Hierarchy is conceptualised as based on a monolithic pyramid-like distribution of power with lower-ranked actors subjected to the regulation of top-ranked units. Empirically, the optimum performance of hierarchical systems is defined by high levels of compliance by lowly ranked units. In what may count as an analytical self-fulfilling prophecy resulting in a theoretical cul-de-sac, the (un) conscious utilisation of the hierarchical framework to study the unification processes of African International Organizations (AIOs) has consistently led to the verdict of ‘no-performance’ due to, among others, government non-compliance with unification regimes or initiatives which require joint efforts. Employing the concept of ‘heterarchy’, this chapter seeks to enhance theorisation by resetting the ontological culture of hierarchy that dominates the study of African continentalism. This quest is based on the conviction that AIOs are situated between the two extremes of the hierarchy-anarchy spectrum. Within this context, designating AIOs as ‘no-performance’ entities from the perspective of hierarchy assumes that African unification processes are only institutionally articulated at the hierarchy fringe of the said spectrum. Heterarchy, with its emphasis on a non-hierarchy monolithic conception of power, envisages the possibility of in situ requirements motivating entities to govern just as they allow themselves to be governed by others in a quest to achieve formal ideals. As such, heterarchy can be used to theoretically re-imagine processes of African unification as transactions enacted in settings between the hierarchy-anarchy continuum. This chapter is set out as follows: a sketch of African integration mega-trends from 1958 to 2021, a critique of studies on African continentalism inspired by the hierarchical frame of thought followed by a sketch of the tenets of heterarchy, and finally, a conclusion.