The time commitment is a very good point, Dave.
If we want to also involve people who do not work for big corporations (or get
otherwise sponsored by big organizations) then the idea of having ADs review
every document may need to get a bit relaxed. Today, almost all of the ADs (and
IAB members) work for major enterprises.
In companies managers typically do not get involved in every little technical
detail but rather need to ensure that the work gets done. Maybe ADs could
delegate more tasks to directorates, as it is done in the security area
already. This also avoids the problem that an AD becomes the bottleneck in
understanding the work that working groups produce. This happened in the past
as well.
Ciao
Hannes
On Mar 3, 2013, at 6:14 PM, Dave Crocker wrote:
On 3/3/2013 4:56 AM, Eric Burger wrote:
The 50% time commitment is an IESG-imposed requirement. If that is really
the problem, we have had areas with more than two ADs.
Finding qualified Transport ADs has been a continuing problem for a number of
years. This year's impasse was inevitable. Whatever the problem, it's
deep-seated.[*]
While the problem for Transport is extreme, it's generally difficult to find
a good range of qualified candidates for AD. A major barrier is the time
commitment to the job. And it's not really a 50% slot; the reality for most
ADs seemed to be in the 75-100% range.
This is a massive cost to their employer, both in raw dollars and opportunity
cost -- ADs are typically senior contributors. That means removing a
strategic resource from the company's main activities. To take a senior
contributor away usually requires that the company be very large and have a
very deep bench of talent.
That's an onerous burden, in my view, and significantly reduces the pool of
available candidates.
The IESG needs to decide that the job is a 25% job -- an actual terms -- and
then decide what tasks are essential to perform within that amount of time.
This will require a significant change in the way ADs do their work.
Reducing the real, budgeted time for an ADs job should significantly increase
the pool of available candidates. As a side benefit, it should also
significantly improve the diversity of the pool, along most parameters.
As an obvious example of what to change, it means that ADs need to change
their paradigm for document review.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net