You're aware of "forming, storming, norming..." etc? It's a well-recognised problem. Smaller "abrasive" teams are very off-putting to some people; larger bureaucratic organisation are equally off-putting to others.

I suspect no one structure is optimal for all contexts.

Have a look at the design of the new Crick Institute in London, designed for serendipity. Or Facebook's attempt at an open plan office (probably not a great example, but you see the idea). Maybe even Taleb's ideas about anti-fragility (despite my finding him a terrible, turgid author).