>> 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 have been using the operations directorate as reviewers for the documents on the upcoming agenda. it has been very helpful. > 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. none of these has been the slightest problem to me. the biggest problem is getting an agenda sufficiently in advance. due to circumstances beyond my control, i have email only access, and do not know what is on next week's agenda as it has not been distributed as scheduled. this is not uncommon. and, of course, it means i can not send it to ops-dir reviewers. > Having those folks be [more] formal and secretariat-managed would > help with the process of managing them the secretariat is not fulfilling it's current tasks. don't add more. randy
