isn't the ideal here like such. A group that has:

1. Absolute and perfect horizontal and vertical lines of communications within the group.

2. Innovation and intuition at all levels are encouraged (and in fact crucial) within the limit that all good things must come to an end - decisions must be made within time frames.

3. Expertise in specialized areas comes into the group - preferably from in-house associated groups (since then #1 comes fully into play); but if required, from outside sources.

4. Absolute in-house confidentiality as to everything known in-house (both the lead group and all associated groups), except for designated output.

5. Communications with outside sources is limited to a need to know basis for confidentiality reasons.

6. The designated in-house lead group is in charge.

Nothing new in any of this - standard practice on "big case" and "big project" matters in the legal field (e,g., Sullivan & Cromwell and Donovan-Leisure in the 60s and probably for decades before); and I expect many organizations (business, government and military) as well.

The trick is to do this within a bureaucratic framework (large law firms are bureaucratic, but can't afford to be too bureaucratic) - which is easier said than done.

Should we call this the American Approach ?