On 11 Oct 2014, at 01:06, Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Stewart: > > Thanks. Certainly food for thought. > > The proposed change relates to how the organisation is divided into parts, what areas we have. I think that is a necessary part, but it should not be the only part. Additional changes are certainly worth considering, and the IESG has been considering them as well. In particular, I would be very interested in lowering the per-person workload so that a broader set of people could consider IETF leadership positions. Including even more people who are great engineers and also needed elsewhere. This seems a highly desirable goal of any adjustments to the IESG structure. > (FWIW, we have a few ADs who are succeeding with a fully-loaded day job and their AD task. By the way, strangely enough, one of the difficulties in “letting go” in the IESG and having even more of the work performed in the working groups relates to how view ADs decide to run our daily business. There certainly is a lot to do, and on large areas or in difficult situations a lot of effort is needed. However, personal management styles differ greatly. It is also about the culture and personal choice and not only about how we’ve defined the AD tasks in our process RFCs.) Tim