Reading some comments, like 'this is wrong because your job is to respect hierarchy decisions', reminds me how corporate still are military minded...
There are different military philisophies, not all are top->down strict hierarchies. E.g. in the Prussian army of old, missions were communicated through objectives (I want to achieve X, your part is to do Y, while these other guys will do Z), and execution is up to to the local officers who actually see the things as they are locally and have all the knowledge about what they need to do, how it fits in the wider plans, and are best placed to decide how to do it. Furthermore, if an office or NCO disagreed with their direct commander's orders, they could go above their head to their commander's commander to protest. Add in the general staff system where staff officers had to service in command as well as part of their training, and could counteract commander's orders, it made for a very robust and flexible system capable of adapting to evolving situations and where officers didn't hesitate to argue with their superiors, go above their heads, and even disobey orders if they really thought it made sense.
This is called "mission-type tactics" or "mission command" (DE: Auftragstaktik): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mission-type_tactics
It became somewhat out of fashion at the Modern age, but AFAIK no army operates purely on "your job is to respect hierarchy decisions".
A significant part of why early company-owners in the US preferred slaves is not because their labour was free - they were expensive assets, particularly skilled ones - but because free workers were less compliant to hierarchical control. They could walk off the job, they expected their opinions to be listened to, and you couldn't whip them into compliance. There's basically a straight line from plantations through Gantt then Taylor and his Scientific Management to McKinsey's Budgetary Control.
Culturally northern corporations tend towards the West Point Peter Drucker management by objectives schools of thought.
Whereas the culturally southern plantation class is as you describe. Walmart is always my go to example.
This also roughly tracks geographically with strength of Labor. To no one's suprise, the neoliberal (confederate) generations long assault on Labor means the southern style has been waxing. Hopefully, with the youngs' (Gen Y & Z) new found enthuasism for Labor -- in the form of life, liberty, and pursuit of justice -- the slave owners grip on our society will begin to wane.