--On Thursday, 21 November, 2002 13:53 -0500 Scott W Brim
John, I like what you say, but I would like to see it less
formal. I have encouraged ADs to have groups of personal
trusted professional assistants (not just area secretariats,
although there could be overlap), who could take care of all
the tasks you suggest for offloading.
Yep. Probably better, for all sorts of reasons (including not
concentrating resources and power/authority in the secretariat)
if it worked. But, if anyone has actually done it and made it
work to good effect, I'm not aware of it. I can speculate on
many reasons for that, of which lack of stable resources,
management time, and uncertainty as to whether the other IESG
members would accept such arrangements are high on the list.
Some of this gets back to an observation that was made from the
floor last night --and that has been made many times before--
which is that the IESG members are, in general, charged with
getting the job done but not required to do it all themselves.
Having those folks be [more] formal and secretariat-managed
would help with the process of managing them (if they aren't
volunteers, they need space, payroll and benefit functions,
etc., which are unlikely to come from ADs). And they might be a
resource in transition during AD changes. I don't know whether
those advantages are worth the risks and tradeoffs;
instinctively I like your model (assuming I understand it)
better if it is feasible.