That just reminded me of something I hated about a large consulting firm I used to work for. When doing the "laddering" (aka ranking people for promotions and raises), we had to justify why people deserved to be ranked higher than everyone else.
The people in that meeting were soooo full of shit. You'd have people claiming that their brand new analyst fresh out of college was managing a team of 100 people. Meanwhile I'm like "my new guy wrote some good test scripts and didn't say anything dumb in front of the client." Just couldn't compete with all that BS.
In some industries you can be a supervisor with 100 reports. Job titles are so asynchronized even in similar types of companies that they're virtually meaningless without company specific context.
Very very much a thing in Finance, with tiers of VP too (Assistant VP, VP, Senior VP). Even for people doing internal support, it makes the internal "customer" feel good.
It was a learning experience when I was told not to prioritize anyone below SVP.
It's often also used as a compensation aid when someone has maxed out their pay band or title but there isn't a management slot open or they don't want to do management. My team doesn't have titles for team leads, but all our "unofficial" ones have at least an "Assistant" VP title.