Both markets and groups are much better at quantifying power differentials than in assessing information objectively and making useful predictions about the future.
This is why groups tend to be dumb. So much energy goes on hierarchical posturing and social signalling that there's relatively little left over for practical intelligence.
Orgs that can break through this can do astounding things. But the successes tend to be more rooted in the values of science and engineering as processes than in market processes.
Historically, every so often you get an org that works as intelligence amplifier and is more than the sum of individual talents.
But this configuration seems to be unstable, and so far as I know no org has ever made it stick as a permanent feature of a business culture.
This is why groups tend to be dumb. So much energy goes on hierarchical posturing and social signalling that there's relatively little left over for practical intelligence.
Orgs that can break through this can do astounding things. But the successes tend to be more rooted in the values of science and engineering as processes than in market processes.
Historically, every so often you get an org that works as intelligence amplifier and is more than the sum of individual talents.
But this configuration seems to be unstable, and so far as I know no org has ever made it stick as a permanent feature of a business culture.