Well, there is some food for thought here.
First, everything 411A said about the PIC's authority is backed 100% by regulations in the US, Europe, and Australasia, as Brian Abraham said.
Second, of course SM is posing: heshe is not "worried" by the culture at 411A's operation - heshe doesn't even know what operation it is. Suffice it to say (as 411A will no doubt tell us) that they don't have accidents or incidents attributable to poor crew coordination, in which case one may conclude that whatever "culture" it is at 411's operation works perfectly.
The point of CRM was to improve flight deck performance in the sense of lowering incident and accident rates, in particular with operators who had some history of poor flight deck performance contributing to accidents.
That may help explain why CRM training may have run its course in the US, Australasia and Europe. The lessons have been learned, the useful insights per operator have long been incorporated into SOPs, and the accidents happening to the major operators in those regions, when they do happen, no longer involve poor crew coordination. (To back up this assertion, let me refer to the annual Boeing statistical summary and Flight International's annual safety reviews.)
I would guess that any airline still suffering from a history of incidents involving poor crew coordination likely still has a lot to learn through CRM training.
PBL