The chain of command (at least the "upper echelon") on a film set goes like this:

Producer
Production Manager
Assistant Director
Director

The reason for this is because the director needs to be focused on the creative aspects with the DP, and because he needs to be focused on the actors, and not what time lunch is at, or when the key grip is coming to set, etc. While the director is the most important person on a set, he needs to answer to his AD in terms of time constraints. The AD's schedule is set by the PM, and the producer okays that schedule (among other things).

The PM basically is the AD's boss. He/she will ask the AD where we're at, he/she will organize when the meal breaks are, who's coming to set and when, etc. Keeps the entire production running, whereas the AD keeps the director going. The producer oversees all of this, but on the NYU project I did, myself, the director, the AD, and the PM would meet every night after we shot and discuss the next day. We all worked as a cohesive unit, and loved working with each other...so there was a hierarchy, but we certainly collaborated.

To answer your other question...

>...to have an associtate producer on a student film? In the
>idustry, isn't it generally considered a bullshit title you
>give someone when you can pay them enough?


Associate Producer is a bullshit title. It is in the professional world, and it is in the student film world. The AP is basically the producers bitch, at least...he was SUPPOSED to be. The AP on my NYU set didn't do a damn thing so we fired him shortly before production. The AP on THIS project was supposed to handle a LOT of things I delegated to him, but dropped the ball...because he was way too concerned with his Making Of documentary on set.