Steve Jobs was also known to lock teams in a room until they arrived at a common vision. It's a difficult task, to align everyone, but in my limited experience not doing it resulted in extremely inefficient execution. What's more, people feel belittled and rejected if you disregard their viewpoints. Sometimes you need to get things done regardless of what people feel or think, but you can't sustain that for a long time.
locking people in sure achieves at least one thing, but then so does adding two zeros. Jobs locked staff in, at Google when you a book meeting room, the wifi and lights cuts off at the end - a kill-switch approach [1].
personally, I think those hacks are cute and handy, but once you recruit well, reward and empower your staff, leading becomes much easier. At google, that approach probably helped more with their ESG policies than staff productivity. In Jobs' case, probably helped "him" stay focused rather than his staff, a meditation technique of sorts lol
Re: Juries. wasn't the main reason to prevent the world outside the court from influencing their decision?
