I think delegation to directorates, chairs, and document shepherds is more useful than creating a new assistant role. Not saying that such delegation is easy, but it clearly has worked well in some situations at least. There's really just a couple of fundamental variables we can tweak: delegation (moving work around), depth (how much and how detailed we do it), coordination (how different pieces of work are organised as either separate independent processes or as something that needs more coordination), and scope (what work belongs in the IETF). And in every organisation, the roles needs to be reasonable & motivated for everyone in those roles. In my completely person opinion: First, tweaking the scope should be off the table, because organisation should follow need, rather than vice versa. Our job (at the IESG/IETF) to fix the organisation if necessary. Second, I think we should look at delegation and depth of work at the IESG, and not merely because it would help AD work load. The better reason to look at that would be to empower the WGs to do their work in as complete fashion as possible, and be self responsible for dealing with the issues that arise, e.g., in cross-area reviews. This is why we've said that we will be sending more work back to the WGs and created the early directorate review experiment. Admittedly these are small steps. But it is my belief at least that the IESG needs to get out of the loop in more cases than we are today. Finally, a couple of +1s to the following people: Loa wrote: > I should probably keep my mouth shat about this :) ! Looking tot he RTG > area don't we have an Assistant AD, only that we call it the > RTG Directorate Chair? A very proper place to delegate work and assign > responsibility. Indeed. (Which may beg the question of whether additional recognition for the important work by chairs and directorate folk needs more recognition.) And Joel: > For better or worse I told the nomcom that I only have 2 hours a day (7 days a week) for this… They took me anyway. The load is unevenly distributed. The internet and routing and Apps ADs appear to have more drafts to process and more complex working group interactions, then does the ops side of ops and management. > > That said, this is not a not a full time job for me and I am not compensated for doing it. If my level of available commitment isn't adequate, I guess we'll find out between now and the 2 year mark. My contribution to the things that bring me to the IETF as on operator have dropped off because I don't have time for them. Kudos to Joel for doing such a good job with a limited amount of time. I hope that this sets an example as well for others to follow! (Obviously, areas and situations differ, too, which people should take into account.) Jari