It's been well reported on that Russia doesn't work like that, with junior officers unable to use initiative and the whole system being very slow to respond to changing events. The reason it operates like this was shown when they did try having a more independent unit, which resulted in the Wagner Group mutinying.
That's standard in Western militaries. It means units aren't paralyzed by unexpected circumstances while they wait for communication to go up and down the chain of command, and it improves resilience if communications or senior officers are incapacitated.
The classic "Buy a reputable brand, cut costs and coast along on the reputation until you can sell off all your shares and move on to another company". Bonus points for using legalised embezzlement share buyback.
People talk a lot about the genericisation of brand names, but the branding of generic terms like this really annoys me.
I'll use the example I first noticed. A few years ago, the Conservative government was under criticism for the minimum wage being well under a living wage. In response, they brought in the National Living Wage, which was an increase to the minimum wage, but still under the actual living wage. However, because of the branding, it makes criticising it for not meeting the actual living wage more difficult, as you have to explain the difference between the two, and as the saying goes, "if you're explaining, you're losing".
Couldn't find it