Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
'Every now and then I receive visits from earnest men and women armed with questionnaires and tape recorders who want to find out what made the Laboratory of Molecular Biology in Cambridge so remarkably creative. They come from the social sciences toseek their Holy Grail in interdisciplinary organisation. I feel tempted to draw their attention to 15th-century Florence with a population of less that 50, 000, from which emerged Leonardo, Michelangelo, Ghibertiand other great artists. Had my questioners investigated whether the rulers of Florence had created an interdisciplinary organisation of sculptors, architects, and poets to bring to life this flowering of great art?...My questions are not as absurd as they seem, because cre-ativity in science, as in the arts, cannot be organised. It arises spontaneously from individual talent. Well-run laboratories can foster it, but hierarchical organisation, inflexible, bureaucratic rules, and mounds of futile paperwork can kill it. Discoveries cannot be planned; they pop up, like Puck, in unexpected places.'
Peter A. Lawrence (Thu,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: