Depends on the rest of the systems surrounding the president. The US president, for example, has some power to do things unilaterally, but much of what a president does must be approved by other branches of the government to take effect. In that sense, the president isn’t the sole person at the top of the hierarchy, there’s a few bodies that that power is split between.

In addition to the other comment, company presidents are usually considered lower rank than CEOs, but also often don’t answer directly to them.

A president usually presides over a group, like a board or a council, without direct power over technically lower rank individuals. If a president started micromanaging the cleaning staff, they’d probably be fired.

That being said, company structure varies wildly, and there are definitely company presidents that act more like kings and dictators. It’s just a title after all, no one will arrest you if it’s inaccurate.

Exactly as your other comment finds, monarchies can be dictatorships if the monarch really takes control. The typical method of control tends to be different though, with monarcies often using traditional power (such as heredity and religion) and dictatorships usually being the result of military force (coups and conquerings).

I think the more useable difference is that a monarchy is a system ruled by a single person, while a dictatorship is a single person ruling. It depends on whether we’re talking about an existing system of hierarchy or a person at the top; a leader vs, well, a dictator.

It’s not common, but I’d bet a dictatorship that lasts long enough will become a monarchy or institue some form of oligarchy, while a monarchy could become a dictatorship without changing much; maybe reverting with the dictators passing or simply collapsing.

Well I was curious and did a little reading. It seems mostly in name. Though Monarchies tend to have a dive right component where Dictatorships seem to more often arise from a coup d’etat.