It's a difficult question, and I wish I had a better answer than 'read laloux'[1]. But I can try to summarise the perspective I gained from that exercise. On a

It's a difficult question, and I wish I had a better answer than 'read laloux'[1]. But I can try to summarise the perspective I gained from that exercise. On a policy level, anything that reduces the amount of power concentrated in any single hierarchy would probably help. But I agree policy is probably not the best place to make any lasting changes. Culture seems far more promising to me, if the cultural assumptions are more around becoming the best at a new field over competing in a crowded one, or about helping your junior colleagues make good decisions over making good decisions for them, then I think we'd be getting somewhere. Obviously, that is a slower thing to change than anything that could be done at a policy level, but I think it gets us towards the right metrics. On an optimistic note, I do think that organisations which make more use of all members' judgement have advantages over those who concentrate decision making - here's a general making that same point in a military context [2]. As for where the points of maximum leverage might be to achieve that kind of change... I'd certainly be interested in any suggestions! [1] https://www.reinventingorganizations.com/ https://www.reinventingorganizations.com/ [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7B5pFSq7XA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7B5pFSq7XA