Team leadership reorganization

Originally Posted by stevend1994

I would say to drop it down to 3, or even 2...4 is much more likely to lead to split decisions(yes, 2 arguably would do the same, but then there would be less antagonism; two people against eachother vs 4). Also, in my experience, it's just easier to manage with less people in overall executive lead.

Subgroup leaders, depending on the team size (I would say 25-30 or above) can still exist, but by no means should the subgroup leaders default to being overall executive leaders. With subgroup leaders, I definitely feel as though an overall team leader (or 2 for that matter) is necessary. But if you have 4 subgroup leaders, I don't think that that should at all mean that the 4 subgroup leaders should all be executive leaders...

Yes, this post is very scrambled and probably makes no sense to anyone outside of my mind, which is a little fried right now(yay finals studying). But I'd be willing to clarify/answer further questions.

The only reason I'm saying 4 are because we're all really good friends and get along easily. Plus, we all just happen to be really good at the 4 different parts of the team.