The way I've seen it tackled, rank is less a rigid ladder and more about the specific, often brutal, roles within a social-familial-military structure. An Alpha isn't just the strongest; they're the pack's anchor, the one who literally bears the emotional and psychic weight of everyone through the mate bond and pack bonds. That creates a loyalty born of shared feeling, not just fear. Betas are the lieutenants, the ones who translate the Alpha's will into action and often manage internal disputes. An Omega's low rank isn't useless—their submission can soothe the entire pack's aggression, acting as a pressure valve. So loyalty flows weirdly: you're loyal to the Alpha because you feel their stability, but you're also loyal to the system because everyone's role keeps the collective sane. A pack where the Delta (enforcers) are unstable can undermine everything, even if the Alpha is powerful.
That said, I get tired of stories where a random 'rogue' shows up and challenges the Alpha to a fistfight for leadership. Real loyalty in those settings would be complex—would the Betas follow a brute who won by force but can't hold the bonds? Probably not for long. The best depictions show rank as a web of responsibility, where leadership is a burden that earns loyalty, not a prize that demands it.