A chain is only as strong as its weakest link?

***
What is the meaning of the quote "A chain is only as strong as its weakest link?


A chain is only as strong as its weakest link.

What does it mean?

The entry from Wikipedia about chains shows:

A chain is typically made of metal. A chain may consist of two or more links

But I didn't understand this quote about chains.

phrase-meaning
quotations
Share
Improve this question
Follow

This metaphor is common in many languages. It's sufficiently well known in English that it's the name of a TV quiz show. When exported to non-English-speaking countries, the name is localised; often but not always a literal translation works –


It effectively means that no matter how strong most of the chain is, even if there's one weak part, it could break the entire chain.

It means you need to eliminate all weaknesses for there to be no risk that the 'chain' could fail.


Do you understand the word "chain"? If not, look that up.

Suppose you use a chain to, say, tow some heavy object behind your truck. If the object is heavy enough, the chain might break. Where will it break? At the weakest link.

The point being this: Suppose you made a chain with 100 links, 99 links of case-hardened steel and one link of tin. Then you try to pull the heavy object with it. What will happen? The tin link will break. It doesn't matter how strong the other 99 links are. If just one link is weak, the chain will break. The overall strength of a chain is not the strength of the strongest link, or even of the average link. The overall strength of a chain is the strength of the weakest link.

This is often used as an analogy for other cases where one poorly-designed part can cause an entire machine to fail, or where one incompetent person can cause an entire organization to fail, etc. People may say, "Fred is the weakest link on our team", meaning, Fred's laziness or incompetence or whatever flaw will make the team fail no matter how well everyone else does.



A chain is only as strong as its weakest link.

It means that if you want to know the level of strength of a chain (i.e. how strong is it) then you have to check which link (chain made of links - see here) is weakest and then the level is determined by this one.

It means that even though the rest of the links in this chain are strong but anyway because one link is not strong as they are, therefore you can break this chain while you break the weakest link...

Think about a chain made of 20 links. 19 links are made of strong metal but one link is made of thin plastic. Then the strength of this chain is determined by this weak plastic link, because when you break this plastic link you actually break the chain and then the rest metal links don't really matter...



It's a metaphor that is used to compare a group of something to a chain and the impact of a single member.

If you have a chain holding something and one of the links breaks, the chain itself isn't useful anymore hence when it is used, it is comparable to saying:

A group is only as strong as its weakest member.



Chains are constructed from multiple links of (usually) metal joined together. Because of this, the strength of the chain relies upon the strength of the individual links in the chain. If you were to test the strength of the chain (e.g. by pulling on both ends simultaneously), then when the chain breaks it would generally break at a particular link. It would break at that link because it would be the weakest link in the chain. Therefore the strength of the whole chain is equivalent to the strength of the weakest link in it.

This saying has become a metaphor for the strength of any entity that is made up of multiple parts, usually that entity is a group of something, e.g. people.



Imagine you had 7 people running a race as a team, and the team had to finish together, at the same time. no matter how fast your FASTEST person is, he can not finish until EVERYONE else finishes at the same time.

Therefore the SLOWEST person on the team affects the speed of the fastest runner. The ENTIRE team is as slow as the slowest person. The slow person is the "weakest link"

Just as a chain, with individual links that can hold many tones... if one of the links can only hold 2.2 pounds, or a kilo, or whatever measurement you choose to use, the entire chain, no matter how strong, breaks when the weakest link breaks. Any single link breaking, causes everything to fail.


The statement A chain is only as strong as it's weakest link is a metaphor. The analogy here, is of a chain where, the strength needed to break the weakest link, is all that is needed to break the chain.

This is a commonly used metaphor, for example:

Sam is completely out of shape. I don't want him on our volley ball team; a chain is only as strong as its weakest link.

In this example, Sam, who is out of shape could cause the team to lose in a volley ball match, being analogous to the weakest link.


If you are running a marathon, the success of the team depends on every participant. You have to run the race as if it is your last. If any member of the team is not physically fit, not agile, runs too slow and even drops the baton, the race is lost. It doesn't matter how agile the other participants are. The one that drops the baton is the weakest link


NOUN
a hierarchical series of organisms each dependent on the next as a source of food.
informal
a hierarchical system or structure within a particular sphere or group:
"a small paper toward the bottom of the journalistic food chain"
the series of processes by which food is grown or produced, sold, and eventually consumed:
"they have taken all reasonable steps to ensure that no contaminated products enter the food chain"
More definitions and word origin
Translate food chain to

German
NOUN
Nahrungskette
Lebensmittelkette


***

What Is a Chain of Command? (Definition and Explanation)
By Indeed Editorial Team



A chain of command brings structure and organisation to the reporting and communication process within a business. It gives each individual a clear understanding of how they fit into the ecosystem of a company and how their role contributes to the larger mission. It's a clear process that allows coworkers to share information and notify each other about potential issues in a timely and efficient manner.

In this article, we discuss what a chain of command is, why it's important, the different types there are, how to establish one and the advantages and disadvantages of implementing a chain of command.

Upload your resume on Indeed
Let employers find you when you create an Indeed Resume
What is a chain of command?
A chain of command describes the structure of an organisation's reporting relationships. It conveys the hierarchy of authority, meaning that the more responsibility you have within an organisation, the higher your position within the chain of command. You will find this concept in institutions that have a large labour body with clear positions of influence in place, including the military, government entities and businesses.

A business chain of command usually has a CEO or founder at the top, followed by the people who directly report to him, such as c-suite executives and heads of department. The hierarchy changes over time as people join, leave or get promoted into roles with greater responsibility. Usually, a visual document called an organisational chart illustrates the chain of command.

Related: Everything You Need to Know About Autocratic Leadership

Why is a chain of command important?
A chain of command is important because it maintains order. As an employer hires more people, relationships within their organisations become more complex, making it even more vital to have an established structure. The following explains why the concept is so important:

Defines roles and responsibilities
As an organisation grows in size, it becomes much more challenging to account for every employee. That's why a chain of command ensures every individual understands their function in the business; and therefore, their responsibilities.

It distributes power at scale to keep people aware of who they should report to about a project or concern. When mistakes happen, detecting where the problem originated becomes more straightforward. It results in an important system of responsibility and accountability.

Facilitates the flow of communication
A chain of command promotes two-way communication. It allows people at the top to disseminate decisions and information with ease and speed. Similarly, it creates a clear communication process for people at the bottom to notify key stakeholders about urgent problems. Knowing who to address is important because it increases efficiency.

Related: 14 Leadership Qualities That Are Found in Great Leaders

Types of chains of command
Although the rise of the gig economy and digital marketplace has decentralised traditional chains of command, the four types of organisational structures are still common in most workplaces. They include:

Functional structure
Under a functional organisational structure, employers group together people who do similar tasks. For example, accounting professionals work in one group, such as the finance department. This structure facilitates quick decision-making because group members work in close proximity; and therefore, can communicate regularly.

Divisional structure
A divisional structure groups people together based on the product or project they are working on. For example, an events company might segment their employees based on event categories, such as weddings, birthdays and corporate conferences. The goal of this type of chain of command is to boost efficiency and output.

Matrix structure
A matrix chain of command combines the approach of a functional and divisional structure. It groups people together based on expertise, then further separates them based on the projects they are working on. This structure gives you more autonomy, which leads to greater innovation and creativity. However, this isn't a viable option for most companies as the complex framework requires a lot of resources to manage effectively.

Related: 5 Roles and Responsibilities of a Team Leader

Flat structure
More and more millennial brands are adopting a flat organisational structure. As the name suggests, this chain of command lacks an explicit hierarchy and distributes authority equally. In this approach, every individual is their own 'boss'. Thus, it gives anyone the opportunity to voice their opinion.

Chain of command advantages and disadvantages
Before you decide to implement a chain of command for an organisation, you need to weigh the advantages and disadvantages of introducing or following such a system. Consider the following pros and cons:

Chain of command advantages
Here's an overview of the advantages of establishing a chain of command:

Provides direction: A chain of command delegates one boss to each employee, which prevents them from feeling the need to please multiple masters. This helps managers communicate concise information so that their subordinates can produce quality work. In return, they feel a greater sense of competency and empowerment.
Improves accountability: A chain of command assigns responsibility to each leader; therefore leading to greater accountability. Creating a system of transparency encourages people to pay attention to detail and improve productivity.
Provides structure: The greatest advantage of a chain of command is that it's grounded in structure. Workers follow the correct procedures, know who to report to and understand who to approach for resources, assistance or feedback.
Encourages actionable decisions: When fewer people are responsible for the bigger decisions, this allows a business to move faster. A chain of command centralises goal-setting at the top, which creates more focused long-term objectives. This prevents confusion, creates more efficient workflows and supports a results-driven approach.
Related: Management Styles: Overview and Examples

Chain of command disadvantages
Here's a brief summary of the challenges of implementing a chain of command:

Outdated: The concept originated in the industrial age and has changed little since then. Therefore, a chain of command may not apply to all business activities today.
Slow communication: Technology has made communication in the workplace simpler and faster. However, a chain of command doesn't take into consideration new forms of communication, such as instant messaging and social media. Nor does it show an understanding of the speed of decision-making needed in the current work environment.
Decreased sense of autonomy: Young professionals want to feel like their work is making a difference. They want to contribute their ideas because it gives them a feeling of empowerment. Thus, the hierarchal structure of a chain of command may be too rigid to motivate these employees.
Lack of flexibility: The current work environment is both fast-paced and extremely competitive. This means that people cannot wait several days to go through a chain of command to talk to a company executive. Instead, they need an agile structure where they can get a response within minutes.
How to establish a chain of command
Follow the steps below to guide you on how to establish a chain of command:

1. Choose your organisational structure
When you think about what your organisation's chain of command should look like, think about your organisational objectives and the resources available to you. Understand the size of your organisation and how structure can facilitate communication and decisive action. This will inform you about which type of chain of command to implement. For example, if you are a relatively small start-up that wants to encourage innovation, a flat structure may best meet your needs.

2. Understand individual roles and responsibilities
Compile the various roles people have within your business and understand their responsibilities. Think about how different departments and different teams interact with one another. Understand their need and their various functions. Organise individuals based on their authority, seniority and expertise. This will give you a coherent mental picture of how your organisation operates and who the key players are.

3. Develop a chain of command
Now that you have an idea about how each of your coworkers contributes to a particular function in the business, determine their relevance to the decision-making process. Create a reporting procedure that outlines the expectations for staff and management.

4. Formalise the structure with visuals
Create an organisational flowchart that illustrates the hierarchy of your organisation. It should clearly present who reports to who, with leaders at the top and the people they supervise below them. Think of it as a visual map that employees can quickly refer to when they have questions regarding your organisation's communication process. You should list every employee on an organisational chart, so make sure this is a dynamic document that you can edit when there are personnel changes too.

5. Share it with your team.
Communicate the chain of command throughout the organisation and make sure everyone has a copy of your flowchart for ease of access. Give them the opportunity to ask you questions to address any confusion. Transparency and communication are essential because, in order for your chain of command to be successful, your coworkers need to support it too.