We've breifly discussed this but I'll recap my thoughts.

In the past, some have chosen to run the entire show, taking everything under their belt. It's probably not the best way... things slip through the cracks or are just overlooked. If we spread it out to as many people who want to help, we'll have more buy in from members, less burn out, and we should be more successful.

I think at the minimum, just to keep it running, we'd need two to three positions: Pipe major/ leader, and a financial manager. I think that even if the PM also wants to be group leader, the finances should be managed by a different person, possibly several as the account should have two signers.

A leader: Just a manager, boss, band president or whatever we choose to call him/her. It doesn't even have to be a piper, or someone who's been in the band for any set amount of time, just one who's willing to run the group and make final decisions even if opinion is collected by a vote or poll.

If an individual wants to lead the band, as in conducting practice sessions, being the point person at gigs and parades but does not want to actually be in charge, then we could have a different overall leader, in that case maybe more of a manager.

Financial manager: someone or several people to manage the money. That person could have others help as people are able or something like depositing a check is convenient for them.

If we had a large enough group I'd say that there are prfobably 3-4 other positions that we should fill.