Content deleted Content added
Rescuing 1 sources and tagging 0 as dead.) #IABot (v2.0.1 |
|||
Line 13:
The concept of chain of [[Command and control|command]] also implies that higher rank alone does not entitle a higher-ranking service member to give commands to anyone of lower rank. For example, an officer of unit "A" does not directly command lower-ranking members of unit "B", and is generally expected to approach an officer of unit "B" if he requires action by members of that unit. The chain of command means that individual members take orders from only one superior and only give orders to a defined group of people immediately below them.
If an officer of unit "A" does give orders directly to a lower-ranked member of unit "B", it would be considered highly unusual (a faux pas, or extraordinary circumstances, such as a lack of time or inability to confer with the officer in command of unit "B") as officer "A" would be seen as subverting the authority of the officer of unit "B". Depending on the situation or the standard procedure of the military organization, the lower-ranked member being ordered may choose to carry out the order anyway, or advise that it has to be cleared with his or her own chain of command first, which in this example would be with officer "B". Refusal to carry out an order is almost always considered [[insubordination]]
In addition, within [[combat]] units, [[line officer]]s are in the chain of command, but staff officers in specialist fields (such as medical, dental, legal, supply, and [[chaplain]]) are not, except within their own specialty. For example, a medical officer in an [[infantry]] [[battalion]] would be responsible for the [[combat medics]] in that unit but would not be eligible to command the battalion or any of its subordinate units.
The term is also used in a [[civilian]] [[management]] context describing comparable [[hierarchical]] structures of authority. Such structures are included in Fire Departments, Police Departments and other organizations
==Sociology==
| |||