DR. GRINT: Conventionally we distinguish between hierarchies and anarchies. Hierarchy would be formal positions of power in a particular organization whereas anarchy would be the absence of formal positions of power. Nobody in control.

I think if you look at the historical record, there are no organizations that persist across time successfully that are run as anarchies. They are all to some extent hierarchical. But the question is what kind of hierarchy do you have? Now, one way of understanding this would be to think about heterarchies.

A heterarchy is a movable hierarchy where people would replace leaders on a temporary basis. This would be the kind of equivalent of a research team, or a project team. Where different people would take positions of power, for more appropriate roles given their expertise. And you can see this in, in all kinds of small informal groups where different people play different roles of leadership. They are better understood as heterarchies than as hierarchies.

HATTIE: And so how big is the house?

(Voiceover) Many strong companies like E.M. Rose builders operate as heterarchies. The right talent is assembled project by project. Merriam-Webster says a heterarchy is a form of organization resembling a network or fishnet and authority is determined by knowledge and function. Employees at Altoon and Porter have their own share in computer, but move to new desks when assigned a new project. Renegade Animation taps particular talent for particular jobs. Goshow Architects is all about everyone's best ideas being brought forward, and the same is true at Boardroom Inc.

DR. GRINT: A different way of putting that would be that they are engaged in deep leadership. That is to say leadership occurs throughout the organization and is not constrained to the formal positions in the hierarchy. What I'm suggesting is, there are two things. One is the formal leaders need to be constrained by their subordinates who are willing -- this is another way of putting this would be to talk about them being constructive dissenters. People who have the best interest of the organization at heart, they're constructive. But they're happy to dissent from the main ideals of the organization or the decision making of the organization. Which is the reverse of destructive consenters.

People who are willing to say yes of course that's right knowing that it's actually not the right way to go about things. Most organizations are full of destructive consenters, yes people. As opposed to constructive dissenters who are the thorns in people's sides that are actually very unpopular but necessary to keep an organization from going in the wrong direction. You need to surround yourself with a group of people who are willing to tell you when you're going wrong.

ED: Actually you know Wing can't tie shoes. He can't barely get his hair combed out or anything. He's disorganized, but he's a great marketing man. The one thing that he does, he does better than anyone alive.

HATTIE: (Voiceover) Ed is Wing Lam's younger brother and Wing is the force behind Wahoo's Fish Taco, their 22-location surfer food joints. All traditional leadership roles were thrown out the window by these three brothers because they were more interested in success than their own egos. The baby brother, Mingo, is the CEO. And they recruited a fourth partner, Steve Karfaridis, a Greek with 5-star restaurant systems experience to be the COO.