For members of a community group to act in this way could prove to be disastrous. By their very nature they need to consult with their stakeholders and, wherever possible, act with consensus. Alternative approaches will lead to disillusionment and fragmentation. A parallel and related problem may be seen with differences in organisational structures between business organisations and community groups. For business to operate effectively, it needs a clear organisational hierarchy with everyone knowing their place - who they report to and who reports to them.
Business needs bosses and subordinates.
Experiments have been tried with flatter structures, but generally it is the traditional pyramid-shaped hierarchy that we see in successful businesses. For a community group to have a traditional hierarchy like this would not make sense and would be an anathema to their very reason for coming together, which is generally to work together to address concerns over a common problem. The structural difference between business and community groups means that not only are decision-making processes often less clear in community groups, but so are levels of accountability ie. They speak the same language and are managed similarly. This may sound depressing and counter to the message I am attempting to bring - that business does have a responsibility to work with its community.