This duplicates the tasks, requiring changing multiple templates if the core process changes.
This runs into the same issue.
Redundancy - other than for backup purposes - is one of the primary reasons for error in modern knowledge work.
It starts off with one duplication, and someone thinking “Oh, I just need to not forget to update the other template when things change”
Then that gets duplicated, and people end up with 14 templates, each slightly different for that specific client/situation.
Everywhere I worked where I saw redundancy it eventually led to errors, and a quest to make sense of the variations.
Not only does this introduce errors into your process, it also introduces a resistance to change, because changing the core process now require changing it in 14 places rather than one.
But the improvements you can make for the work that are the same across all variations are most impactful for improvement, as they impact all of your variations.
This is why I - as an improvement professional - oppose duplication of templates. Because my job often involves preventing and reverting redundancy.
I’d take @lpb’s approach any day over duplicating a template.
@Garrett_Knoll I’m hoping you/the team takes this into consideration when considering this request vs supporting Modular Templates, which in my opinion is extremely underrated compared to this thread. It may not be the feature everyone wants, but I think it’s the feature people actually would be better off with.