In recent months we have learned that the one criteria for being selected in a management position could be loyalty. Otherwise labeled fealty - undying, singularly responsive, unadulterated loyalty. Anything but will be punished beginning with the loss of the position and ending with TBD. And no, competency is not the priority but it might be viewed as helpful if needing to defend a hiring decision. No, the only criteria is loyalty to the individual doing the hiring.
Certainly, Adolph Hitler understood this criteria. He also understood or learned how to create a structure where failure in loyalty could be easily identified and consequences swift. I have consulted to organizations where such a paradigm was in practice. Even outcomes weren't valued as much as loyalty. The consequences: a nervous staff that kept their eyes open all around them so much so they often lost track of what was their priorities. And similarly, when the exec required loyalty of the board, members knew that failure to give full unequivocal support would result in the necessity of their departure. Yes, the board was viewed as "the" exec's board and that was true for their accountability, meeting management and recruitment.
Of course we know that there is little way in modern management that loyalty would be adopted as the sole criteria for what is a good hire and good production. Do we?