not always. Asci-red had a distributed version of OSF/1. this wasn't a great design because it was built on distributed shared memory, so it had fault tolerance and performance problems. the MTA had a shared memory monolithic BSD, but that was almost a forced choice.
The Cray T3D had a really nice distributed services model (really kind of a distributed exokernel) that would be worth emulating
on some machines there was an interactive ganged run facility like 'mpirun'. I think even this distinction where there are 'login' or 'service' nodes and anonymous runners would be at least a little structure. I guess you could argue that k8s is this, but it kind of falls short and seems to require a lot of continuous propping up.
I worked on a single system image project that didn't ever get shipped. it turns out that a syscall proxy layer isn't that difficult to implement, and that leaves you with an undisturbed user space.
anyways, there are a whole host of design options that don't look like k8s or slurm. and having spent some time recently on non-hyperscaler clusters, that bottom level of bringup (provisioning, networking management, reporting, fault tolerance, distributed filesystems) is really a nightmare. I think we lost a lot of traction there by raising generations exclusively in someone else's operational context.