I agree with some of your points but I don't think that deconstructioning the pieces of the project is a panacea. What frequently occurs when that happens is that you get distributed work along with distributed responsibility. Then whenever anything goes wrong or needs to change, there is no one who can make it happen.
You get team A who needs team B to make a new api, but they won't do it till they get a new device because their kpis don't improve for any work they do for team A, so HR needs to be involved the do hiring but they need to talk to accounting to approve the budget and on and on and on.
If you've ever seen Rick and Morty, the episode where aliens have accidentally pulled another character in and the leader is trying to find out why, when every department blames another and he says "oh, so it's nobodies fault" is a perfect example of most large projects
Not a panacea, but if you imagine - every effort is begun with a built in base probability of failure (battle won or lost before it's fought kind of thing) - that a smaller effort reduces likelihood of failure cause you have less unknown variables.
Breaking things up, not necessarily with the teams, but with time. Milestones, separate the projects over time. Also, the shorter deadlines I've found help keep focused. Longer than a couple months - things can languish.
You get team A who needs team B to make a new api, but they won't do it till they get a new device because their kpis don't improve for any work they do for team A, so HR needs to be involved the do hiring but they need to talk to accounting to approve the budget and on and on and on.
If you've ever seen Rick and Morty, the episode where aliens have accidentally pulled another character in and the leader is trying to find out why, when every department blames another and he says "oh, so it's nobodies fault" is a perfect example of most large projects