  Condorcet's jury theorem states that the correct outcome is reached in direct
majority voting systems with sufficiently large electorates as long as each
voter's independent probability of voting for that outcome is greater than 0.5.
Yet, in situations where direct voting systems are infeasible, such as due to
high implementation and infrastructure costs, hierarchical voting systems
provide a reasonable alternative. We study differences in outcome precision
between hierarchical and direct voting systems for varying group sizes,
abstention rates, and voter competencies. Using asymptotic expansions of the
derivative of the reliability function (or Banzhaf number), we first prove that
indirect systems differ most from their direct counterparts when group size and
number are equal to each other, and therefore to $\sqrt{N_{\rm d}}$, where
$N_{\rm d}$ is the total number of voters in the direct system. In multitier
systems, we prove that this difference is maximized when group size equals
$\sqrt[n]{N_{\rm d}}$, where $n$ is the number of hierarchical levels. Second,
we show that while direct majority rule always outperforms hierarchical voting
for homogeneous electorates that vote with certainty, as group numbers and size
increase, hierarchical majority voting gains in its ability to represent all
eligible voters. Furthermore, when voter abstention and competency are
correlated within groups, hierarchical systems often outperform direct voting,
which we show by using a generating function approach that is able to
analytically characterize heterogeneous voting systems.
