Re: Changes to Area Director role over time

["Rob Wilton \(rwilton\)" <rwilton=40cisco.com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Dean,

 

Thanks for sharing.  I agree that it is worth thinking about how the role has changed and whether it is still functioning as effectively as it can or should.

 

I have two main thoughts on this:

 

1. I suspect that ADs will fill the time that they available to serve the role, and will aim to prioritise either the work that is most important, (or coming on to my second point), the work that is deemed to be most urgent (e.g., telechat review deadlines).
   
   It is also worth noting that different ADs will get different amounts of time support from their employer, and different ADs will be willing to work longer days or give up more of their free time for the IETF.

 

2. Perhaps the more important point is to understand from the wider community what is most important aspects of the AD role.  For most ADs, a fairly significant amount of time is spent reviewing documents from other areas for telechat reviews.  All ADs do this differently in terms of the amount of time they spend on these reviews, and what level of detail they provide as comments.  Obviously, if we were to de-emphasize this part of the AD role then it would either reduce the overall time commitment for ADs or give them more time to spend on other aspects of IETF leadership that may be more strategic and more beneficial to the IETF as a whole.
   
   

Kind regards,
Rob

 

 

From: ivandean@xxxxxxxxx <ivandean@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Monday, 24 March 2025 at 13:11
To: The IETF List <ietf@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Changes to Area Director role over time

Hello,

Multiple discussion on the email lists, in person, plenary and being NomCom chair for the past 12 months, let me to think about the AD role and how it has changed over the years (we could say decades). What do we want AD to be? It is getting harder and harder to get nominees for AD positions and it could be due to ever expanding responsibilities. Maybe we have to be more critical in what work we are adopting, break up the workload types between different roles, maybe we have to use more tools to help reduce the AD workloads, but going forward people expecting ADs to be everything under the Sun is not sustainable.

1. Growth in Scale and Complexity
Early Days: Initially, ADs managed fewer Working Groups (WGs), had smaller workloads, and focused on a more limited set of protocols.

Now: Today, ADs manage larger portfolios of WGs, deal with broader technical and governance responsibilities, and handle a significantly larger volume of documents and drafts.

2. Administrative and Organizational Responsibilities
Early Days: Area Directors previously focused primarily on technical oversight of their working groups.

Now: ADs are expected to spend significant time on administrative functions, governance, conflict resolution, community management, diversity and inclusion efforts, and procedural fairness.

3. Broader Technical Focus and Cross-Area Collaboration
Early Days: ADs primarily operated within their own technical domain, rarely interacting closely with other areas.

Now: Todays protocols frequently cross multiple technical areas, requiring ADs to collaborate more broadly across the IETF and IAB (Internet Architecture Board), driving more holistic architectural coherence and interdisciplinary work.

4. Emphasis on Transparency and Accountability
Early Days: Processes were somewhat informal, relying heavily on personal relationships and informal consensus-building.

Now: There is a strong emphasis on transparency, accountability, clear documentation of decisions, community consultation, and adherence to well-defined procedures.

5. Increasing Workload and Demand for Professionalization
Early Days: AD roles could often be filled by volunteers without formal organizational support.

Now: Due to increasing demands, many ADs require explicit employer support, often negotiating dedicated work time to effectively fulfill their responsibilities. This shift reflects increased professionalization in the role.

6. Adoption of Tools and Automation
Early Days: Coordination relied heavily on email, face-to-face meetings, and manual document handling.

Now: Adoption of tools for issue tracking, collaboration, automated workflows, and decision management (e.g., Datatracker, GitHub) has changed ADs’ workflows significantly, making processes more structured and efficient.

8. Community Expectations and Social Dynamics
Early Days: The community was relatively homogeneous, smaller, and less global, resulting in fewer cultural or linguistic challenges.

Now: The community is larger, global, diverse, and socially dynamic. ADs have expanded responsibilities to ensure equitable participation, inclusivity, and conflict resolution across diverse cultural backgrounds.

Dean