Editing Command hierarchy (section)

==Sociology==
In [[sociology]], command hierarchy is seen as the most visible element of a "power network."{{Citation needed|date = January 2016}} In this model, [[social capital]] is viewed as being mobilized in response to orders that move through the hierarchy leading to the phrase "command and control".<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20150905204126/http://usacac.army.mil/sites/default/files/publications/15-12_0.pdf usacac.army.mil]</ref>

===Features===
Regardless of the degree of control or results achieved, and regardless of how the hierarchy is justified and rationalized, certain aspects of a command hierarchy tend to be similar:
* rank – especially [[military rank]] – "who outranks whom" in the [[power structure]]
* unity of command – each member of the hierarchy has one and only one superior, precluding the possibility of contradictory orders
* strict [[accountability]] – those who issue orders are responsible for the consequences, not those who carry them out (with the exception of illegal orders, as previously noted)
* strict [[feedback]] rules – complaints go up the hierarchy to those with power to deal with them, not down to those who do not have that power
* detailed rules for [[decision making]] – what criteria apply and when
* standardized language and terminology
* some [[ethics]] and key beliefs in common, usually enforced as early as recruiting and screening of recruits

===Problems===
{{clarity|date=September 2024}}

However, people of such compatible views often have similar [[systemic bias]]es because they are from the same culture. Such problems as [[groupthink]] or willingness to accept one standard of evidence internal to the group, but require drastically higher evidence from outside, are common.

In part to address these problems, much modern [[management science]] has focused on reducing reliance on command hierarchy especially for [[information flow]], since the cost of communications is now low, and the cost of management mistakes is higher. It is also easier to replace [[Management|managers]], so they have a personal interest in more distributed responsibility and perhaps more [[consensus decision making]].

Ubiquitous command and control posits for military organizations, a generalisation from hierarchies to networks that allows for the use of hierarchies when they are appropriate, and non-hierarchical networks when they are inappropriate. This includes the notion of ''mission agreement'', to support "edge in" as well as "top-down" flow of intent.