To our readers: Please keep in mind our subreddit rules when posting.

Particularly, please make sure to write an in-depth answer, to not just speculate, and not to just post a link.

The hierarchy on paper may look the same but where the true power resides changes a lot depending on the armies. Most industrialized western countries are really NCO oriented where under officers are given objectives by their officers but have some leeway on the way to carry out their orders. It allows for a better flexibility and smart officers generally are open to their NCOs inputs even though they are the one taking the decisions.

In some other armies though officers are kings and NCOs are just glorified soldiers which are pretty much just there to carry the orders as they were given to them. NCOs only are given the minimum information their officer deems necessary for them to carry out their mission as they are not supposed to take initiative anyway. This kind of model can be found in some arabic armies (eg : qatar).

My point is the structures may look similar on paper but in the end doctrines can still differ a lot on the field.