I was responding to this, emphasis added. If I misinterpreted your intent then comment withdrawn. And I said I only see holding things up as a possible motivation for trying to change the entire thing in one action, especially if it's most of your time, and especially announcing that intention in advance. If things were already going badly you can count on me to drive changing it back myself, but I'm not so against change that I'll vow to spend all my time trying to avert it. As for my motivation for bringing up this idea, if we were going to play with the same old style ( note I'm the one who is driving that too ) we would have about 2 weeks of extra time on our hands to land on a 1st of the month starting date. This is enough time to toss out an idea and see if it energizes more people than dislike it. If we pass my self-imposed deadline for making this fly, then I happily start the final discussions on the traditional constitution. To be fair, I'll respond to this as well That's the kind of response I'm very happy to see, as opposed to the other one I already pointed out. Is it the strategic vs tactical part of the new concept, or having a different arrangement of offices which you don't like? I am quite open to other solutions which emphasize strategic planning and make the leaders more like leaders and less like glorified polling secretaries.