IMHO, If we reduce job output of AD and responsibilities we will get low quality Processes. By having assistant ADs we reduce only ADs input hours in IETF.
AB
On Thursday, October 17, 2013, Dave Crocker wrote:
On 10/18/2013 3:54 AM, Tim Chown wrote:
I believe the "intense service" you mention is a significant deterrent for many.
I'm sure it's been suggested before, but is there mileage in rethinking the
AD roles,
It has been suggested many times. The suggestion has been ignored.
We have been having some very serious recruitment problems for a number of years now. This year's crisis was entirely predictable.
The only way the situation will change meaningfully is to make the job less onerous, and especially make it possible for the AD to continue doing real work for their company.
ADs are senior folk. That makes them a strategic resource for their company. Or, at least, they'd better be. Only very large companies can afford to lose a strategic resource for years.
Looking for alternative funding does not make the job less onerous and does not permit the AD to continue doing real work for their company.
Re-define the bloody job. At a minimum, make the workload realistically no more than 50%, but I actually suggest trying for 25%, given that reality will increase the actual amount above that.
This means taking the current list of AD tasks and deciding on the ones that absolutely cannot be done by others, and specifying other ways to do the remainder.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net