On 22/10/2013 07:07, Andy Bierman wrote:
Hi Joel,
Delegating authority without responsibility is a bad idea.
The question of "does an AD have too much responsibility"
seems to be the underlying issue here.
It seems the main IESG areas of responsibility are:
1) Steer the IETF (e.g, approve BoFs, WG charters)
2) Manage all IETF working groups (e.g., deliver milestones)
3) Review all drafts for RFC publication
Why not have Area Managers as well as Area Directors? (split out (2))
They would be responsible for getting WGs in the area
to complete their milestones on time. (e.g, they have WG conflict
resolution authority, not the ADs). The desired skill set focus for an AM
would be
management, not technology.
We mustn't forget that although ADs almost always attempt to steer
(or manage) by persuasion and reasoning, they do have two or three
ultimate weapons - the powers to replace WG chairs, to close WGs,
and to decline to advance a document. This is what makes it hard
to split 1) from 2), and makes it plausible to separate 3) from
1)+2), IMHO.
Brian