[CapricornNoble]

This makes for frustrating reading, coming from an industry where "Organizational Design" can have extremely serious consequences: the military.

A brief case study: Russia's invasion of Ukraine. The argument has been made (and I agree) that much of their early failures stem from not understanding/implementing Unified Command. They didn't have a Joint Task Force Commander who was responsible for the entire Area of Operations. They didn't have an Air Component Commander subordinate to the JTF to ensure all air operations achieved synergy with, and were in support of, the ground scheme of maneuver.

Most field-grade officers who have planned and/or executed a major multi-service or multi-national training exercise are familiar with Command Relationship org charts and understand WHY they are important (if that stuff isn't clear, responsibilities get fuzzy when edge cases arise, and then in the resulting confusion/friction....people die). It's also just as important to understand how much of that "big DoD" cruft you can peel away when you are doing small, localized training with a developing nation with....austere practices, shall we say.

So I could see adding "Organizational Design" to my LinkedIn....unknowingly putting myself in the same bucket as "hot-air no-nothing ex-FAANG managers". And then no one cares what digital signal processing stuff I could do for them as an IC... :(