In this P2P model, a proportion of the network is supernodes. Nodes connect to a small number of supernodes, and the supernodes index what files they have. When searching, nodes need only query the supernodes (not the whole network). If the number of supernodes is proportional to the square root of the network size, this scales moderately well. For extra scalability, supernodes are chosen that have high bandwidth, memory capacity, etc.
So by analogy, an organization might have a two level hierarchy: ordinary members and council. Each member is in conctact with several people on the council, and these people represent them. To find someone with expertise, a member need only ask around the council. The council as a whole has enough information to make good decisions on behalf of the whole membership.
As in the computer network, the council would comprise about the square root of the membership. Councillors would be chosen (somehow) who had good people skills and social intelligence.
We might expect organizations like this to scale to about the square of the size of a typical "tribe" social network. Tribes are about 150-200 people, so in the order of 20,000 to 40,000 people. The councillors having high social intelligence, small-world effects ("Bob knows about that kind of stuff, ask him") might allow larger organizations.
I've started jotting down how this stuff relates to politics. Do you want to know MORE?