To prevent single points of failure, implement a "pilot/co-pilot" system. Regularly rotate employees, promoting the co-pilot to pilot and bringing in a new co-pilot. This develops well-rounded talent, breaks down knowledge silos, and makes the company anti-fragile, despite initial employee resistance to change.

Beyond just making meetings 25% shorter, standing up changes the group dynamic. When sitting, people claim personal space ('my chair, my turf'). Standing creates a shared space, which psychologically shifts focus from individual territory to collective teamwork and shared ideas.

Managing innovative teams requires a balancing act. While sharing resources like software improves efficiency, it creates blind spots. Leaders should intentionally foster independent 'splinter groups' to work on the same problem, ensuring critical comparisons can be made to uncover hidden errors.

Musician Jacob Collier evaluates groups on a 'supple vs. brittle' axis. Supple groups adapt to unexpected events, while brittle ones resist and snap under pressure. Leaders must create psychological safety that enables teams to embrace spontaneity rather than tightening up.

To ensure rigorous vetting of ideas, create an environment of friendly competition between teams. This structure naturally motivates each group to find flaws in the other's thinking, a process that might be socially awkward in a purely collaborative setting. The result is a more robust, error-checked outcome.

The concept of Dunbar's Number, which posits a cognitive limit of about 150 stable social relationships, is not just theoretical. Companies actively use this principle to cap the size of working groups and even entire facilities to keep communication efficient and prevent the growth of stifling bureaucracy.

Research shows power degrades empathy, making leaders less objective. A practical system to counteract this is to formally assign a team member the role of 'devil's advocate' for major decisions. This institutionalizes dissent as a process, removing the personal and career risk of challenging authority.

Biologist William Muir's 'super chicken' experiment revealed that groups of top individual performers can end up sabotaging one another, leading to worse outcomes than more cooperative, average teams. In business, this 'too much talent problem' manifests as ego clashes and a breakdown in collaboration, undermining collective success.

The Waterline Model suggests 80% of team dysfunctions are rooted in structural problems (unclear goals, roles), not interpersonal issues. Before you 'scuba dive' into individual conflicts, 'snorkel' at the surface by clarifying roles and expectations. This simple act solves the majority of problems.