# EM-ORG-07 provider comparison

Claude and Grok agree on a profile-only result with no new model or runtime identifier. Party identity remains in the person or organization master. WM-ORG-013 masters a perimeter-bound stakeholder relation; WM-KNW-007 carries attributed expectations; WM-ACT-034 carries dated stakeholder assessments; WM-ACT-008 carries engagement plans.

Both reviews reject party-level stakeholder traits. Influence, impact, salience and priority are assessment content qualified by perimeter, viewpoint, period, method, evidence and uncertainty. One counterparty may participate through separate relation instances in Projects A and B. A reassessment in A creates a successor record and preserves the earlier basis; it cannot change B.

Grok sharpened relation addressability: the WM-ORG-013 relation must be a citable subject of WM-ACT-034. If it is not addressable, the profile is blocked because using the party as subject recreates the invalid trait model. This gap does not justify a new identity class.

Both providers distinguish interests from expectations. Interests record what is at stake; expectations are attributed claims about what should or will occur. Conflicting interests and contrary expectations may coexist. Representation is scoped and contestable, and dissent remains attributable rather than being erased by a consensus projection.

Registration grants no outreach, processing, disclosure or decision authority. Engagement plans reference stakeholder relations, interests, expectations and current assessments but do not own them or widen permissions. Privacy restrictions, representation mandates and evidence controls survive projections, aggregation and cross-perimeter reuse.

The disposition remains a held declarative profile. Canonical publication depends on WM-ORG-013 boundary and parent correction, addressable relation contracts, base-model access and conflict semantics, ratified composition and executable fixtures.

## Frozen-audit reconciliation

The single frozen audit accepted the profile with six limits. The final candidate prohibits cross-perimeter party rollups, moves analyst hypotheses to attributed WM-KNW-007 claims, requires each successor assessment to carry its own derivation basis, pins external authority or explicit unknown before execution, uses non-reconstructive state-preserving redaction, and requires perimeter-qualified bitemporal relation keys. No second audit was run and no identifier was added.