Hey Graham, no issues and good discussion. I guess what I was really trying to say is the things you are pointing out tend to be the exceptions and not the norm. What I clue in on are words such as "Usually". Of course there are exceptions and we tend to hear about these things and we also tend to filter and focus on those things that validate our thought processes. I am just trying to present a better perspective of the issues from my own experiences in an attempt to get you and others to see an expanded view that things are not so clear cut and black and white. thats all.
I agree. Then we are both doing the same thing. Command structure is a good topic to study. It's plusses and it's minuses. Examples where it works well compared to examples where it didn't. As I've said before spotting the differences is the difference.
An ideal one would help. A not ideal one would destroy. So knowing the qualities needed inherent to a good one as opposed to a bad one is the difference.
It can lead to a whole broad area of study actually. For instance, most people see, and have experienced, the effect of command structure where all goes one way, from top to bottom. A one way flow. Compare that to a communication structure. Communication, or good communication is a two way flow. A circle if you like. You to me and then me back to you.
Now try to communicate back upline on a command line. Mmmmm. not usually so easy, especially if you disagree. Could even get you shot. (extreme I know but just magnifying a point)
In communication you are communicating to another person. In a command structure in comes ego and arrogance and you are then communicating either to 'above your paygrade' type attitude or to subordinates, 'huh, what do they know.'
A fascinating subject and when wrong hinders rather than helps wouldn't you say. On the other hand you could say that when good then as it's an organized body can therefore do more good than an individual.
Anyway. I'm signing off on this one. Good talking to you.