In her first speech as the fund's chief,
she called for governments to enact domestic reforms that achieve "stronger and more resilient growth",
and for those with remaining fiscal firepower to deploy it.
She has promised to collaborate more with the World Bank, particularly regarding countries that have received the fund's help.
Ms Georgieva may want to remove the impression that the MF cares only about restoring stability
to crisis-ridden countries at the expense of jobs and growth.
It is hardly unusual for new bosses to make management changes, including at the fund.
It could benefit from a shake-up that flattens its hierarchical management structure. Its policies could also be improved.
Its programmes sometimes crimp growth, such that countries miss its rosy GDP forecasts.
Its engagement with fragile states can be lacklustre.
The risk, though, is that Ms Georgieva's reforms backfire.
If she wants the most able staff to work on fragile states, she will have to butter them up.
Mr Lipton's departure means one fewer set of capable hands to help in a crisis.
Some fear that without him there will be an increase in "clientitis"— country directors being too soft when demanding reforms.
One near-term challenge is Argentina, the recipient of the fund's biggest ever loan.
On February 12th fund officials began talks with the government, which is seeking to restructure its debt.
There are also concerns that Mr Lipton might be replaced by someone less capable.
The Trump administration has resisted the idea that Mr Lipton's job be abolished altogether.
It is floating the name of Geoffrey Okamoto, an acting assistant secretary of the Treasury, as a potential replacement.
For Ms Georgieva's strategy to work, she needs someone pliable in the role.
But if they are too weak, the institution could eventually suffer.
Ms Georgieva still needs to convince some fund-watchers that she is updating its mission not diluting it.
New ambitions require resources—or a sense of which old tasks will be cut to make way for new ones.
Structural reforms need not do damage. But they should be enacted with care.