Hi @TempeTechie,
took another turn 
1. Reducing number of overall objectives, simplifying comms
To avoid seeming to “boil the ocean” and actually trying to do everything at once, I believe the objectives could be structured as below.
2. Tight and concurrent timelines
With regards to my 2nd concern of trying to achieve all of them within two years my main worry is the current capacity & capabilities of the AAEs. Each AAE can ramp up/onboard other contributors/service providers, but it takes time to build a quality team (as we are seeing with the AGV and OpCo).
This being said I do not know whether the 2 year timeframe for most objectives is too short or actually achievable but believe a short exercise mapping objectives vs capacities could help. A starter could be the below screenshot, to map out objectives with AAE owners and trying to figure out if we are putting too much on a single AAE’s plate.
Disclaimers:
- I filled this with my (limited) knowledge (more than happy to edit, discuss etc)
- Probably each objective has more AAEs collaborating, but final ownership should not be shared
- I see the OpCo’s role in this as resolving disputes, identifying prioritization issues (in case of any competing objectives), tracking objectives and holding AAEs accountable; obviously tbd if the OAT @Frisson @pedrob @ajwarner90 @stonecoldpat agree
- Other experienced SPs column is empty by choice (don’t want to force anyone to collaborate) but could imagine @CastleCapital , Reverie @Federico, @Areta and others here; who have enough context & skills to support and might make tighter timelines feasible
Again @TempeTechie thanks so much for putting this together hope my thinking helps.