When the plan was presented to the bank's senior executives, there was a storm of protest from the regions. They pointed out first that the plan violated the principles of genuine decentralization. The regional executive VPs were to have full business responsibility. Yet for rapidly growing parts of the business-corporate banking, fiduciary banking, and mortgage banking-they would have no direct responsibility. These activities were going to be done by headquarters divisions. The same applied to operations-that is, to the 70 percent of the bank's costs that are people. They further objected that their subordinate status was both wrong in terms of organization and contrary to the bank's strategy. "We expect the bank to grow the most in the regions outside of the capital city, yet the regions will still be treated as they were under the old 'Zona Interior' system and report to a capital-city executive VP rather than directly to the chief executive officer," the regional men pointed out. Finally, they strongly objected to perpetuating the tradition under which the president ran the capital-city division. "This means," they said, "that the president will have no time for us, will give us no attention, and will, inevitably, channel resources and good people to the capital city, when the growth opportunities and needs are outside."