No, dominance based hierarchies are being illuminated for what they are - artificial social stratifications that maintain traditional power via coercion and violence -absent entirely of things like merit. There are other types of hierarchies. Read the story I linked at the bottom of the OP about that.

If you stopped having apoplexy long enough to pay any actual attention to what I've said, you would have noted that I've already made clear that partnership in this context doesn't mean what you probably think it does.

Your conniption fit is entirely unnecessary if you stop jumping to conclusions and actual pay attention to the content. I’ve reposted several paragraphs from the OP for your convenience:

“Hierarchies of actualization (partnership-style) work environments have an organizational structure where the leaders not only expect support and respect from those whom they have authority over, but they also give it back reciprocally. Organizational goals are achieved through collaboration and relatedness, rather than paternalism or threats.

Not everyone has the same level of authority, but those with more use that power to make sure that the people in their charge have what they need to fulfill the mission. They are the coordinators, the facilitators, and the monitors who make sure that things are on task and they do that by engaging with their team, not by managing from above.”

In some of the most successful start-ups and even large organizations that have evolved, you can visibly see greater levels of delegation and decision making at all levels. Leaders focus on guiding and communicating the vision, leading large client projects and finding new ways to develop their staff. Managers are taking on more leadership responsibilities and pass increasing amounts of responsibility to junior employees. Forbes