The “Do Nothing” Option is very self explanatory. Many argue that the Engineering Society is currently functioning effectively and do not wish to change that. There are several reasons why this logical. Logistically, not changing the structure of the executives is the simplest option. Office space will not need to be altered to accommodate an additional executive and another computer would not need to be acquired. This would also mean fewer constitutional changes that take an extremely long time to pass through council meetings (three readings and a vote for both A and B societies). This would translate into less work for the executive team, whereas they could get more work done in the mean time. Council meetings would also be significantly shorter.
There would also be a large amount of work required with respect to the testing and finessing of the new position, whether it is a redefined exec role, a new directorship or an entirely new exec member.
And there is already a large amount of difficulty present with getting people to run for executive positions. It seems as though more and more executive positions are acclaimed with candidates running unopposed. What could be implemented to fill an additional exec placement?
At the end of the day, people are basically being bombarded with information. Is more information about exec positions necessary? This falls back to the stigma associated with mailing lists. There is just too much going on, so why make things more difficult? And to what end is all of this change? When do we stop adding executives to lighten the work load? When is satisfaction with the society ever achieved? Can’t we just follow tradition?
Leave a Reply