Young Professionals Briefing Series: Careers in International Affairs

Panelists discuss and share advice on navigating different foreign policy career pathways in both the public and private sector.

The CFR Young Professionals Briefing Series provides an opportunity for those early in their careers to engage with CFR. The briefings feature remarks by experts on critical global issues and lessons learned in their careers. These events are intended for individuals who have completed their undergraduate studies and have not yet reached the age of thirty to be eligible to apply for CFR term membership.

MR.     : Why is it so eerie? (Laughter.)

BODURTHA: All right, we’ll make some noise.

Good evening, everyone. Thank you for joining us for tonight’s edition of the Young Professionals Briefing Series here at the Council on Foreign Relations. My name is Nancy Bodurtha. I’m the vice president of Meetings and Membership at the Council.

I am pleased to welcome those of you who are here in person at our Washington office as well as those who are joining via the miracle of Zoom. I understand that there are about 150 participants virtually this evening.

For those of you who are new to this convening or new to the Council, the Council on Foreign Relations is an independent, nonpartisan membership organization, think tank, and publisher. The Council aims to be a resource not only for its members, but also for the broader public to provide information and analysis on issues of foreign policy and international relations. I encourage you to visit our website, CFR.org. It’s really an extraordinary resource and repository of content. You can find video and transcripts of past events, links to our reports and publications. There are a number of podcasts that the Council produces, as well as the analysis from our experts in the Council’s think tank.

Tonight, of course, is the Young Professional(s) Briefing Series. This is an event that we produce for individuals who have finished their undergraduate degrees and are just getting started professionally, for folks who have an interest in international affairs and engaging with the Council. We organize approximately one event a month in this series. We alternate between New York and Washington. These events are always offered in the hybrid format so that people outside of the host city can join.

In addition, there’s a monthly newsletter that goes out to the invitation list that’s curated specifically for the young professionals. And this highlights a real range of Council resources that we hope that you will find relevant.

Tonight we’re going to talk about “Careers in International Affairs.” We’ve got a fabulous panel. And we are going to hear from Erin Dumbacher, who is the Council’s Stanton nuclear security senior fellow. We are also going to hear from Benjamin Frohman, who is the national security fellow with the U.S. House Select Committee on Strategic Competition between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party. We’re also joined by Theresa Lou, who is the associate vice president of The Asia Group; as well as Parker Novak, who is the director for government and external affairs at the International Republican Institute.

And these folks are not only extraordinary experts within their realm, but they are also current or former term members of the Council on Foreign Relations. This is a program that I hope you will keep in your sights. It is a special five-year membership program that people are eligible to apply for when they’re between the ages of thirty and thirty-six. You can find more information about the program and the application process on CFR.org. But I would encourage you to speak to any of our panelists tonight about the Term Member Program or any of my colleagues from the Council’s staff who will be around during the reception following the panel tonight. It’s an extraordinary program, and I hope that you will keep it in your sights and consider applying for it.

Our format tonight: We’re going to have a thirty-minute panel discussion followed by thirty minutes or so of Q&A, so be thinking about your questions. We’ll be taking questions from people participating virtually as well as from those of you who are in the room.

And I am going to turn things over to our moderator, Alex Ward. Alex is also a term member of the Council on Foreign Relations. His day job is as the national security reporter at the Wall Street Journal. He covers the White House and the State Department. He’s worked previously for Politico, Vox, and the Atlantic Council. And he’s also the author of a book, The Internationalists: The Fight to Restore American Foreign Policy After Trump. So, Alex, over to you. Thank you.

WARD: Yeah, thanks so much. Guys, how we doing? We doing all right? All right. Good. (Laughter, applause.) You braved the winter. D.C. did the classic thing: It was fall, and then it just became winter right away. So thank you for coming.

Look, I have—we have a short amount of time to answer all of your work-related problems and questions, so we’re going to do our best to do that with about fifty or so minutes. I’ll just say this: I remember being in the seats where you are now listening to smart people to be, like, how do I get to where I go—where I want to go. And I’ll just remember that this whole process, this whole time, sucked. It was just terrible. And so if I have a sincere goal for you during this, is that we make this sucky process just even slightly easier. And if we can be—and I think I speak for everyone here, including those who are abroad—and I’ll reveal his location in a minute; he's not in some secret bunker—(laughter)—like, if we—thank you. (Laughter.) There’s going to be a delay, so all jokes will be laughed at four seconds afterward. Like, truly, I can speak for all of us, I hope, that, like, we’re here to help, not only just onstage but afterward. So, like, don’t let this—let this be the start, not the end, of the conversation—albeit a very formal start.

OK. So let’s get at it. First, let’s talk to the disembodied man above us. Parker, hos are you doing, buddy? Good to see you. First—so he’s in Timor, by the way, which if you don’t know is really far from here. And so, first, I want—can you just tell us what you’re doing in Timor? And then I want you to answer this question, because I think it corresponds to the fact of where your location is: Give us the best piece of advice about getting your dream job. Because being in Timor for work and wearing what looks like a dope, dope shirt—(laughter)—is pretty dream job-esque. So walk us through it.

NOVAK: Yeah. No, Alex, good to see you. Good to see everyone in the room. Calling in from Dili, Timor-Leste, which is just about 9,800 miles from Washington, D.C. Bright and early here.

You know, I think to kind of answer your question but also getting—because it gets to how the heck I am in Timor-Leste right now for work, and not paying for it, and having fun here, I think part of it is be open to experiences that may be new to you. Be open to opportunities you may not know have existed, even if you have strong feelings or strong opinions about where you want to go in your career. I never had on my bingo card that I was going to end up specializing in a country like Timor-Leste or also in Indonesia, where this shirt is from. I originally wanted to be a Middle East hand, because I think everyone our age in the heyday of Iraq and Afghanistan, we all wanted to be Middle East hands. I was our country director in Timor-Leste a number of years ago now, but was one of those things that came up. They asked me if I wanted to move and my answer was simply, yes, I absolutely do. So packed up to a country I’d only been to once or twice, knew very little about, and very far from home. And that turned into an incredibly formative experience, both personally and professionally. And as Theresa knows well, I am absolutely obsessed with Timor-Leste, as are many people who have—among the few who have worked on it. So I think, you know, it’s be open to experiences and keep an open mind, as simple as that sounds, to opportunities you may not know, because they may turn into your dream job.

WARD: Theresa, you got name-checked so I’ll come to you in a second. But actually, I’m just very curious—maybe slight poll in the room if you’re cool with that. I recognize people might want to do counterterrorism or nuclear or whatever, but just for simplicity’s sake let’s do regions. Raise your hand if you want to be an expert in: Europe? Asia? Africa? South America? There’s a region I’m forgetting, I’m sure. No, but—(laughs)—OK, it’s interesting, all right. And then people seem to have more, seems, functional interest. But kind of still between Europe and Asia. I’m surprised.

Anyway, Theresa, you got name-checked. What’s your best piece of advice for getting your dream job or wearing dope Indonesian shirts?

LOU: Yeah, absolutely. Thanks. Alex. And just before I start, I want to thank CFR again for having me back. It’s such a pleasure.

CFR was actually my first internship in D.C. and it was my first professional home in D.C., where I learned a lot of really good lessons—happy to talk about that—and made some of my great friends, including ones sitting onstage right now and many who’ve shown me a lot of love tonight by being here. So, again, this is very much like a “Mom, I made it” moment. (Laughter.)

But to—I think to really foot-stomp Parker’s point, I think—and just to put my own personal spin on it—I really do think it’s being able to say yes to different opportunities that you wouldn’t have thought about. I left the Council in 2018 on a whim. No job prospect lined up. I took an internship at State, where there was no promises that I was going to get paid or hired—or certainly not paid, but certainly not hired either. But just because I knew that CFR had given me a lot that I wanted to further chew and sink my teeth in, and I was ready to see what else was there.

And that’s actually where I met Parker, when I was an intern at the State Department. And that then led to an internship at the DOD, which was, again, also unpaid. Kind of nerve wracking. But I said yes again, because that was what in that moment my gut told me that I needed. I needed to experience the executive branch if that is what I wanted to do. Wanted to see if I could get a security clearance, because that’s kind of a nonstarter if not. And then there, went on and on to do other things that I wouldn’t have even known about as a job, literally, just about seven years prior to me actually having applied and then gotten it.

So being open to saying yes. Knowing that obviously it’s good to have goals and aspirations, but the path to get there is entirely nonlinear. And that the more you’re able to meet different people, speak with other colleagues, friends, and make good and meaningful connections, the more doors and opportunities that will help you realize other opportunities to either get to where you wanted to go or to go on a different journey that you would have never imagined. But it’s equally, if not more so, fulfilling, so.

WARD: How many internships have you guys done, just curious, before you got, like, your first paid D.C. job?

DUMBACHER: One.

WARD: One.

DUMBACHER: For a long time.

WARD: OK, a long internship.

FROHMAN: Three, maybe.

WARD: Three.

LOU: One.

WARD: One. Parker?

NOVAK: One.

WARD: One? All right. Six for me. (Laughter.) So keep at it. OK. But, speaking of, like, I know I wouldn’t be here having this conversation with you guys—and I’m very fortunate to have it—without mentors and supporters of my career who wanted to help me get into international relations, and media most recently. So I’m curious, you know, Erin, like, what does it take to sort of get a mentor, get supporters, have people in your corner so they can basically be building blocks that you can build your career on top of?

DUMBACHER: My best mentors have been my current or former bosses. And I think it takes a long time to build a relationship with someone who’s going to really not just mentor you, offer you a little bit of advice on the side—which you can, frankly, get through a lot of really good informational interviews or conversations, coffee chats, what have you, which you should do many of—but my best mentors have actually been the people who not only could look ahead for me and with me to say what next job might you want, but also knew my skillset really well, and trusted me, because I had worked really hard with or for them. And they then were not just mentors. They were champions. They were looking for the next job for me. They were the ones who would write the much more passionate recommendation letter.

They were the ones who would say, actually, it might be time for you to look for a new job—(laughs)—because you’ve been here too long, or we’ve kind of capped out. Like, I can’t give you anything else to do. It’s time for you to go think about something else. So I would encourage—I would encourage thinking about everyone you work with as a potential mentor in some way, but to also really, like, no question, make sure that you’re building relationships with people who will not just give you some hot tips, if you will, or, like, chat about the news with you—which is also really important—but who will be the champion for you in your careers.

WARD: Ben, similar situations? Did you—did people try to kick you out of where you were working? (Laughter.)

FROHMAN: Many. Too many that I want to admit. Absolutely. I mean, I think that the mentor, you know, aspect of career development is so, so important, you know, because, you know, as people in this room, I’m sure, can relate to, you know, a lot of people come into this field not knowing the first thing about what the, you know, array of possible jobs and career trajectories look like. You know, I went to public school in the Midwest, came to this town, and had no idea, you know, kind of what my next step would be. And so, you know, finding people who you trust, and who come to trust you because of the good work you do, and really nurturing those relationships, like Erin was saying, more than just, you know, coffee chats.

Those are really important, but to, you know, work to show your capabilities to people who are in positions of authority, bosses, and people around you at work who you trust and, you know, might see your career modeled to some extent off of theirs, and knowing that you want to learn from their experiences, people who you can grow from through your relationship with them. And then you’re turning to those people at key moments where you feel like you have, you know, maybe outgrown your organization, or they are asked, encouraging you to move on from your organization because maybe they feel that you’re ready for your next step, or they’re just tired of you. And those—for me personally, those relationships have been so critical for becoming a term member here at CFR, for example.

You have to have people who are going to be your champions. And to get to my current job, where I am on the House Select Committee on the CCP, similarly, you know, I would never have known about some of these opportunities without mentors of mine that I, you know, took the time to reach out to, and they took the time to, you know, mentor me over the years, you know, helping me navigate what otherwise is just a very bewildering landscape. And, you know, they open doors that you never knew were even there.

WARD: A bit of a jump ball, but do any of you have a—like, a rule-of-thumb formula for trying to—you know, for touch points with people who you want to get in your corner? Like, you know, one email every four months, or a coffee twice a year? Or is it just kind of—you just kind of go with the flow? Just curious.

DUMBACHER: I ask other people for introductions.

WARD: OK.

DUMBACHER: Also my boss’s bosses sometimes are good people because they know about your work, but they don’t know you and they don’t know your work very precisely. But it’s totally within the wheelhouse to say, I could spend twenty minutes asking you about your own career? Or would you be willing—do you—I asked boss’s boss at one point, should I apply for term membership at CFR? And they were, like, absolutely, yes. Do you want—how can I help, right? So that’s not—that’s not, like, a regular cadence, maybe. But again, you can think about—I mean, we all can, like, think about social circles, right? You got the people you’re with all the time. And then you kind of need to branch out beyond the next concentric circles. And the best way to do that is to, like, use your current experience to get there, right?

FROHMAN: You want to be persistent, but not too persistent. I had one mentor who I remember saying, this is too much. (Laughter.) This is too often. Maybe we do once every other month. I’m, like, OK, that sounds good. But it’s more than just having one chat with somebody and then coming back to them a year later. You want to, you know, develop a relationship that’s genuine.

LOU: Yeah. I think—to build off of Ben’s point, I think what’s most important is authenticity. I think if it’s not authentic, it doesn’t resonate and it’s also not sustainable. And so whatever authentic means for you and the individual you’re engaging with, I think that’s probably the best cadence. But, yeah, keep an open mind. Like, if there’s an article you read and you go, like, hey, you know, I read this article and would love your thoughts. I think that’s a very natural segue. I did have an intern supervisor who once told me he tries to figure out people’s birthdays—and sometimes, like, back in the day of Facebook or LinkedIn it’s available. And then on their birthday he, like, surprise messages them. And sometimes people go like, oh, wow, you remember my birthday. And then that’s a really—another great, natural segue. I think there’s a way to do that where it could be a little bit creepy—(laughter)—so don’t do that. But I have—

WARD: It’s your kid’s seventh birthday. (Laughter.)

LOU: Exactly. Or, if you get to, like, my age now, like, I try really hard to also remember kids and pets names as well. Just I think things that will make people feel like you are genuinely getting interested in them, and hopefully you really are, not just for transactional purposes. I think that’s really important. But I think, like, when you’re interested in someone as a human being, and what they’re working on, what their life is like, I think that helps that authentic, sustainable relationship building.

WARD: Not to make this a little bit too weird, but I have found in these kinds of networking conversations there’s a weird parallel to dating. Like, you can be—hold on. (Laughter.) Hold on. No, but you can, like, be too eager, or you can reach out too much, or you can share too much information, or you could, like, play hard to get, weirdly, which is a terrible strategy if you’re trying to get a job. But, like, I’ve seen people, like, treat it this way. But there is a kernel of truth. I’m not saying date the people you’re trying to get as mentors. (Laughter.) But I am—but I am saying that, like, there is—like, basically, if you think, oh, maybe I’m reaching out too much, like, you probably are. Like, you know what I mean? Like, there’s similar instincts there. That’s all I was trying to say, OK, people watching at home.

Theresa, I’m curious—I’ll just keep going with you—we’ve heard about some successes, things people can do. Is there any mistake you made on the way to getting to this seat, to where you are now? And what should they avoid? Or how should they not be you, when they make—(laughs)—in this case?

LOU: Yeah. One thing that always sticks out to me is not withdrawing from my Spanish class in Georgetown early enough. But all kidding aside, I think, look, I think I’ve been personally very, very fortunate in my career trajectory. I’ve had a lot of people in my corner. I’ve had great opportunities. But I really do think, and going back to my first point, I think sometimes, you know, luck is opportunity meets, you know, preparedness. And I think that that is very much true. And that’s something I take to heart. But I do think that you want to set yourself up for the best opportunities. And one thing that I think has worked out for me, but could have very well not worked out for me, was simply because I’ve always looked at—and looked for opportunities that I knew about.

But I was looking for agency jobs, like any, like, executive branch jobs. I looked only at think tanks that I’ve heard of before. And, again, that’s all worked out in one way or another for me but, to my previous point, it could have just as not worked out. The summer I applied for a CFR internship when I was a college sophomore, I think the ratio was, what, 500 to one, if not more. I could have easily not made the cut, and would have not—and, by the way, I got in as a sophomore. I didn’t hear back from any think tank in D.C. when I was a junior. Go figure. But that was because I kept a really small pool only the things I had heard about.

And so that’s sort of really when I think, especially as I’ve gone further along in my career, I’ve become very invested and passionate about saying to people, like, know what you’re worth, know what you do not want to do, but also be very open to saying yes, and open to things that you may not have heard of before but have an interesting mission, great people and really—or a really cool product, if that’s what they’re doing. There are ways to get into this field that you may have never even dreamed of. And there are, like I said, many more doors and windows that you might not have even heard of.

And if you just rule them out, like I did when I was applying, you could wind up very much at a dead end without realizing what had happened and what you would have missed out on. So there’s a high opportunity cost for not casting a wide net, both for very practical reasons but I also, I think, just from an opportunity standpoint. It’s a large numbers thing. And it worked out for me, but it could have very well not worked out. And I’m glad that I sort of, like, had that recognition when I did.

WARD: Parker, you clearly made no mistakes in your career because you’re in Timor-Leste looking fly as hell. (Laughter.) But just curious, I mean, if you had to make up a mistake that happened in your in your career, well, give us one.

NOVAK: Not learning a foreign language, and not putting the time into that. It’s something I am currently trying to rectify, because it turns out I really, really need that for my job. Trying to learn Indonesian right now. I think as you grow older, you know, your career gets busy, your life gets busy. You may have a family. Learning a language becomes harder and harder. And if I could have one do-over, I would have put time either in high school or during undergrad to learn a language.

WARD: Hmm. All right. Start learning. (Laughter.) Erin, give us a time you—clearly you’re in a good spot here. You’re at CFR doing some cool nuclear stuff. But I’m sure it wasn’t a direct path here. Can you give us a sense of a time it just didn’t go to plan, or a time you failed on your career pathway?

DUMBACHER: Oh my gosh, the city is full of applications from me for jobs that I did not get. (Laughter.)

WARD: Same. Same.

DUMBACHER: I mean, I started my career—you have my bio—I started my career in the private sector. And ended up pursuing jobs there because they were research jobs and they were social science jobs, but they had nothing to do with defense issues or national security issues, what have you. But they did have technology, right? So I kind of pivoted in a couple places where I would say, OK, in the Venn diagram of all the things I want to do, and what I care about, and what skills I want to develop, and what’s, like, just work I want to be doing on a day-to-day basis, I tried to choose some mix that the market also permitted me to have, right? (Laughs.) And so I really liked working in a research-based consulting company for a while. I was getting to do research. I was learning something every day. It was kind of like getting my own MBA, but they paid me and I didn’t have to pay them.

But I also came to a point where I was, like, this was not my mission. This was not what I set out to do in my career. So I went back to graduate school late, relatively speaking. So that—I guess that’s corrective of a mistake. I’m a big believer—this is actually something we used to teach in consulting, and I in general, thinking about nuclear weapons policy, I’m not a big fan of the ladder construct. Like, you might have studied escalation, like, all the way from crisis to—I’m not a big fan of Kahn in that particular way. But I am a fan of career ladders. And I think about my career as having started kind of on a private sector ladder, and I got up a couple rungs, realized it wasn’t right for me, and had to get on another ladder—either drop all the way down and climb back up again or, in my case, in a couple instances, I was lucky enough to be able to just, like, pivot down one or two rungs and then have to climb the next one.

And then doing that again a couple times early in my career allowed me to see, to your point, what I didn’t like, what I didn’t want to keep doing, and what I was most interested in. But it took a few tries. So I guess I would—I would make the case that you should be conscious in choosing your own ladder. I also don’t think there are a lot of careers anymore where you can start as a foreign service officer, for example, and then rise vertically all the way up to ambassador. That doesn’t exist. So we all have to be conversant in being able to jump among and between. And all it takes is one. It just took one manager at the nonprofit I worked for who said, she has research skills, she’s written a little bit on this topic. But, no, is she a nuclear weapons expert now? No. But I will hire her, because she can get my job done. She has the skills to achieve what they were trying to achieve, which was the Nuclear Security Index back in the day when we were gathering data from 192 countries. And it turned out someone who had a consulting background, who could manage a spreadsheet, was a good fit for that.

So thinking about your skill set, and then when you are on the opposite side—and I try to do this when I’m hiring as well—when you’re on the opposite side eventually, remember that all it takes is one. And that maybe it could be beneficial to try and hire that person who has promise in their skills and their passion and their drive, but might not have, like, your conventional resume for the job that you are—that you’re trying to fill.

WARD: So if not a ladder, what, like, the table saw of nuclear? Like, what hardware tool—

DUMBACHER: Read my future publications. (Laughter.)

WARD: All right. Sweet plug. Ben, you think a lot about how China and the U.S. compete against each other, so I think you’re the right person to ask this. If we’re going to be crude about it, everyone here will be competing with a lot of other people for a lot of similar jobs. And they’ll be needing different types of skills, and techniques, or ways to sell themselves in resumes or in interviews. Like, what are the—maybe you can, you know, speak to, I mean, if you’re doing your own hiring. But I’m curious, you know, what skills, what does everyone here need in order to be competitive in the job market going forward?

FROHMAN: Yeah. It’s a great question. And one of the hardest, you know, things I’ve done and jobs I’ve been in is be a hiring decision-maker, because there are so many just incredible resumes that come by our desks, especially now. I think the space is—you know, certainly in the U.S.-China space more and more people are—you know, great people are coming in to work in this field, and, you know, have backgrounds that—you know, I look at the applications. I’m like, I would not have hired myself for this job ten years ago. There’s no way. These people are way better—you know, just incredibly talented folks. So it’s a competitive landscape. You know, so I think, you know, you have to—you know, not U.S.-China kind of specifically, but I think just as a general principle, you know, you want to be able to write well. Everybody sees your cover letter. And that’s a really easy way. You know, if there are grammatical mistakes or a typo, like, you look for attention to detail and care that goes into your writing, which is so essential for jobs in this career field.

And you look for—I mean, I think, you know, Theresa talked about authenticity. In an interview, if you do get in for an interview, you want to be authentic, genuine. You want to be a real person. Don’t put on a front. Just, you know, be yourself and be personable. People want to hire people that they want to work with, because, you know, every team is made up of individuals who are—you know, who make the team what it is. You’re not just, you know, skill sets on paper. So, you know, so that’s really important. And finally, I would say, you know, it is—there are so many resumes that come by your desk when you’re making hiring decisions. To have—you know, and back to the discussion of mentorship—to have mentors who, you know, can put in a good word for you. This is, you know, not a pitch for nepotism, but, you know, to have somebody who is a trusted actor outside of the space where it’s hard sometimes to, you know, distinguish who’s a really solid applicant. And to have somebody—to have, you know, a really good reference that comes in is so important for, you know, sometimes separating otherwise very, very competitive applicants.

WARD: We’re going to come to you guys in a second for your questions. Obviously, you guys have been thinking about what you want to ask. And I see some of you are already liquored up, so it’s going to be a great time. (Laugher.) But I am curious, just there’s sort of a mandatory question I have to ask and since we’ve talked about resumes and applications. AI. Can you guys tell if AI’s been used in the application? Are you guys using AI to filter out applications? And if you have any thoughts on, you know, the extent that it should be used, or not used, or anything like that?

DUMBACHER: Yes, no, learn how to do research without AI. (Laughs.)

LOU: Yeah, can I double tap on this? So just interesting poll, since Alex—how many of you guys use ChatGPT, Gemini, something like that in your day-to-day? Just raise your hand. I do. Cool. And I think that that is great. And I think and I think that that is very much inevitable in a lot of fields. I think that there are going to be some exceptions still, especially in the national security space. So, like, do keep that in mind. But I do think that the advent of AI means that obviously digital literacy, technological literacy, AI prompting, is all very, very important.

But I keep coming back to this in my mind, personally—and I don’t want to speak for my other panelists—but I actually think that the more AI becomes a prevalent part of day-to-day jobs, the more that I think fundamentals are important. I don’t think you can be a very good writer, or a good prompter, if you don’t know the subject matter. I don’t think you can be a good assessor of whether ChatGPT, or Gemini, or Claude, or whatever gives you is good if you’re not a good writer or a critical thinker. In international relations, I think context, nuance—they’re not just buzzwords, albeit they are. Like, don’t use them when you’re actually writing. But they actually mean something. And I think it’s really, really hard for you to just use AI that away. And I think, like, if someday your computer crashes and you’re forced to take a 60-minute writing test, would you be able to do it without the help of AI, right?

I think that the future is such—and I tell myself this all the time—is I think that the people who will continue to succeed in this field in the future are the ones who know how to use the tools well, but also because, and primarily because, they already have the craft down. So take the time to build that literacy, to build that skill. I know it’s tempting. Like, I am old enough to remember when I had to write my final term paper before I graduated. I was just, like, God, if I could just wave this away, wouldn’t it be so nice? It’s super tempting to just do it. And I don’t know how academic institutions are handling it these days. But do take the time to build that literacy, to build that skill set, to build that knowledge base. Because that is the stuff that will really help set you apart when you can amplify that with AI.

WARD: I’m so glad you said that. There’s something that I’ve been finding out in just my job of reporting. Now, granted, take with a grain of salt what I’m about to say. But, like, the sign of your intelligence or the sign of your subject matter expertise is not the answers you’re getting, but the questions you’re asking. Which, granted, again, rich coming from a guy who asks questions for a living. But still, like, that’s, what I found when I also interview people, is the more I go, oh, that’s—the fact that they asked X question shows that they’ve really given thought to the subject matter. So I’m really glad, to your point, on what you said.

OK. Let’s go to you guys. You’re the main event anyway. Let’s start in the back, right over there. And say—oh, sorry, I should say a couple things. One, please say your name, what you’re doing. Also make sure that what you say ends in a question mark and is relatively succinct. Thank you.

Q: OK, I’ll be brief. Thanks, everyone. My name is Melissa. I work for RAND.

I just want to contextualize this question in the moment. A lot of us have seen our entire career paths kind of vanish. The public sector is contracting dramatically. And we don’t know if there will be a recovery or not. So how would you all approach trying to think about careers in an entirely new sector, if everything you’ve done up into this point is foreign policy or government related?

WARD: The government’s going away. public sector is going away. What should these IR people do? Parker, you’re abroad. (Laughter.)

NOVAK: Transferable skills. Also, I think, if you haven’t done this already, because in the end everyone in this room has fairly comparative resumes when always said and done. You’re in a more competitive job market, particularly if you’re drifting towards the international development space, which is immolated over the past year or so. Building skills or cultivating knowledge that makes you unique compared to others, and looking at each specialty. And, within that also, you know, building transferable skills, say, to working a civil society group in the U.S., a local government in the U.S., and maybe taking a bit of a detour until there’s more certainty in the foreign affairs space.

DUMBACHER: Yeah. I already mentioned that I’ve been on, like, a couple different ladders in the past. And I’ve tried to look for, like, the Venn diagram of what I’m interested in but also what the market can withstand and offer, and also, you know, what skills I have and what I can bring. And so I would, like, focus on those two elements, maybe more. You have to be market conscious maybe more so now than you used to. And then think about other industries that need very similar expertise, or maybe there’s, like, a slice of what you’re working on now that is also relevant in a private sector field, but maybe they don’t talk about it in the same way, or pitch it in the same way, or what have you.

So I already mentioned, for example, I was helping banks figure out how to digitize their operations at one point in my career. I was interested in technology. I was interested in policy. And it turned out—and I was interested in doing the research. And so doing, you know, focus groups and surveys and interviews that you would do for a policy paper, could be actually really similar to what you might do in a private sector, especially for a firm trying to figure out, like, how to get over a big challenge. So I would think about that Venn diagram. And just, like, how for certainly, for a period of time, you might have to prioritize things a little bit differently.

FROHMAN: I think it’s a just—if I can, you know, add in there, it’s a great question. And so many people are suffering with, you know, not only having their career—their future careers vanish, but their current careers vanish. Yeah, I would say, you know, one, this is not the end of, you know, what will happen with our—you know, our career civil servant workforce. You know, time will march on, and there will be changes. And it seems like now is—you know, it’s been a shock to the system in many ways. But, you know, this too shall pass. And there will be some, you know, new answer that comes to the fore, you know, in the coming years. And, you know, a lot of jobs will come back maybe in different ways. But, you know, this is—don’t give up hope for some of those career paths.

The other thing I would say is that, you know, now I feel, you know, working in foreign policy, you know, in my career, people ask about, you know, going into the foreign service and kind of going, like, a traditional, you know, route as a diplomat. And something that I will often say is that, you know, now working on Capitol Hill, that’s one of the great things about, you know, separate and equal branches of government, at least, you know the way it’s supposed to work. (Laughter.) But there are always—you know, Capitol Hill is an incredible place to gain experience in foreign affairs and foreign policy. And as a junior staffer you’ll be meeting with heads of state, you know, depending on the position you’re in. And it’s really incredible the opportunities there.

And then finally, the private sector too. You know, five years ago nobody knew the word “supply chains,” or, you know, “economic coercion.” And now, like, every industry is participating, maybe against their will, in foreign policy and international affairs. So there are many opportunities. And some of the most impactful opportunities are working in the private sector to figure out, you know, the national security implications of our—of our economy, and, you know, where some of our economic vulnerabilities lie, and reducing those as much as we can. And that’s such a critical mission right now.

WARD: Can I just push you on one very quick thing? Which is, you know, when I was coming up, and we were all coming up, the one of the things we kept hearing was, like, learn to code. That’s terrible advice now, right? (Laughter.) Right? Right? That’s terrible advice. Or, to your and to Erin’s point about market—you know, think about the market, market relevance—I bet it was—a lot of people here not more than a year ago really wanted to get into the humanitarian space. Would you actually recommend someone that you know who’s interested in it to, like, get into it, because those slots are smaller.

DUMBACHER: In that particular field?

WARD: Like, just to say, we’re talking about market, right? Like, you might love—and I’m not knocking humanitarian. Humanitarian stuff is great. But, like, would you really recommend for someone to get into that field right now?

DUMBACHER: I mean, this is where I talked about the balance of, like, your professional interests and your passion, relative to what the market will permit. Like, that is a constant—there’s constant tension there, right? Like, does—I don’t know a lot of people who have jobs for whom they—and maybe journalism is an exception, frankly, because you get to cover the waterfront on topics. But, like, I don’t know a lot of people—there are a lot of people who are interested in and are passionate about how we should never use nuclear weapons again. Very few of them work full time talking and thinking about nuclear weapons. And that’s OK, because they’re also voters, and they’re also citizens, and they’re also going to the Hill to advocate on the side, right? There’s other ways to be involved in some of the things that we are most passionate about. And it’s incumbent on us, I would argue, as citizens, that we have sort of a menu or a roster of those things. It doesn’t necessarily have to be where you’re spending your nine-to-five.

WARD: All right. Back to you guys. And I forgot to mention, those online, hello, you’re welcome to ask a question too. We’ll get to you at some point. Yes, right here. So can you wait for the microphone? Thank you. OK.

Q: Hello. Nicole Gerber. Nice to meet you all. Private sector.

Twofold question. When it comes to artificial intelligence, I mean, I grew up with the understanding that we’re not even supposed to use Wikipedia as a primary source, or to gather information from. You’re supposed to use primary sources, especially when it comes to a serious job or profession. So why would we want to use some sort of artificial intelligence that gathers sources from all across the web, from un-officiated sources of people you have no idea, does not source anything, in terms of any professional field? It’s one thing if you’re doing it for your private life, but for a professional field why would you ever want to use that?

And then, secondly, for nuclear weapons, there’s been a lot of discussion about modular nuclear—modular nuclear reactors to power AI. And I think it was Reagan that started this—a system of, like, a checks and balance between multiple countries, an international system of regulation with nuclear technology or nuclear weapons. Do the nuclear modular reactors comply with the international regulations, given that it would be ostensibly extending the supply chain for the materials that make up the weapon—or the energy sources, and it’s harder to track. Even if you’re doing war gaming with AI, probably something that you would not be able to take into consideration in the numerous models that they have.

WARD: OK. So why trust AI, I think was the—was the first one. And the second one, did you understand it?

DUMBACHER: Yeah.

WARD: OK, good. (Laughter.) That wasn’t a knock on you. That was a knock on me. Do you have thoughts on the AI? We haven’t heard from you in a bit. Why don’t you go ahead with AI.

LOU: Sure. I guess just some unstructured thoughts, perhaps. Like, I don’t—I think the adage “trust but verify” still stands here. I think it works in a lot of things. And I think it certainly applies here. But that’s also, again, why I sort of gave my, sort of, like, TED Talk about the importance of actually having the skills, right? I think it’s important to know citing your sources. I grew up in the same era. I don’t think I would have ever gotten a passing grade if I cited Wikipedia. But we are where we are. And, you know, I’m not going to be the one fighting that tide. But I do think that, for what it’s worth, like, I do think that there are certain things you can do when you use AI, if you choose to, to help minimize that margin of error, right? Like, ask it where you got your sources. Usually they won’t get—usually they won’t, you know, glaze you on that one. They’ll either have it or they don’t. And then but it is ultimately up to you. So which is, again, like, go back to square one.

But I do think that there is some real strength here, that there are some real, real good areas of utility and efficiency. Like, could I read CRS, like, Congressional Research Service, reports on any number of topics? Yes. Is that the gold standard? Absolutely. AI can summarize that for me. It can, if I want it to, and then go in and read it. It is a—it is a way to aggregate a lot more information. And then I can choose to go in and look at the resources specifically. But, again, it goes back to, sort of, like, what are you prompting it, and what are you using it for? I am not going to sit here and say that it is good for everything. I think that is up to everybody’s respective good judgment.

But I do think that there are certain use cases. And if you choose not to use it, I think that’s all right too. I think that’s more the power to you. But it is the way that I have seen people going. And whether you—however which way you feel about that, I think that’s just something that I’ve observed. So, again, I think it’s good for certain things. Deeply flawed—including, by the way, deeply flawed at currently analyzing legislation, in my experience. I would not trust ChatGPT to analyze legislation, having done it—having both written legislation and tried to use ChatGPT. It’s not very good. But now I know, and I would never trust it to do that. And so—but I only knew to look because I knew what I was looking for. So take that as you will.

WARD: You’re the nuclear question.

DUMBACHER: Can I first, on AI? I think there’s so much power in some applications of that technology, but I do want us to be, like, very clear-eyed about what we know—where we know it works, and where it doesn’t. And like, for example, I would very much like us to never even think about putting AI on top of, like, nuclear early warning systems and decision analysis in that particular way. So just for the record. For now.

WARD: Some nervous laughter there. (Laughter.)

DUMBACHER: Some nervous laughter. That’s right. We can’t—Gartner has a hype cycle, right? Like, we’re up at the top of how much—

WARD: Not a ladder?

DUMBACHER: It’s a different image.

WARD: Different tool. Different tool. (Laughter.)

DUMBACHER: OK. You asked about small modular reactors, I think, and IAEA, and safeguards, and international agreements to make sure that both there’s proliferation sensitivity when we move to sort of a new frontier in nuclear energy, which I think is super important. And how the—I would argue, like, the current system that we have for regulating proliferation—it’s all based on a—you know, the 1960s Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. There are many good things that Ronald Reagan did in this field but I don’t think this was one of them.

I do think that there are ways to build security by design with some of the new reactor technologies. But you have to be careful about the fuel source, of course. And I also think that the international system, which is set up, as we have it today—which requires, for example, states to voluntarily report and take part in the additional protocol, et cetera—there’s a gap between the emerging nuclear energy revolution and what the current sort of safeguard system is set up to do. And so that’s a really—that’s a huge open problem that, actually, I was at a conference last week and a junior scholar was trying to come up with ways to study and think ahead about, but we are nowhere near having a good answer to that question. And then there—I will—you know, if you have specific questions about particular reactors. That’s when I kick it over to the scientists, and I have some ideas for you if you have particular questions about particular fuel sources. (Laughs.)

WARD: All right. You guys can plan the end of the world later. We have an online question—

DUMBACHER: Energy doesn’t cause the end of the world.

WARD: OK. (Laughter.) We had an online question.

OPERATOR: We will take our next question from Alden Silverman.

Q: Hello. First off, thank you all for sharing such great advice.

You guys spoke about ways that you can foster relationships with people like your bosses, that already serve in foreign policy capacities. For someone who isn’t working a job in politics and is in an unrelated industry, do you have any specialized advice for that person trying to learn more about foreign policy roles, and eventually landing a job and pivoting industries? Thank you.

WARD: It’s a great question. How do you go from being a trucker to being a—to working on the Hill? Ben, do you have any thoughts?

FROHMAN: Yeah. It’s a—it’s a tough question. You know, it depends on kind of what—if you’re a trucker, or if you’re in finance, or, you know, working for an industry group. But I think there are always pathways to get to a job in foreign policy if that’s what your desired end goal is. I mean, I think coming to more CFR events, and doing that networking, and meeting people. And, you know, sometimes you also have to take a risk. I forget who it was—which of my fellow panelists was talking about just coming to D.C. and kind of, you know, leaving what you’ve been doing behind and starting new.

I have hired at least one person that I can remember in my career who made a complete career change from working in kind of politics that were unrelated to U.S.-China policy, who really wanted to get—who had a passion for China policy and wanted to start there. And I think, you know, he took a big step down from where he was to do an internship, and just really fully committed to pursuing that path. And, you know, that stood out to me when I was looking at this resume. And it’s been really rewarding to see that person go on to do great things in this space, coming from somewhere completely different and taking a calculated jump to try to, you know, pursue his passion. So, you know, that would be my advice to someone who is considering a similar—taking a similar leap.

WARD: Parker, you’re nodding in Timor-Leste in agreement.

NOVAK: Yeah. I’m nodding because I started my career in politics and on Capitol Hill. And when I was a young political staffer never thought I was going to do anything else. Realized I wanted to do foreign policy. Had absolutely no idea how I was going to get there. Didn’t think I had transferable skills, et cetera, et cetera. So I got lucky. I found a bridge via my current employer, International Republican Institute, which, to be clear, is nonpartisan, where a lot of our programming overseas it’s kind of doing the politics of development, essentially. So there was a need for people with political skill sets, with the thought that you can learn the foreign policy side, and that progressively led to me ultimately becoming much more of a foreign policy person than a political person. So I would say we’re able, and it’s contingent on, you know, what industry you’re coming from, what you’re wanting to do. But if there’s kind of an intermediary bridge point that you can find, even if it’s a really niche one, you know, do what you can to identify that and try to use a bridge point to get to where you want to go.

WARD: I usually—I’m trying not to interject too much my own stuff, but in this case I do have one. For me, I was—let’s see, what did I do? I was a waiter at TGI Fridays. Then I interned here. Then I taught high school. And then I got into journalism. So, like, it can be done. I won’t say that’s the easiest path ever, but it can be done.

Let’s go to another in the room. Back there.

Q: Hello, there. Thank you for being with us tonight. My name is Nicholas Stenseng from Control Risks.

And, like the previous speaker and many others in this room, I have a job title that doesn’t necessarily reflect what my research interests and passions are. So specifically in the terms of job applications, what is your recommendation for not only showing that research interest, but how far to show that research interest—whether it is cover letters, producing published work, or other suggestions? Thank you.

LOU: I’m happy to start. Thank you, Nicholas. That’s a great question.

So when I was at CFR I worked on international institutions and global governance, a program that still exists today, does great work on transnational threats, et cetera. I was huge fan. But you’ll notice, I work on Asia. I’ve since worked on Asia for coming close to, you know, a decade. But it wasn’t that. So I’ve made that bridge by consciously pairing the thematic stuff that I was working on day-in, day-out here at the Council with writing opportunities. I think you said that yourself. And I think that that is a really, really great opportunity not only to get your name out there, but also to really engage in some of the literature and to really hone those chops, and to demonstrate your interest, right?

Like, I think to me, speaking when I’m hiring, like, to me, it speaks volumes if you’re taking time out of your normal nine-to-five, nine-to-six, what have you, to really dedicate yourself to taking on additional project to show that you’re interested in whatever topic it may be, even if you’re not working on it, right? And I think that is the kind of thing where, you know, some of us have had the luxury of working on what we want to do exactly but, just to Erin’s point, there are many other things where these are skill sets that are complementary, and that you can also take your job and marry it with your passion. Or, if you can’t do that, then go above and beyond and show that your passion is what you want to do, and have that speak for you.

FROHMAN: Something to add to that, that I was just thinking I wanted to say in my previous response, is that sometimes the applicants who come from a slightly different field or specialization are actually the most compelling candidates, because you don’t have someone who’s just, you know, going up and doing the thing they’re supposed to do, and the next thing, and the next thing. But you have someone who has broader experience and background, who’s bringing something new and unique, because you have so many people who just, you know, follow the straight path to try to get that next job, but it’s rare that you have someone who starts somewhere else and has done something really of value and compelling, who then can tell a compelling story of, and this is why I wanted to make this change, because that shows passion. You know that those people are going to be the most passionate, or among the most passionate, because they took a risk. They’re doing this for a reason. And when you can tell a story that makes sense to a hiring manager of this is why this person made this major change, and they’ve got passion and drive and, you know, a unique background, you know, that really stands out.

DUMBACHER: Also, write your bullets on your resume super clearly with results orientation and data whenever you can, because everyone can understand “achieved X percent of this very difficult thing,” et cetera, et cetera, even if they’re outside of your current field.

WARD: Do you like numbers, like, wrote four articles, you know, organized two events, or whatever?

DUMBACHER: Yeah, if the numbers are relevant. I mean, don’t force them.

WARD: Sure, sure, sure. Yeah. Don’t just be, like, drank six martinis or something. (Laughter.) All right, so CFR has a very ironclad rule, which is events must end on time. And the punishment if I don’t succeed in doing that is I’m going to get 20 percent tariffed on top of what I currently make. (Laughter.) So we’ve got about five minutes left. But I do want to get to as many questions you can. So I think I saw enough. Let’s try to do two at a time. So let’s do here and let’s do back there. But let’s start up front.

Q: Thank you. Crystal Staebell, U.S. Energy Association.

So whenever I go online and I Google how to write an interesting resume, you’ll find Harvard Business Review. Someone says, I send the cover letter that says just one sentence and I got the job. You find people who say, I went on the—I applied for a job at Amazon, I sent them a cake on their anniversary and I got the job. So on one hand, my question for you is how do you find ways to stand out in the job application process while not going a bit too far or being a bit too outlandish?

WARD: Why don’t we answer that while the mic gets back to the person over there? Oh, wait, is the mic already back there? Oh, then let’s just do it. Sorry. Great.

Q: Hi. My name is Madi. I contract to the undersecretary for research and engineering.

I was curious if you had advice for when it makes sense to pause in your career and, like, hone your specialty, versus when it makes sense to make that leap towards leadership or to try to, like, climb the ladder. per se.

WARD: Two great questions. So, basically, how do you stand out in a cover letter, is that a fair summation?

Q: How to stand out in the application.

WARD: In the application, in the application process, and when to sort of specialize or keep going. Do you have any thoughts on this? Since you’re the nuclear specialist. (Laughter.)

DUMBACHER: This is going to sound like back to basics, but the resumes and the applications that stand out to me are the ones that are, just, like, excellent on their own, in their own package. And so you’re very clear in your language. It’s very comprehensive of what you did to the point that it matters for the destination you’re trying to achieve. You know, it’s oriented towards where you want to go, but it’s very true to where you came from. Like, the story makes sense. So I realize that that’s not flashy, but being, like, clear and concise, I think will get you really far in applications.

On the pivoting, I think all of that is so dependent also on, like, your life phase. I think of life in phases. I had a phase where I was having two children, not at the same time, thankfully, but, like, I, for those years, was really happy to be in a place where I could be more flexible and I was doing sort of more academic-style work, right? But that’s totally up to, like, where you are. And it’s fair to be kind of realistic about, you know, if you have, you know, the hours between 6:00 and 9:00 p.m. to yourself or not, because you have small children, as I currently do.

WARD: Any thoughts, or—go ahead, Ben.

FROHMAN: Yeah, I would agree that, you know, for applications, just be professional. Just do it the right way. Be professional. Be succinct. I’ve never—you know, I’ve never personally received a cake, or any other party trick. (Laughter.) Maybe that would be nice, but I think just, yeah, being to the point, being professional.

On the question of kind of when it’s time to, you know, make a career change, this is something I’ve given a lot of thought to over the course of my career. And, you know, I always come back to doing what feels right to you at that time. Not what you think you should be doing—should I pursue management? Should I try to move up to, you know, the D.C. office? But it’s, you know, where am I right now? Am I learning? Am I growing? Am I enjoying my every day? If the answer to those things is yes, then there’s no need—no reason to force yourself to move on to try to play a career game. And then you will know, you will feel when it’s time for you to move on, when you’ve stopped growing, when you’ve stopped—when you feel like you’re stultifying and you don’t have much more room to grow or learn.

WARD: I’ll just mention two quick things on yours, just because they’ve worked for me, anecdotally. One is—I’m curious, has anyone here ever sent a thank-you email to an interviewer—not by email, a handwritten card? All right. There should be more of you. Do that. The second is, you don’t have to do this every time, but if the, like, assistant or receptionist was extremely helpful in getting in the building or whatever, send them flowers or send them a thank-you note. I promise assistants or receptionists, that gets to the boss at some point. And you’ll probably be the only one who sent flowers, don’t send creepy flowers. (Laughter.) But send nice thank-you flowers.

OK, I’m putting you guys on the spot when we end here. Any bumper sticker career advice that you have? Like, what’s your one- or two-line mantra for when someone asks you, I need help getting a job in this. What is the—what is it that you say? And if you don’t have one, I’m sorry, I didn’t put them—I did not prepare them for this. This is on me. Let’s go down the line. We’ll start with the furthest away geographically, Parker. (Laughter.)

NOVAK: This is probably reflective of my own personal experience, to be clear, but I’m a very strong advocate for people living and working overseas if they get the opportunity to do so. You will learn to walk in somebody else’s shoes. You’ll get a different perspective on history. You’ll learn a culture. For me, that fundamentally changed my perspective on foreign policy and really forced me to learn by doing, versus just reading a textbook. Which, to be clear, is also helpful. Not everyone’s going to get those opportunities, but I am always an advocate for people doing that when able.

WARD: Let’s go down the line.

LOU: You have one reputation. It takes a long time to build up. And it takes—it’s very easy for it to come crumbling down. And I think for me this is always—at the end of the day, like, the things that I remember are the people who have treated me with respect, the people who are doing excellent work. But that’s—sort of, like, the doing excellent work is really it’s sort of the baseline, right? Like, that’s sort of being just a good colleague, being a good consummate professional. But I think being a good person and having that reputation for excellence, for being reliable, for being a good colleague, for being that authentic person, I think all those things are not quantifiable. But that is really the thing that I have found when I look back at the people who have stood in my corner, the people who have wrote me the best recommendations, it’s because I build a relationship with them. It’s because they know that I can put my head down and do the work. Nothing is above my pay grade. Nothing’s too small. And nothing’s too hard to take on.

And I also am very—I’ve worked on the Hill before. And, you know, I think what I tried to do was make sure that my reputation was true for both sides of the aisle. And by that, I simply meant being able to have honest conversations with people. And you can take that and adjust that to whatever walk of life or whatever career line. But I do think that the foundation, the basics of just being a good person, a trustworthy colleague, a good friend, all those basic skills that you learn when you’re in preschool, kindergarten, hopefully through elementary school, are all the, really, ones that will also carry you and go really far, and is weirdly increasingly hard to come by.

FROHMAN: I like Theresa’s bumper sticker.

WARD: It’s a short bumper sticker. (Laughter.)

LOU: You have one reputation.

WARD: One reputation, that’s good.

FROHMAN: Being at risk of repeating a little bit what I said in answer to the last question, I think freeing yourself from your self-imposed expectations of what your career is going to look like and how it’s going to play out is so important. And what is essential to that is being in touch with what feels right for you at that time. Do not expect your—I mean, people have the five- and the ten-year plan. Maybe that works for some people, but it can just as often lead you astray and create a lot of misery and unhappiness when you’re not doing what you thought you were supposed to do. Because you will have opportunities you didn’t expect, or you will be in places where you end up enjoying things way more than you thought you would, or you end up not liking something you thought you would.

And just roll with that, and realize when it’s time to go—to move on, and when maybe—my first job I thought I was going to get my foot in the door, get to this other office as soon as I could. And I ended up spending five and a half years there because I realized I love the people I work with. I love the subject matter I’m working on. I’m learning so much. I’m getting great opportunities. I live in a beautiful city, that is not Washington, D.C. There are many other cities out there. (Laughter.) And there will always be time to move to D.C. later on. And so that was—that would be my bumper sticker. Feel what is right for you at that time in your career.

DUMBACHER: When you’re job hunting all it takes is one for it to work out. You just need one really good one that you feel comfortable at, that you feel like you’re learning at. And it can feel, when you’re on the other side of it, you put out 500 resumes and applications, what have you. But it just takes one to work out.

WARD: Parker, Theresa, Ben, Erin, thank you so much for doing this. Thank you, CFR, for putting this on. And thank you guys for coming. (Applause.) The good news is there’s another reception. So we’ll probably hang out and at least there’s drinks. So go do that. All right. Thanks, y’all.

(END)

This is an uncorrected transcript.