I think you’re overestimating corporations a bit. Some aspects of intelligence scale linearly as you put more people into a room, eg quantity of ideas you can generate, while others don’t due to limits on people’s ability to communicate with each other. The latter is, I think, more or less the norm; adding more people very quickly hits decelerating returns due to the amount of distance you end up having to put between people in large organizations. Most end up resembling dictatorships because it’s just the easiest way to organize them, so are making strategic choices about as well as a guy with some advisors.

I agree that we should see structures of humans as their own kind of organism in a sense, but I think this framing works best on a global scale. Once you go smaller, eg to a nation, you need to conceptualize the barrier between inside and outside the organism as being highly fluid and difficult to define. Once you get to the level of a corporation this difficulty defining inside and outside is enormous. Eg aren’t regulatory bodies also a part, since they aid the corporation in making decisions?

Usually for companies, regulatory bodies are more like antibodies against bacteria. Or for another example, regulatory bodies are like any hormone producing body part, they control that the assemble of your guts do their thing and don't fuck it up.

Maybe that’s a loosely effective analogy. It depends on the degree of antagonism between corp and regulator.