Echoing what Steve and others have said, it is also of very vital importance to conduct some form of review at the conclusion of the season. I'd like to refrain from calling it a performance review, but no team can afford to be complacent if it decides that it wants to move forward progressively with each year. In specific regards to 188, the earlier iterations of the team were handled with the system of co presidents and a very even distribution of power due to the large number of students. In my days, there were only a core group of 15-20 people with a periphery of maybe 40 students, meaning that whoever appeared to commit the most and was able to get on with their jobs well enough became de facto leaders. This season some of the mentors and concerned students took it upon themselves to examine how we performed as a team and decided a return to the old system and a revamp of the organization chart would be appropriate and most likely improve the core functions of the team and our performance next season.
Do not be afraid to be progressive, take a critical look at how things have operated and make sure that you receive feedback from both students and mentors! Remember, just because something has been one way for 10 years, doesnt mean it cant be another way for another 10
