This sounds like a field station or NASA-style science backroom team. And it sounds great in principle, and I have absolutely no doubt that with the right mix of people it will work well. I've seen that and it's beautiful.

I've also seen that apparent success devolve into backstabbing and eventually cultural warfare - and finally mission failure - due to the requirement to "contribute" in each meeting. Eventually, with enough experience and growing philosophical difference, it turns into a pissing match. "Ah, yes, but my comment is still more insightful, cuts to the quick."

Flat is no panacea. I'd propose a sort of mutation-inducing element: rotate juniors and focus-outsiders through those meetings. Spread that culture of constructive critique, and - admitting you're thinking as a manager - get feedback on whether it's really working or not sooner. More important: spread the bleeding edge of foresight. Forget the elite-as-solution and *really* work the DNA. Evolve.