Tradition II:
For our group purpose there is but one ultimate authority—a loving God as He may express Himself in our group conscience.
Tradition IX:
Each AA group needs the least possible organization. ...
Concept III:
As a traditional means of creating and maintaining a clearly defined working relationship between the groups, the Conference, the General Service Board and its General Service Office, and of thus ensuring their effective leadership, it is here suggested we endow each of these elements of service with a traditional “Right of Decision”.
Concept VI:
On behalf of A.A., in Great Britain, our General Service Conference has the principal responsibility for the maintenance of our services, and it traditionally has the final decision respecting large matters of general policy and finance. But the Conference also recognises that the chief initiative and the active responsibility in most of these matters should be exercised primarily by the Trustee members of the Conference when they act among themselves as the General Service Board of Alcoholics Anonymous (Great Britain).
Concept XII:
General Warranties of the Conference: ... that all important decisions be reached by discussion, vote, and, whenever possible, by substantial unanimity; ... [Warranty IV]
In groups, large matters of general policy and finance must go to the group for a decision. These are fundamental questions of how the group operates.
All other matters are left to the officers to discharge as they see fit. The group can make suggestions, pass on ideas, etc., but the group need not and indeed must not legislate as to how someone performs their role. If they deliver, fine. If they don't, there's room, in Concept III, for reprimand, redirection, reorganisation, and replacement if something major is going wrong.
Tradition IX suggests avoidance of excessive formality.
In other words, if something can be dealt with informally, deal with it informally. If it a question of how a job gets done, have a discussion, sure, but just leave the decision to the officer in question.
The system of proposals, discussion, vote, and substantial unanimity really applies only to final decisions respect large matters of general policy and finances, basically the time, location, and content of the meeting, plus the overall structure of the meeting, and big financial decisions. Everything else: be a mensch and sort it out. Don't legislate for legislation's sake. Least possible organisation. Officers get to make decisions, too.