I'm abstaining from voting in the poll for the same reason I abstained in the ITA Board vote to admit 90 Minds. As a member of both, I have a clear conflict of interest. However, please know that I am the Board sponsor of the nomination.
The reason for the size limitation is to prevent devaluing existing members. When CS3 became a member of the ITA, we paid the full fee and continue to pay the annual assessment. We are a firm of 10 employees and 12 FTE's. I and other members of the ITA Board look upon the 90 Minds relationship as giving smaller firms a way to participate with out the entry fee. I think of it as a junior member at a Country Club. (Please note, those are my words and not that of any other Board member so don't hang me out to dry on the analogy.)
If you are part of a 103 person firm even though your consulting group is 3 people, your organization can absorb the membership MUCH more easily than I can mine. As such, we should stand equal at the table. If you a 1 to 5 person group, it's a disproportionately bigger burden and quite frankly, you probably wouldn't be a candidate to join ITA because of the financial barrier. My hope in facilitating this arrangement up is to help as many as I can while not diluting the ITA value proposition to other firms. My hope is that ITA participation helps you grow to a size where your firm out grows the 90 Minds arrangement and you join ITA directly.