I agree when you say that understanding them is the real challenge compared to simply knowing them (at the same time I do not say that I understand them fully or enough). However, as you can probably agree upon, the shift from understanding to acting is another important challenge. The examples in your paper show that companies are acting (assuming they understand the challenges and opportunities first), but I wonder, are there examples of real-life cases where the results were less successful or rather disappointing perhaps? These are opportunities for learning about it as well.

You say:
” I do believe that we are reaching a point where other types of governance are better alternatives as opposed to hierarchical ones”.

I also believe this, but I think that a lot of people who agree with us make the serious error of assuming that all network-style alternatives to traditional hierarchies are the same. In actuality, however, there are many many kinds of networks, and they all have a plethora of interesting properties: diameter, path lengths, robustness, etc.

The real challenge is not simply KNOWING that panarchy is pervading every part of the world structures: agriculture, manufacturing, energy, culture, politics, and economics, but doing the hard work of UNDERSTANDING all of the opportunities and challenges presented to us by the diversity and plurality of the new era.

-Paul B. Hartzog
http://www.panarchy.com