Starfish vs Spider

I am going through the old articles. This one is suggested by our Chairman. The following is an exert from the book. The approach appears to be good, however, the difficulty in adopting new environment is not addressed with an intensity I expected. 

“Leaders have seized on collaboration as a powerful new lever to cut costs, innovate faster, co-create with customers, and usher their organizations into the twenty-first century business environment.”
“Now all that individual brainpower is tied together and amplified by the power of technology: The new and potent "we" is far smarter than any singular "me." 


For the first time, humans can act in mass collaboration, using the kind of collective intelligence once reserved for ants and bees—but now with human IQ driving the mix. The result is a quantum increase in the world's ability to conceive, create, compute, and connect. We are only beginning to comprehend the consequences.”
“What’s the difference between a starfish and a spider?  A spider has a head.  If you cut off the head, the spider dies.  If you cut off a spider leg, the spider survives as a seven legged spider.  But a starfish has no head.  If you cut a starfish in half, it makes two starfish.  Indeed, if you cut off a leg of some starfish, they’ll grow—from that leg—a whole new starfish.”


“There's no real evidence that one can become expert in something as broad as "decision making" or "policy" or "strategy." Auto repair, piloting, skiing, perhaps even management: these are skills that yield to application, hard work, and native talent. 


But forecasting an uncertain future and deciding the best course of action in the face of that future are much less likely to do so. And much of what we've seen so far suggests that a large group of diverse individuals will come up with better and more robust forecasts and make more intelligent decisions than even the most skilled "decision maker .”


Which is best ... Comment....