If non of these are good enough perhaps you can explain what your scenario is?
I try to figure out a scenario which leaves no security gap in a corporate environment (and keep in mind that I try to go to the max of paranoia level...)
So we have three offline computers and one computer to broadcast transactions.
For installing Electrum, you need one person per computer. Here we have the first security gap: If they would memorize the seeds AND collude, the total of the four would be able to steal all the coins.
Now you chose four other people who randomly have to perform a transaction. The scenario would be:
a) Transaction is made on the online computer
b) Transaction is signed by the three offline computers
c) Transaction is signed by the online computer and broadcasted
IF the guys at the computers can see the seed, they potentially could memorize it and steal the funds later.
They also could get the private key, memorize it and steal the funds later.
So the more transactions that are being made, the more the risk that seeds can be stolen.
Now one could say: Don't let people operate the computers who you don't trust. True. But over the course of years, things may change. And: Don't trust, verify.... Fact is: If one keeps the seeds in mind, he can access the funds years later, and nobody would find out it was him.
In an ideal world, the persons installing the seed would be able to verify them without ever seeing them. This is, currently, not possible.
Also: If the three offline wallets are set as watch only wallets, they can't be used to sign a transaction.
In a corporate environment, it would make sense to have several levels of segregation where the persons signing the transactions would have no possibility to get even close to the seed, the master private keys or the private keys.
Maybe this already is somehow implemented and I just don't see it. Or maybe my reasoning just has flaws?