{"schema":"https://ver.cy/schemas/card/1.0.0","id":"vr.wm-org-002","code":"wm-org-002-organizational-unit","url":"https://ver.cy/models/wm-org-002-organizational-unit/","name":"Organizational Unit","alternateNames":["O2"],"kind":"world-model","status":"published","version":"0.3.0-research.1","language":"en","classifiers":{"family":"World Models","category":"Society, people and institutions","entryKind":"entity","plane":"","domain":["SOC.ORG.UNT"],"industry":["Cross-industry"],"navPath":"NAV.SOC.ORG.UNT","tags":["organizational","unit","soc.org.unt"],"facets":{}},"whatItIs":"This model covers an organizational unit as a subdivision that, in the words of the W3C Organization Ontology, 'only has full recognition within the context of that Organization'. It governs unit identity, classification, containment and reporting relationships, delegated mandate and decision rights, authorized establishment and measured staffing, structural change acts and their temporal validity, plus the provenance, retention, disclosure and interoperability rules that make the structure record operable. It deliberately stops at the boundaries of legal organizational identity, of the post/position as an object in its own right, of employment relationships, of physical sites, and of statistical or financial reporting units that are derived from - but not identical to - internal structure.","purpose":"Provide the format-neutral context an agent needs to understand, create, inspect and operate the internal structure of an organization: which units exist, how they nest and report, what each is mandated to do, what establishment and staffing they carry, and how that structure is changed, dated, evidenced and disclosed over time.","scope":{"in":["Unit identity, naming, aliases and parent-scoped or ISO/IEC 6523 organization-part identification","Unit kind classification against governed code lists and unit existence status","Containment hierarchies, including multiple concurrent hierarchies (managerial, legal, cost, functional)","Reporting and coordination lines, including non-containment and dotted-line relationships","Delegated mandate, decision rights, authority limits and segregation-of-duties constraints attached to a unit","Authorized establishment (post complement) seated in a unit and its occupancy state at unit granularity","Dated headcount and full-time-equivalent measurement of a unit, with basis and aggregation thresholds","Reorganization acts (create, rename, reparent, merge, split, transfer, disband) and unit lineage","Effective dating, bitemporality and as-of reconstruction of the structure graph","Record authority, approval evidence, retention/disposition and disclosure control for structure data","Crosswalks to W3C ORG, CPOV, FHIR, LDAP, SCIM, schema.org and ISO/IEC 6523 projections"],"out":["Legal personality, incorporation, registration, LEI and regulatory identity of the whole organization (WM-ORG-001)","The post/position as an object with its own title, grade, job description and occupational classification (WM-ORG-004)","Employment contracts, appointments, persons and their occupancy of posts","Constitutive charter powers of the organization as a legal entity (charter model)","Physical premises, addresses, geometry and site operations (site/location model)","Statistical units such as enterprise, local unit and kind-of-activity unit used for economic observation","Financial segment reporting, general ledger and cost accounting mechanics","Stewardship policy machinery and access-grant issuance (S1/S2 service models)","Business capability, process and value-stream modelling","Identity-provider group membership and directory synchronisation state as a system of record"],"boundaries":[{"neighbor":"WM-ORG-001 Organization","distinction":"W3C ORG separates org:FormalOrganization (recognized in a legal jurisdiction, with rights and responsibilities) from org:OrganizationalUnit, which has full recognition only inside its parent. Legal identity, registration and LEI stay in WM-ORG-001. A branch that is separately registered is dual-classified: it is a unit here and a legal entity there, and GLEIF only issues an LEI to the legally registered entity, not to an internal division."},{"neighbor":"WM-ORG-004 Position","distinction":"org:Post represents a position that exists independently of who fills it. This model records only the unit-side facts: how many posts are established in the unit, which posts are seated there, and the aggregate occupancy state. Post title, grade, competency profile and occupational classification belong to WM-ORG-004, which this model CONTAINS by reference rather than by copy."},{"neighbor":"Site / Location model","distinction":"FHIR states that Location records where a service occurs while Organization records who performed it; Eurostat's 'local unit' is 'an enterprise or part thereof ... situated in a geographically identified place'. A unit may be associated with one or more sites, but premises, addresses and geometry are not unit attributes and are not modelled here."},{"neighbor":"Statistical units model","distinction":"Council Regulation (EEC) No 696/93 defines enterprise, kind-of-activity unit and local unit as observation units for economic statistics. These are derived by statistical rules from operational reality, not asserted by the organization, and their boundaries routinely differ from internal units. Treated as an ALIGN target, never as a source of internal unit identity."},{"neighbor":"Financial segment reporting","distinction":"IFRS 8 identifies operating segments through a management approach based on how the chief operating decision maker reviews internal reports, and permits aggregation of segments with similar economic characteristics. A reportable segment is therefore a derived view over internal units, not a unit; this model supplies the inputs and the change signal, not the segment determination."},{"neighbor":"Directory and identity systems","distinction":"RFC 4519 defines 'ou' as a multi-valued name attribute and RFC 7643 defines SCIM 'department', 'division' and 'organization' as free-text names. These carry no identifier, no validity period and no hierarchy semantics, so directory content is a lossy projection of this model and never its system of record."},{"neighbor":"Global organization registries","distinction":"ROR states it 'is not focused on capturing all subdivisions of a given organization such as a university's schools or departments' because departments 'often emerge, close, combine, and change'. No general governed global identifier exists for internal units, so unit identity is parent-scoped by default."}]},"distinguishingFeatures":["A unit is a part of an organization created by that organization, with no legal personality of its own.","It is distinct from a position (WM-ORG-004) placed in it and from the people assigned to those positions.","It differs from a site or location; one unit can span several sites and one site can host several units.","Structure changes are reorganization acts with decision records, not attribute edits."],"structure":{"bundles":[{"id":"unit-identity-and-classification","name":"Unit Identity and Classification","description":"What a unit is, how it is unambiguously referenced, what it is called, what kind of thing it is, and whether it currently exists.","layers":[{"id":"unit-identification","name":"Unit Identification","description":"Identifier assignment, external addressability and naming of a unit.","findings":[{"id":"unit-identifier-scheme","name":"Unit Identifier Scheme and Assignment","description":"A unit's authoritative identifier is normally minted by the parent organization's master system, because no general governed global registry issues identifiers for internal subdivisions. ISO/IEC 6523 provides the only widely deployed external addressing slot, combining an International Code Designator, the parent organization identifier and an optional organization part identifier; schema.org exposes this as iso6523Code in XXXX:YYYYYY:ZZZ form. Identifier stability across rename, reparenting and merge must be decided explicitly.","questions":[{"text":"Which system is the authoritative assigner of this unit's identifier, and is that system the parent organization's master record rather than a downstream HR or directory system?","id":"q-authoritative-id","kind":"identity"},{"text":"Can this unit be addressed externally as an ISO/IEC 6523 organization part under the parent organization's ICD and organization identifier, and if so which OPI value and source indicator apply?","id":"q-external-addressing","kind":"interoperability"},{"text":"Does the identifier survive renaming, reparenting and merger of the unit, and is it guaranteed never to be reassigned to a different unit?","id":"q-id-stability","kind":"constraint"},{"text":"If no master-system identifier exists, which UUID or ULID does the adopting Dimension mint, and where is that minting act recorded?","id":"q-id-fallback","kind":"provenance"}]},{"id":"unit-naming-and-designation","name":"Unit Naming and Designation","description":"Units carry an official name, display and short names, abbreviations, language variants and superseded historical names. FHIR provides name plus alias for 'alternate or historical names' and requires at least one name or identifier; LDAP 'ou' is explicitly multi-valued. Names are unstable and non-unique and must never be used as identity.","questions":[{"text":"Which name is the official designation of the unit, in which language, and which instrument fixed it?","id":"q-official-name","kind":"definition"},{"text":"Which former names remain in use downstream and over which validity periods were they current?","id":"q-name-history","kind":"temporal"},{"text":"Is the unit name required to be unique within its parent, within the whole organization, or not at all?","id":"q-name-uniqueness","kind":"constraint"}]}]},{"id":"unit-classification","name":"Unit Classification and Existence","description":"The kind of unit and whether it currently exists as an operating subdivision.","findings":[{"id":"unit-kind-classification","name":"Unit Kind and Classification Scheme","description":"Units are typed against a governed code list (department, division, directorate, branch, committee, board, team, programme office, shared-service centre, cost centre). W3C ORG provides org:classification against a scheme; CPOV constrains purpose to COFOG codes for public organisations and adds a classification property; FHIR uses a CodeableConcept type. The scheme must be named, versioned and resolvable, and the same unit may carry codes from several schemes simultaneously.","questions":[{"text":"Against which named and versioned classification scheme is the unit's kind asserted, and is that scheme resolvable to a published code list?","id":"q-kind-scheme","kind":"classification"},{"text":"Does the unit carry codes from more than one scheme (internal kind, public-sector function, industry activity), and which one governs behaviour?","id":"q-multi-scheme","kind":"interoperability"},{"text":"Is this subdivision also a formal organization recognized in a legal jurisdiction, requiring dual classification and a link to WM-ORG-001?","id":"q-formal-vs-unit","kind":"definition"},{"text":"What evidence is required before a unit's kind may be reclassified, and does reclassification require a reorganization act?","id":"q-kind-change","kind":"authority"}]},{"id":"unit-existence-status","name":"Unit Existence Status","description":"Whether the unit is proposed, active, dormant, suspended, disbanded or created in error. FHIR carries a boolean 'active'; ROR distinguishes active, inactive and withdrawn, where withdrawn means the record was created in error and is not a real-world cessation. That three-way distinction - operating, ceased, erroneous - is required so that error correction is not confused with reorganization.","questions":[{"text":"Which status values are permitted for a unit, and is 'created in error' modelled separately from 'ceased to operate'?","id":"q-status-vocab","kind":"state"},{"text":"Which status transitions are legal, and which of them require a reorganization act rather than a simple correction?","id":"q-status-transitions","kind":"lifecycle"},{"text":"How is a unit that exists on paper but has no establishment and no activity represented, and how long may it stay in that state?","id":"q-dormancy","kind":"state"},{"text":"After a unit is disbanded, is its record tombstoned with its relationships retained for historical reconstruction, or removed?","id":"q-tombstone","kind":"retention"}]},{"id":"collaboration-vs-unit-typing","name":"Kind and scheme","description":"ORG supplies org:classification with range SKOS Concept and also allows subclassing when the kind is intrinsic. CPOV uses classification codes and points to the EU Organization Types named authority list for European institutions, while other levels must use other schemes. FHIR Organization.type is an example binding. Popolo forces a single classification per organization and requires implementations to choose one scheme. There is no universal unit-kind code list; department, branch, team, committee and similar labels are local. A committee may instead be an OrganizationalCollaboration if it is not an internal subdivision.","questions":[{"text":"What kind is this unit, in which classification scheme, and is that kind intrinsic or merely a directory grouping?","id":"collaboration-vs-unit-typing-q01","kind":"classification"},{"text":"Is this body an internal unit, a committee treated as a unit, or a cross-organization collaboration?","id":"collaboration-vs-unit-typing-q02","kind":"classification"},{"text":"May this unit carry more than one classification at once, and if a profile forbids that, which scheme is the unique classifier?","id":"collaboration-vs-unit-typing-q03","kind":"constraint"}]}]}]},{"id":"structural-composition","name":"Structural Composition","description":"How units nest into hierarchies and how they report to and coordinate with one another.","layers":[{"id":"containment-hierarchy","name":"Containment Hierarchy","description":"Parent-child membership of units within the organization, including concurrent hierarchies.","findings":[{"id":"parent-child-containment","name":"Parent-Child Containment","description":"Every unit resolves to exactly one parent organization and, except at the top, to one parent unit within a given hierarchy. W3C ORG expresses this with org:unitOf/org:hasUnit and org:subOrganizationOf; FHIR uses partOf; schema.org uses parentOrganization, which supersedes branchOf and is not distinguished from subsidiary ownership. ROR maintains reciprocal parent and child edges on active records. Cycles, orphans and multi-parent assertions within one hierarchy are integrity failures.","questions":[{"text":"Which organization (WM-ORG-001 instance) does this unit ultimately belong to, and is that link mandatory and immutable for the unit's lifetime?","id":"q-parent-org","kind":"composition"},{"text":"Which unit is the immediate parent within the named hierarchy, and what is the depth and root of that path?","id":"q-parent-unit","kind":"relationship"},{"text":"How are cycles, orphaned units and multiple parents within a single hierarchy detected and prevented at write time?","id":"q-integrity","kind":"validation"},{"text":"Is the parent link a containment of a non-legal subdivision or an ownership relation to a separate legal entity, and how is that difference preserved when exporting to vocabularies that conflate them?","id":"q-containment-vs-ownership","kind":"interoperability"}]},{"id":"concurrent-hierarchies","name":"Concurrent Hierarchies and Matrix Structure","description":"One organization commonly maintains several simultaneous hierarchies over the same units: managerial line, legal-entity roll-up, cost/budget roll-up, functional or professional line, and the internal reporting structure that IFRS 8 makes decisive for segment identification. Each hierarchy is a separately named, separately governed edge set; collapsing them into one tree destroys the information that downstream reporting depends on.","questions":[{"text":"Which named hierarchies exist over the unit set, who owns each, and which one is the default for display?","id":"q-hierarchy-inventory","kind":"composition"},{"text":"Where does a unit's position differ between hierarchies, and is that divergence intentional or an integrity defect?","id":"q-hierarchy-divergence","kind":"quality"},{"text":"Which hierarchy corresponds to the internal reports reviewed by the chief operating decision maker for the purposes of segment identification?","id":"q-codm-hierarchy","kind":"decision"},{"text":"When two hierarchies imply conflicting authority over the same unit, which precedence rule resolves the conflict?","id":"q-hierarchy-precedence","kind":"constraint"}]}]},{"id":"reporting-and-coordination","name":"Reporting and Coordination","description":"Directed reporting relations and non-containment relationships between units.","findings":[{"id":"reporting-lines","name":"Reporting Lines and Their Standards Basis","description":"Reporting lines are distinct from containment: a unit may sit under one parent but report functionally elsewhere (dotted line). W3C ORG's org:reportsTo is defined between Agents or Posts, not between organizational units, so unit-to-unit reporting is an extension of the standard and must be declared as such rather than claimed as conformant. SCIM offers only a single 'manager' reference at person level, which cannot carry line type or validity.","questions":[{"text":"What type is each reporting line - administrative, functional, professional, operational or advisory - and is it solid or dotted?","id":"q-line-type","kind":"relationship"},{"text":"Does the reporting line hold between units, between posts, or between the units' heads, and which representation is authoritative?","id":"q-line-subject","kind":"definition"},{"text":"Where unit-to-unit reporting is asserted, is the departure from org:reportsTo recorded as an explicit extension with a mapping rule?","id":"q-line-conformance","kind":"interoperability"},{"text":"Over which period is each reporting line valid, and can two lines of the same type to different targets overlap in time?","id":"q-line-validity","kind":"temporal"}]},{"id":"cross-unit-affiliations","name":"Cross-Unit and External Affiliations","description":"Units participate in relations that are neither containment nor reporting: shared services, joint committees, secondments of capacity, service-level relations to other units, and affiliations to bodies in other legal entities. FHIR introduces OrganizationAffiliation precisely for 'complex non-hierarchical relationships between separate legal entities without implying ownership'; ROR uses a 'related' type for 'less defined connections, such as resource sharing or participation without direct control'.","questions":[{"text":"What kind of non-hierarchical relation is this - shared service, joint body, service agreement, secondment or partnership - and does it imply any control?","id":"q-affiliation-kind","kind":"relationship"},{"text":"Does the counterparty sit inside the same parent organization or in a different legal entity, and does that change which model owns the relation?","id":"q-affiliation-boundary","kind":"composition"},{"text":"Which instrument establishes the affiliation, over what period, and what obligations does it place on the unit?","id":"q-affiliation-terms","kind":"authority"}]}]}]},{"id":"mandate-and-authority","name":"Mandate and Authority","description":"What a unit is empowered to do, within which limits, and who is accountable for it.","layers":[{"id":"remit-and-decision-rights","name":"Remit and Decision Rights","description":"The scope of a unit's mandate and the decisions it may take.","findings":[{"id":"unit-mandate-scope","name":"Unit Mandate and Scope","description":"A unit's mandate states its reason for existence and the subject matter, geography, customer set or process it covers. W3C ORG offers org:purpose; CPOV types purpose as a code and suggests COFOG for public organisations, and adds spatial coverage of the administrative region an organisation covers. Mandate must trace to a delegating instrument, because ISO 37000 requires delegation to be formalized.","questions":[{"text":"What is the unit's stated remit, and is it expressed as free text, as codes from a governed scheme, or both?","id":"q-mandate-statement","kind":"definition"},{"text":"Which instrument delegates this mandate to the unit, and from which higher authority or charter power does it derive?","id":"q-mandate-source","kind":"authority"},{"text":"Over which spatial, market, legal-entity or process scope does the mandate apply, and where does it explicitly not apply?","id":"q-mandate-territory","kind":"spatial"},{"text":"Does this mandate overlap or conflict with the remit of another unit, and which rule resolves the overlap?","id":"q-mandate-overlap","kind":"exception"}]},{"id":"delegated-authority-limits","name":"Delegated Authority Limits","description":"Delegation is bounded: spend thresholds, contract-signing powers, hiring authority, approval tiers and escalation triggers. ISO 37000 holds that those who delegate remain accountable for the delegate's use of that authority, that delegation should be formalized together with appropriate assurance processes, and that no one should be accountable for matters over which they have no authority. Limits are therefore first-class data, not narrative.","questions":[{"text":"Which decision types may this unit take without escalation, and what quantitative or categorical limits bound each of them?","id":"q-authority-limits","kind":"constraint"},{"text":"May the unit sub-delegate any part of its authority to a contained unit or post, and under what conditions?","id":"q-subdelegation","kind":"authority"},{"text":"Which assurance process verifies that delegated authority is being exercised within its limits, and at what cadence?","id":"q-assurance","kind":"evidence"},{"text":"Under what circumstances is delegated authority suspended or withdrawn, and does withdrawal take effect immediately or at a stated date?","id":"q-authority-withdrawal","kind":"lifecycle"}]}]},{"id":"accountability-and-controls","name":"Accountability and Controls","description":"Who answers for a unit and which control constraints its structure must satisfy.","findings":[{"id":"accountable-role","name":"Accountable Role for the Unit","description":"Each unit has a head or accountable role. W3C ORG models this as a Post or as a Membership linking an Agent, an Organization and a Role, which keeps the accountability slot stable while occupants change. ISO 37000 requires that decision-makers have appropriate authority, competence and resources for the responsibilities given. The person occupying the role is out of scope; the slot and its linkage are in scope.","questions":[{"text":"Which post or role is designated as head of the unit, and is that designation a property of the unit or of the post?","id":"q-head-slot","kind":"ownership"},{"text":"How is an acting, interim or vacant headship represented, and who holds the accountability while the slot is unfilled?","id":"q-acting-vacancy","kind":"state"},{"text":"What evidence exists that the accountable role has the authority, competence and resources matching the unit's responsibilities?","id":"q-resource-adequacy","kind":"evidence"}]},{"id":"segregation-of-duties","name":"Segregation of Duties and Structural Controls","description":"Structure itself carries control obligations: certain functions must not report into the unit they oversee, incompatible mandates must not sit in one unit, and control functions may require an independent line to a governing body. ISO 37000 frames this through accountability that cannot be discharged without matching authority and through formalized delegation with assurance. Violations are structural defects detectable at graph level.","questions":[{"text":"Which pairs or sets of mandates must never be held by the same unit, and which rule set encodes that prohibition?","id":"q-sod-rules","kind":"constraint"},{"text":"Which units require an independent reporting line that bypasses their operational parent, and to which body does that line run?","id":"q-independence","kind":"requirement"},{"text":"How are segregation violations detected when a reorganization is proposed, and does detection block the change or only warn?","id":"q-sod-detection","kind":"validation"},{"text":"Under what conditions may a segregation rule be waived, who may approve the waiver, and for how long?","id":"q-sod-exception","kind":"exception"}]}]}]},{"id":"establishment-and-staffing","name":"Establishment and Staffing","description":"The posts a unit is authorized to carry and the staffing actually measured in it.","layers":[{"id":"establishment-plan","name":"Establishment Plan","description":"The authorized complement of posts seated in a unit.","findings":[{"id":"authorized-post-complement","name":"Authorized Post Complement","description":"The establishment is the set of posts a unit is authorized to carry, independent of whether they are filled. W3C ORG's Post 'exists independently of who fills it', which is exactly what makes an establishment countable. This model records the authorization, its approving instrument, the count and its budget linkage; the post's own definition belongs to WM-ORG-004.","questions":[{"text":"How many posts is the unit authorized to carry, expressed as post count and as budgeted full-time equivalents?","id":"q-establishment-count","kind":"measurement"},{"text":"Who may increase or decrease the establishment, and does a change require a reorganization act or only a budget decision?","id":"q-establishment-authority","kind":"authority"},{"text":"Which specific posts (WM-ORG-004) are seated in this unit, and can a post be seated in more than one unit at once?","id":"q-post-seating","kind":"composition"},{"text":"What is the tolerated variance between authorized establishment and actual staffing before escalation is triggered?","id":"q-establishment-vs-actual","kind":"constraint"}]},{"id":"occupancy-state","name":"Unit-Level Occupancy State","description":"At unit granularity the relevant facts are how many authorized posts are filled, vacant, frozen or over-established, and since when. Individual occupancy is an employment fact about a named person and is excluded; the aggregate is a unit fact. Keeping only the aggregate here is what makes structure data disclosable without touching personal data.","questions":[{"text":"How many authorized posts in this unit are currently filled, vacant, frozen or in notice period, and as of which instant?","id":"q-occupancy-counts","kind":"state"},{"text":"Is the unit carrying more filled posts than authorized, and under which approved exception?","id":"q-over-establishment","kind":"exception"},{"text":"Is occupancy asserted directly on the unit or derived from employment records, and which is authoritative when they disagree?","id":"q-occupancy-derivation","kind":"provenance"}]}]},{"id":"staffing-measurement","name":"Staffing Measurement","description":"Dated, method-declared measurement of staffing attributed to a unit, and the rules for disclosing it.","findings":[{"id":"headcount-and-fte-snapshot","name":"Headcount and FTE Snapshot","description":"A staffing snapshot is a measurement event, not a unit attribute: it has an as-of date, a counting basis (head count or full-time equivalent, point-in-time or average over the period), a population definition and a preparer. ESRS S1-6 requires employee totals by head count and/or FTE with country and gender breakdowns and explicit methodology disclosure, which makes basis declaration mandatory rather than optional.","questions":[{"text":"Is the figure a head count or a full-time equivalent, and is it a point-in-time count at the reporting date or an average over the period?","id":"q-count-basis","kind":"measurement"},{"text":"Which worker categories are included - permanent, temporary, non-guaranteed hours, contingent, contractors - and which are excluded?","id":"q-population","kind":"definition"},{"text":"What is the difference between the snapshot's as-of date and the instant it was computed and ingested, and are both recorded?","id":"q-snapshot-timing","kind":"temporal"},{"text":"Under what conditions is a prior snapshot restated rather than superseded, and how is the restatement flagged to consumers?","id":"q-restatement","kind":"quality"}]},{"id":"staffing-disclosure-thresholds","name":"Staffing Disclosure Thresholds","description":"Staffing figures for small units can identify individuals, so aggregation and suppression rules are part of the model, not of the consuming report. ESRS S1 itself uses thresholds, requiring country breakdowns only where an undertaking has 50 or more employees in a country and only for the ten largest countries, which demonstrates that threshold logic is normal in authoritative reporting standards.","questions":[{"text":"Below which cell size must a unit's staffing figure be suppressed or rolled up to its parent, and who sets that threshold?","id":"q-min-cell","kind":"privacy"},{"text":"Which breakdowns of staffing by unit are permitted for which audiences, and which combinations are prohibited because they enable re-identification?","id":"q-breakdown-limits","kind":"access"},{"text":"How is the application of a suppression rule recorded so that a consumer can tell a suppressed value from a true zero?","id":"q-suppression-audit","kind":"evidence"}]}]}]},{"id":"change-and-time","name":"Change and Time","description":"How structure changes, what evidences the change, and how any past state can be reconstructed.","layers":[{"id":"structural-change-events","name":"Structural Change Events","description":"The acts that create, alter, combine, move or end units, and the lineage they produce.","findings":[{"id":"reorganization-act","name":"Reorganization Act","description":"A reorganization act is a decision that reshapes structure. It carries at least three distinct times - when it was decided, when it takes effect in the world, and when it was recorded - plus the deciding authority, the affected units and the change kind. W3C ORG's ChangeEvent 'resulted in a major change to an organization such as a merger or complete restructuring'; IFRS 8 then requires prior-period segment information to be restated or the change disclosed, so an act has consequences outside this model.","questions":[{"text":"What kind of act is this - establish, rename, reclassify, reparent, merge, split, transfer between organizations, or disband - and which units does it affect in which role?","id":"q-act-kind","kind":"event"},{"text":"What are the decision instant, the effective instant and the record instant of this act, each with an explicit offset?","id":"q-act-times","kind":"temporal"},{"text":"Which body took the decision, under which delegated power, and is the decision instrument attached as evidence?","id":"q-act-authority","kind":"authority"},{"text":"Which downstream obligations does the act trigger - segment restatement, employee information and consultation, directory reprovisioning, contract novation?","id":"q-act-consequences","kind":"process"},{"text":"May an act be recorded with an effective date in the past, and what compensating controls apply to retroactive entries?","id":"q-retroactive","kind":"exception"}]},{"id":"unit-lineage","name":"Unit Lineage and Succession","description":"Merges and splits create many-to-many lineage that a simple parent pointer cannot express. W3C ORG uses originalOrganization and resultingOrganization on a ChangeEvent; ROR uses predecessor and successor relationships and keeps relationships on inactive or withdrawn records as historical tombstones. Lineage must survive the disappearance of its endpoints so that historical references still resolve.","questions":[{"text":"Which units are the predecessors and successors of this unit, and through which act was each lineage edge created?","id":"q-lineage-edges","kind":"provenance"},{"text":"Does a merged or renamed unit retain its identifier as a continuation, or is a new identifier minted with a lineage edge to the old one?","id":"q-lineage-continuity","kind":"identity"},{"text":"When a consumer dereferences the identifier of a disbanded unit, what is returned - a tombstone, a redirect to the successor, or an error?","id":"q-tombstone-resolution","kind":"interoperability"},{"text":"When only part of a unit moves in a split, how is the partial transfer of establishment, mandate and staffing apportioned across the lineage edge?","id":"q-partial-transfer","kind":"composition"}]},{"id":"change-event-conformance-threshold","name":"Change event semantics","description":"ORG ChangeEvent is a prov:Activity for a major change such as a merger or complete restructuring, intended when the resulting organization is sufficiently distinct to have a distinct identity and URI. originalOrganization, resultingOrganization, changedBy and resultedFrom relate the event to organizations. CPOV adds description, startedAtTime, endedAtTime and hasFormalFramework to legislation or policy that prompted the change. Most internal reorganizations do not mint a new URI; those should be modelled as time-qualified updates to parent, name, kind or status, optionally grouped by a reorganization act. Treating every rename as a ChangeEvent would over-claim ORG semantics. Rare cases include machinery-of-government transfers, split of one unit into several, merger without a new legal entity, spin-out of a unit into a FormalOrganization, and absorption of a former legal body as a unit.","questions":[{"text":"What kind of structural change occurred, which units were original and resulting, and did any resulting unit receive a new identity?","id":"change-event-conformance-threshold-q01","kind":"event"},{"text":"When was the change decided, when did it start to be effective, when did it end, and when was it recorded?","id":"change-event-conformance-threshold-q02","kind":"temporal"},{"text":"Which law, policy, board minute or reorganization notice authorized the change?","id":"change-event-conformance-threshold-q03","kind":"authority"},{"text":"Which affected parties must receive advance notice of this structural change?","id":"change-event-conformance-threshold-q04","kind":"requirement"}]}]},{"id":"temporal-validity","name":"Temporal Validity","description":"Effective dating, bitemporality and reconstruction of the structure at any past instant.","findings":[{"id":"effective-dating-bitemporality","name":"Effective Dating and Bitemporality","description":"Every structural assertion - membership in a hierarchy, a reporting line, a mandate, an establishment line - carries a validity period in world time and a separate transaction period in record time. RFC 3339 requires a stated relationship to UTC and offers '-00:00' where the instant is known but the local offset is not, a distinction that matters for multinational effective dates. ROR's admin block separates created from last_modified, illustrating the record-time axis in practice.","questions":[{"text":"What are the validity start and end of this assertion in world time, and is an open-ended end represented explicitly or by absence?","id":"q-validity-period","kind":"temporal"},{"text":"When was this assertion first recorded and when was it last modified or superseded in the record, independently of its world-time validity?","id":"q-transaction-time","kind":"provenance"},{"text":"Which time offset is used for effective dates in a multi-jurisdiction organization, and is a legal local midnight or a UTC instant intended?","id":"q-offset-policy","kind":"constraint"},{"text":"Are gaps or overlaps permitted in the validity of successive parent assignments for the same unit and hierarchy?","id":"q-gap-overlap","kind":"validation"}]},{"id":"as-of-reconstruction","name":"As-Of Reconstruction and Versioning","description":"Consumers need the structure as it stood at a past instant, both as it actually was (world time) and as it was believed to be at the time (record time). IFRS 8's requirement to restate prior-period segment information after an internal reorganization, or otherwise disclose the change, makes exact historical reconstruction an external obligation rather than a convenience. Reconstruction outputs must be reproducible and identified.","questions":[{"text":"Given a world-time instant and a record-time instant, can the full unit set, hierarchy and reporting lines be reproduced deterministically?","id":"q-asof-query","kind":"process"},{"text":"How is a structure version identified so that two consumers can prove they are looking at the same state?","id":"q-version-identity","kind":"identity"},{"text":"Does the model support producing both the pre-reorganization and post-reorganization views of a prior period for comparative reporting?","id":"q-restatement-support","kind":"requirement"},{"text":"How far back is full reconstruction guaranteed, and what happens to reconstruction after retention-driven deletion?","id":"q-history-truncation","kind":"retention"}]}]}]},{"id":"governance-provenance-and-disclosure","name":"Governance, Provenance and Disclosure","description":"Who owns the structure record, what evidences it, how long it is kept, and who may see what.","layers":[{"id":"provenance-and-authority","name":"Provenance and Record Authority","description":"Which system and which body are authoritative for each structural assertion, and what evidences it.","findings":[{"id":"record-authority","name":"Record Authority and Source of Truth","description":"Unit structure has no external registrar: the parent organization is the sole authority, unlike legal identity where GLEIF and business registers verify against authoritative local sources. Different attributes may nonetheless have different masters - HR for establishment, finance for cost centres, governance secretariat for mandates - so authority is asserted per attribute group, with a declared conflict resolution order.","questions":[{"text":"For each attribute group - identity, hierarchy, mandate, establishment, staffing - which system and which role is the master?","id":"q-attribute-master","kind":"ownership"},{"text":"When two systems assert different values for the same attribute, which precedence order applies and who adjudicates a persistent conflict?","id":"q-conflict-order","kind":"exception"},{"text":"Is any part of the structure externally verifiable (a registered branch, a statutory committee), and against which register?","id":"q-external-verification","kind":"evidence"},{"text":"For an ingested assertion, what are the source system, extraction instant and transformation applied before it reached this model?","id":"q-ingest-provenance","kind":"provenance"}]},{"id":"evidence-and-validation","name":"Evidence and Structural Validation","description":"A structural claim is only operable if it can be checked. Validation covers referential integrity against WM-ORG-001 and WM-ORG-004, acyclicity per hierarchy, temporal consistency, establishment-versus-actual variance, segregation rules and the FHIR-style minimum that an entry must have at least one name or identifier. Results are evidence, with severity and an owner, not silent failures.","questions":[{"text":"Which validation rules apply to a unit record, at which severity, and which of them block a write?","id":"q-validation-rules","kind":"validation"},{"text":"What is the minimum viable unit record that may be persisted, and does it require at least one name or identifier?","id":"q-minimum-record","kind":"requirement"},{"text":"Which assertions require attached documentary evidence before they are treated as authoritative rather than provisional?","id":"q-evidence-attachment","kind":"evidence"},{"text":"Which quality measures are tracked over the structure graph - orphan rate, stale-record age, unmandated units, over-establishment - and what are their thresholds?","id":"q-quality-metrics","kind":"quality"}]}]},{"id":"access-and-retention","name":"Access, Disclosure and Retention","description":"Controlled release of structure information and its governed disposition.","findings":[{"id":"structure-disclosure","name":"Structure Disclosure and Privacy","description":"Structure data spans public facts (a published org chart of a public authority under CPOV-style transparency) and sensitive facts (unfilled posts signalling a planned restructuring, or small-unit staffing that identifies individuals). Disclosure is therefore scoped per projection and per audience, and small-cell staffing must be suppressed or aggregated before release.","questions":[{"text":"Which disclosure classes exist for structure data - public, counterparty, auditor, internal, restricted - and which fields belong to each?","id":"q-disclosure-classes","kind":"access"},{"text":"Which structure fields can identify a natural person, directly or by combination, and what safeguard applies to each?","id":"q-personal-data","kind":"privacy"},{"text":"Which structural changes are embargoed until announcement, and what is the release trigger and the holder of the embargo?","id":"q-embargo","kind":"security"},{"text":"Where employee information and consultation duties apply before a reorganization takes effect, how is that dependency represented as a precondition on the act?","id":"q-consultation","kind":"requirement"}]},{"id":"retention-and-disposition","name":"Retention and Disposition","description":"Structure records have long evidential value: lineage must outlive the units it links, because historical references keep resolving. Retention should follow a governed disposition authority rather than ad hoc deletion - NARA's model is that use of the General Records Schedules 'is mandatory' and agencies must justify any agency-specific schedule. Deletion must be reconciled with the bitemporal reconstruction guarantee.","questions":[{"text":"Which disposition authority or retention schedule governs each class of structure record, and who approved it?","id":"q-disposition-authority","kind":"retention"},{"text":"Which structure records are permanent or archival - founding acts, lineage edges, mandate instruments - and which are transitory?","id":"q-permanent-records","kind":"classification"},{"text":"How is deletion of a unit record reconciled with the need to keep lineage edges resolvable for historical references?","id":"q-deletion-vs-lineage","kind":"constraint"},{"text":"How does a legal hold suspend disposition for affected structure records, and how is the hold released and evidenced?","id":"q-legal-hold","kind":"exception"}]}]},{"id":"external-alignment","name":"External Alignment","description":"Mapping to external vocabularies and controlling fidelity loss on export.","findings":[{"id":"standards-crosswalk","name":"Standards Crosswalk","description":"The unit maps outward to org:OrganizationalUnit with org:unitOf/org:subOrganizationOf, to CPOV hasUnit for public bodies, to a FHIR Organization with partOf and type, to LDAP organizationalUnit with ou, to SCIM department/division, to schema.org department/parentOrganization with iso6523Code, and to an ISO/IEC 6523 ICD plus organization part identifier for e-business addressing. Each mapping is an alignment claim with a direction and a fidelity note, never a conformance claim.","questions":[{"text":"For each external target vocabulary, which local element maps to which term, in which direction, and with what cardinality mismatch?","id":"q-mapping-target","kind":"interoperability"},{"text":"Is a conformance claim being made against any target, and if so what evidence - a passing test suite or a validation profile - supports it?","id":"q-conformance-claim","kind":"evidence"},{"text":"Where do target vocabularies disagree with this model - for instance schema.org conflating department with subsidiary, or FHIR having no distinct unit class - and how is the disagreement recorded?","id":"q-semantic-conflicts","kind":"constraint"},{"text":"How are target vocabulary version changes detected, and what is the review cadence for the crosswalk?","id":"q-version-drift","kind":"lifecycle"}]},{"id":"projection-fidelity","name":"Projection Fidelity and Lossy Export","description":"Exports lose information in predictable ways: LDAP 'ou' and SCIM 'department' carry only names, so identifier, kind, validity period, mandate and reporting type vanish; org charts drop mandate and staffing; segment reports aggregate units away. A projection must declare what it drops and must never be re-imported as authoritative, or the lossy copy will silently overwrite the governed record.","questions":[{"text":"For each defined projection, which elements are omitted, flattened or aggregated, and is that loss declared to consumers?","id":"q-projection-loss","kind":"quality"},{"text":"May any projection be re-imported as a source of truth, and what guard prevents an accidental round-trip overwrite?","id":"q-reimport-rule","kind":"constraint"},{"text":"How stale may a projection be before consumers must be warned, and how is its generation instant and source version published with it?","id":"q-projection-freshness","kind":"temporal"}]}]}]}]},"agentConduct":{"may":["Reconstruct the unit structure as of a given date.","Derive an org chart projection from authoritative structure data.","Reconcile unit data with a directory and report differences.","Compute headcount rollups above the declared minimum cell size."],"mustNot":["Create, rename or reparent a unit without a decision of the parent organization.","Let a directory or downstream system overwrite the authoritative structure.","Publish staffing figures below the minimum cell size.","Delete a disbanded unit together with its lineage links."],"requiresHuman":["Approving a reorganization act.","Assigning or changing a unit's mandate and delegated authority.","Resolving a conflict between overlapping unit mandates."]},"ethics":{"considerations":["Small units can make individual staff identifiable in reported figures; suppression protects them.","Reorganizations affect jobs and working conditions; changes should be traceable and lawful.","Accountability should match authority, so no unit is blamed for matters it does not control."],"affectedParties":["Staff in the unit","Managers and governance bodies","People served by the unit"]},"owners":{"steward":"The adopting Dimension must name a single parent organization as owner of every unit record; units have no independent standing and cannot own their own structure entry.","roles":[{"name":"Structure Owner (parent organization governing body)","responsibilities":["Holds ultimate accountability for the structure record and approves the delegation of authority schedule.","Approves reorganization acts that create, merge, transfer or disband units.","Resolves persistent conflicts between attribute masters."]},{"name":"Structure Steward","responsibilities":["Maintains the unit register, the kind code list, the status vocabulary and the named hierarchy inventory.","Applies reorganization acts, opens and closes validity intervals and maintains lineage edges.","Runs validation, triages findings and tracks remediation to closure."]},{"name":"Mandate and Delegation Custodian","responsibilities":["Records mandates and authority limits against their delegating instruments and assurance processes.","Detects overlapping remits and segregation-of-duties breaches and manages time-bounded waivers.","Reviews delegation formalisation before a reorganization act is approved."]},{"name":"Workforce Data Custodian","responsibilities":["Defines counting bases and population definitions and produces dated headcount and FTE snapshots.","Reconciles authorized establishment against actual staffing and escalates variance breaches.","Applies minimum cell size suppression and logs each suppression decision."]},{"name":"Records and Disclosure Officer","responsibilities":["Binds record classes to an approved disposition authority and executes disposition under legal-hold checks.","Approves disclosure packages, embargoes and audience-specific projections.","Maintains the redaction manifest and the reconstruction horizon statement."]},{"name":"Interoperability Custodian","responsibilities":["Maintains crosswalks to W3C ORG, CPOV, FHIR, LDAP, SCIM, schema.org and ISO/IEC 6523 with exact target versions.","Monitors target vocabulary version drift and schedules crosswalk reviews.","Guards against projection round-trips and publishes loss manifests with every export."]}],"masterSystems":[]},"relations":[{"target":"WM-ORG-001 Organization","type":"references","note":"Every unit resolves to exactly one parent organization, which holds legal identity, registration and external identifiers. W3C ORG grounds the dependency: a unit 'only has full recognition within the context of that Organization'."},{"target":"WM-ORG-004 Position","type":"child","note":"Units contain or govern established posts. This model holds the establishment count, seating and unit-level occupancy; the post as an object that 'exists independently of who fills it' is defined in WM-ORG-004."},{"target":"Employment / role assignment model","type":"references","note":"Employment records fill the posts seated in a unit and are the derivation source for unit-level occupancy counts; persons and contracts never enter this model."},{"target":"Charter / constitutive powers model","type":"references","note":"Unit mandates trace upward to powers held by the organization; ISO 37000 requires delegation to be formalized and delegators to remain accountable, so the upstream power must be resolvable."},{"target":"Site / Location model","type":"references","note":"A unit may be associated with one or more premises, but FHIR keeps Location distinct from Organization and Eurostat's local unit is a geographic statistical construct, so premises are referenced rather than embedded."},{"target":"Stewardship model (S1)","type":"composes","note":"The parent organization owns the structure record and units have no independent standing; ownership, custodianship and accountability facets come from the stewardship model."},{"target":"Access grant model (S2)","type":"references","note":"Disclosure classes defined here are enforced by grants issued in the access model; this model supplies the scoped projections and suppression parameters, not the grant machinery."},{"target":"Audit trail model (S4)","type":"composes","note":"Reorganization acts, mandate changes, waivers and disposition actions require immutable audit facets with separate event and record timestamps."},{"target":"W3C Organization Ontology (org:)","type":"aligned","note":"Primary structural alignment for OrganizationalUnit, hasUnit/unitOf, subOrganizationOf, purpose, classification, Post, Site and ChangeEvent. Unit-to-unit reportsTo is declared an extension, since org:reportsTo binds Agents and Posts."},{"target":"Core Public Organisation Vocabulary (CPOV) v2.1.2","type":"aligned","note":"Public-sector profile alignment for hasUnit, code-valued purpose (COFOG), classification and spatial coverage; applicable only where the parent organization is a public body."},{"target":"HL7 FHIR Organization / OrganizationAffiliation (R5)","type":"aligned","note":"Healthcare-sector projection where departments are Organization instances chained by partOf and non-hierarchical relations use OrganizationAffiliation; a known structural conflict with the distinct-unit-class model."},{"target":"ISO/IEC 6523 organization part identification (via Peppol ICD registry)","type":"aligned","note":"External addressing of a unit as an organization part under the parent's ICD and organization identifier, used for e-business party and delivery-location identification."},{"target":"LDAP (RFC 4519) and SCIM (RFC 7643) directory schemas","type":"aligned","note":"Outbound-only projection targets. Both carry unit information as names without identifiers, validity or typed edges, so alignment is declared lossy and re-import is prohibited."},{"target":"Statistical units framework (Council Regulation (EEC) No 696/93)","type":"aligned","note":"Mapping of internal units to enterprise, kind-of-activity unit and local unit for statistical reporting, recorded as a derivation with explicit boundary mismatch rather than as equivalence."},{"target":"IFRS 8 operating segment determination","type":"aligned","note":"The internal reporting hierarchy is an input to segment identification under the management approach, and reorganization acts trigger the restate-or-disclose obligation; segment determination itself stays outside this model."},{"target":"WM-ORG-001 Organization","type":"neighbor","note":"W3C ORG separates org:FormalOrganization (recognized in a legal jurisdiction, with rights and responsibilities) from org:OrganizationalUnit, which has full recognition only inside its parent. Legal identity, registration and LEI stay in WM-ORG-001. A branch that is separately registered is dual-classified: it is a unit here and a legal entity there, and GLEIF only issues an LEI to the legally registered entity, not to an internal division."},{"target":"WM-ORG-004 Position","type":"neighbor","note":"org:Post represents a position that exists independently of who fills it. This model records only the unit-side facts: how many posts are established in the unit, which posts are seated there, and the aggregate occupancy state. Post title, grade, competency profile and occupational classification belong to WM-ORG-004, which this model CONTAINS by reference rather than by copy."},{"target":"Site / Location model","type":"neighbor","note":"FHIR states that Location records where a service occurs while Organization records who performed it; Eurostat's 'local unit' is 'an enterprise or part thereof ... situated in a geographically identified place'. A unit may be associated with one or more sites, but premises, addresses and geometry are not unit attributes and are not modelled here."},{"target":"Statistical units model","type":"neighbor","note":"Council Regulation (EEC) No 696/93 defines enterprise, kind-of-activity unit and local unit as observation units for economic statistics. These are derived by statistical rules from operational reality, not asserted by the organization, and their boundaries routinely differ from internal units. Treated as an ALIGN target, never as a source of internal unit identity."},{"target":"Financial segment reporting","type":"neighbor","note":"IFRS 8 identifies operating segments through a management approach based on how the chief operating decision maker reviews internal reports, and permits aggregation of segments with similar economic characteristics. A reportable segment is therefore a derived view over internal units, not a unit; this model supplies the inputs and the change signal, not the segment determination."},{"target":"Directory and identity systems","type":"neighbor","note":"RFC 4519 defines 'ou' as a multi-valued name attribute and RFC 7643 defines SCIM 'department', 'division' and 'organization' as free-text names. These carry no identifier, no validity period and no hierarchy semantics, so directory content is a lossy projection of this model and never its system of record."},{"target":"Global organization registries","type":"neighbor","note":"ROR states it 'is not focused on capturing all subdivisions of a given organization such as a university's schools or departments' because departments 'often emerge, close, combine, and change'. No general governed global identifier exists for internal units, so unit identity is parent-scoped by default."},{"target":"WM-ORG-004","type":"contains"}],"interaction":{"identity":{"applicability":"required","items":["Authoritative master-system identifier assigned by the parent organization (unit register key, official decision reference, approved schedule reference).","Governed global identifier or IRI where one genuinely exists - an ISO/IEC 6523 ICD plus organization identifier plus organization part identifier, or an LEI where the subdivision is itself a registered legal entity.","UUID or ULID minted by the adopting Dimension, with the minting act recorded, used only when neither of the above exists.","A date, a name, an org-chart position or a cost centre code is never an identifier; at most they are qualifiers on an identifier."]},"properties":{"applicability":"not-applicable","items":[]},"recognition":{"applicability":"optional","items":["A unit has a name, a parent organization, a parent unit and a mandate, and appears in org charts and directories.","Confused with a team (WM-ORG-003), a cost centre, a site and a legal subsidiary."]},"capabilities":{"applicability":"required","items":["Resolve Unit Identity: Resolve any inbound reference - master-system identifier, ISO/IEC 6523 organization part identifier, alias, former name, LDAP distinguished name or IdP group id - to the single current unit record or to a tombstone with a successor pointer.","Validate Structure Graph: Evaluate integrity rules over a structure version: acyclicity within each named hierarchy, single parent per hierarchy per validity interval, no orphans, referential integrity to WM-ORG-001 and WM-ORG-004, temporal gap and overlap rules, and segregation-of-duties constraints.","Reconstruct Structure As Of: Return the unit set, hierarchies, reporting lines and mandates valid at a given world-time instant as recorded at a given record-time instant, producing a deterministic, digest-identified view.","Apply Reorganization Act: Apply an evidenced structural change - establish, rename, reclassify, reparent, merge, split, transfer or disband - creating lineage edges, closing and opening validity intervals, and registering downstream obligations.","Derive Org Chart Projection: Generate a hierarchy view for a named hierarchy at an as-of instant, containing unit names and kinds only, with mandate detail and staffing deliberately excluded.","Evaluate Mandate Conflict: Detect overlapping or incompatible remits across units and breaches of authority limits or independence requirements, before or after a proposed structural change.","Compute Headcount Rollup: Aggregate staffing measurements up a named hierarchy under a declared counting basis and period convention, applying suppression where a cell falls below the minimum size.","Reconcile External Directory: Compare LDAP or SCIM representations of units against the governed structure, report drift, and push corrections outward without ever accepting the directory as a source of truth.","Emit Standards Mapping: Serialise the structure into a target vocabulary - W3C ORG, CPOV, FHIR Organization, schema.org, or an ISO/IEC 6523 party identifier - using the versioned crosswalk and attaching a fidelity declaration.","Apply Disposition: Execute the approved retention schedule over structure records: destroy, transfer to archive or flag for review, while preserving the tombstones and lineage edges required for historical reference resolution.","Assign mandate: Attach or withdraw a remit, purpose code and delegation source on a unit for a validity interval.","Seat post in unit: Create or attach an established post in a unit independently of any holder. Occupancy is not performed here.","Assert reporting line: Record a supervisory or dotted-line reporting edge between units or posts with validity.","Record staffing snapshot: Store a dated established and filled count for a unit with basis and observation time. Treat as an extension until a primary unit-level metric standard is cited."]},"hazards":{"applicability":"required","items":["Wrong reporting lines route approvals to the wrong manager.","Stale directory structure grants or keeps access that should have ended.","Lost lineage makes historical decisions and records impossible to attribute."]},"interfaces":{"applicability":"required","items":["W3C Organization Ontology (org:OrganizationalUnit).","schema.org Organization with department and parentOrganization.","ISO 5009 official organizational roles code list."]},"context":{"applicability":"required","items":["CPOV, ESRS S1 and the statistical-unit framework are EU instruments; their applicability outside the EU is by voluntary adoption only.","NARA General Records Schedules bind US federal agencies only; they are used here as a model for governed disposition authority, not as a generally applicable rule.","Employee information and consultation duties before a reorganization takes effect vary sharply - strong in several continental European jurisdictions, weak or absent elsewhere - so consultation is modelled as an optional, jurisdiction-conditioned precondition on a reorganization act.","Public-sector units in some jurisdictions have statutory existence published in an official gazette, giving them an external authority that private units lack; the model accommodates this through the dual-classification flag but does not enumerate national regimes.","Minimum cell size thresholds for staffing disclosure are set by national data-protection practice and collective agreements, so the threshold is a Dimension parameter rather than a fixed value.","ISO/IEC 6523 ICD availability is uneven by country; the Peppol list reflects European e-invoicing deployment more densely than other regions.","Financial reporting alignment assumes IFRS; US GAAP ASC 280 uses a comparable management approach but differs in detail and was not researched.","W3C spelling organization is used in identifiers even in jurisdictions that spell organisation.","COFOG as a purpose code is a European public-sector recommendation, not a global requirement.","LDAP/X.500 distinguished-name trees remain a common enterprise projection but are not the semantic identity.","Legal personality follows the ORG FormalOrganization versus OrganizationalUnit split; jurisdictions that treat some departments as legal persons must type those as organizations, not units.","Privacy warnings assume jurisdictions that regulate publication of information about people."]}},"sources":[{"title":"The Organization Ontology","url":"https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-org/","note":"World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)"},{"title":"FHIR R5 Resource Organization","url":"https://hl7.org/fhir/R5/organization.html","note":"HL7 International"},{"title":"Core Public Organisation Vocabulary (CPOV)","url":"https://semiceu.github.io/CPOV/releases/2.1.2/","note":"European Commission - SEMIC / Interoperable Europe"},{"title":"RFC 4519: Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP): Schema for User Applications","url":"https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4519","note":"Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)"},{"title":"RFC 7643: System for Cross-domain Identity Management: Core Schema","url":"https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7643","note":"Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)"},{"title":"RFC 3339: Date and Time on the Internet: Timestamps","url":"https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3339","note":"Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)"},{"title":"Peppol BIS Billing 3.0 - ISO 6523 ICD code list","url":"https://docs.peppol.eu/poacc/billing/3.0/codelist/ICD/","note":"OpenPEPPOL AISBL"},{"title":"schema.org Organization","url":"https://schema.org/Organization","note":"Schema.org Community Group"},{"title":"IFRS 8 Operating Segments","url":"https://www.ifrs.org/issued-standards/list-of-standards/ifrs-8-operating-segments/","note":"IFRS Foundation / International Accounting Standards Board"},{"title":"Glossary: Local unit (Statistics Explained)","url":"https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Glossary:Local_unit","note":"Eurostat, European Commission"},{"title":"ROR Data Structure (schema 2.1)","url":"https://ror.readme.io/docs/ror-data-structure","note":"Research Organization Registry (ROR)"},{"title":"ROR FAQs","url":"https://ror.org/about/faqs/","note":"Research Organization Registry (ROR)"},{"title":"The Legal Entity Identifier (LEI)","url":"https://www.gleif.org/en/about-lei/introducing-the-legal-entity-identifier-lei","note":"Global Legal Entity Identifier Foundation (GLEIF)"},{"title":"ISO 37000 Governance of organizations - Guidance (ISO/TC 309 overview)","url":"https://committee.iso.org/files/live/sites/tc309/files/ISO%2037000%20slides/ISO%2037000%20Governance%20of%20organizations%20-%20Guidance%20-%20v1%202022%20web.pdf","note":"ISO/TC 309 (International Organization for Standardization)"},{"title":"ESRS S1 Own Workforce (Annex I, Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2023/2772)","url":"https://www.efrag.org/sites/default/files/sites/webpublishing/SiteAssets/ESRS%20S1%20Delegated-act-2023-5303-annex-1_en.pdf","note":"EFRAG / European Commission"},{"title":"General Records Schedules (GRS)","url":"https://www.archives.gov/records-mgmt/grs","note":"U.S. National Archives and Records Administration (NARA)"},{"title":"The Organization Ontology","url":"https://www.w3.org/TR/2014/REC-vocab-org-20140116/","note":"World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)"},{"title":"HL7 FHIR Release 4 Organization","url":"https://hl7.org/fhir/R4/organization.html","note":"HL7 International"},{"title":"Popolo Organization","url":"https://www.popoloproject.com/specs/organization.html","note":"Popolo Project"},{"title":"Popolo Post","url":"https://www.popoloproject.com/specs/post.html","note":"Popolo Project"},{"title":"Schema.org department","url":"https://schema.org/department","note":"Schema.org"},{"title":"Schema.org iso6523Code","url":"https://schema.org/iso6523Code","note":"Schema.org"},{"title":"New ISO International Standard for human capital reporting","url":"https://www.iso.org/news/ref2357.html","note":"International Organization for Standardization"}],"openQuestions":["Unit-to-site association: decide whether org:hasSite, hasPrimarySite and hasRegisteredSite belong here as a bounded reference or entirely in the site model. The base excludes premises after an explicit adversarial test; the secondary provider places the link in scope on W3C ORG evidence. Resolve before the next boundary pass, and add a placement layer only if the reference is accepted.","CPOV range and lineage detail: CPOV ranges unitOf at Public Organisation and states a unit cannot exist on its own, which is narrower than W3C ORG's units-of-units, and CPOV prev/next cover rename and split sequences that may retain identity. Fold both into the crosswalk with explicit range, cardinality and fidelity notes.","Popolo Organization and Post as an additional crosswalk target, including its single-classification restriction, its rejection of org:holds in favour of Membership, and its distinct former-name property, which few vocabularies provide.","Cost-centre, profit-centre and funds-centre ERP hierarchies: confirm whether these are admitted as named concurrent hierarchies inside this model or remain finance masters referenced from it, since both providers flag them and neither resolves the boundary.","Works councils, union structures and co-determination bodies: both providers record these as an unmodelled gap that nonetheless gates reorganization effectiveness. Determine whether they become a sibling model or remain a jurisdiction-conditioned precondition on the act.","Establishment-count standardization: search for a primary, unit-grain source defining authorized post complement, grade and budgeted FTE. Absent one, keep the establishment findings marked as local control rather than standard property.","LDAP distinguished-name instability under reparenting, and the name-reuse-after-disbandment collision case with x500UniqueIdentifier-style disambiguators, as validation rules on the identity and projection-fidelity findings.","Informal and shadow structure, temporary project organizations and de facto reporting: both providers record these as gaps with no authoritative source. Confirm the gap stands rather than inventing structure to close it.","Full texts of ISO 37000:2021, ISO 30414:2018, ISO 15489-1:2016 and ISO/IEC 6523-1:2023 are paywalled. Only committee overview material, catalogue metadata, the Peppol ICD deployment and secondary summaries were reviewed, so ISO-derived structure is guidance-grade rather than verified against normative clause text.","Council Regulation (EEC) No 696/93 could not be retrieved directly from EUR-Lex during this research; the statistical-unit boundary rests on the Eurostat Statistics Explained glossary entry that cites it.","The ESRS S1 delegated act annex PDF was retrieved but not machine-parseable; the S1-6 headcount and breakdown requirements are stated at summary level and should be verified against clause text before any compliance claim.","Military, ecclesiastical, academic-collegiate and cooperative governance structures have unit forms (regiments, dioceses, faculties, chapters) that are not specifically accommodated beyond the generic kind code list.","Capacity and skills held by a unit, budget allocation mechanics, and process or capability ownership are deliberately excluded and would need sibling models.","No modelling of unit-level performance objectives, KPIs or scorecards; these were judged to belong to a performance-management model.","Cross-organization joint ventures and shared-service entities that sit between two parents are only partially handled through affiliations; their dual-ownership structure is unresolved.","Cost-centre, profit-centre and funds-centre hierarchies used in ERP as parallel to supervisory structure","Typed multi-hierarchy collections such as supervisory, matrix, geographic and custom trees as first-class objects","Military table of organization and equipment versus actual strength","German works-council and other co-determination overlays","Google Workspace and other directory-policy organizational units used only for inheritance","SCIM enterprise user department attributes","SAP Organization-Position-Person object model as a vendor specification","Grade, pay-scale and bargaining-unit systems","ISO 30400 vocabulary definition and the full ISO 30414 and ISO 6523 texts, which are paywalled","Informal or shadow organization","Classified intelligence structures beyond an exception flag","Temporary project organizations as a project-management class"],"resources":{"spec":"/models/wm-org-002-organizational-unit/spec.yaml","agents":"/models/wm-org-002-organizational-unit/AGENTS.md","source":"https://github.com/ver-cy/world-models/tree/feat/mega-model-registry/research/runs/wm-org-002"},"provenance":{"origin":"world-models research","builtFrom":["models/wm-org-002-organizational-unit/spec.yaml","ver-cy/world-models/card-supplements/wm-org-002-organizational-unit.json"],"providers":["Claude","Grok"],"researchStatus":"reviewable-draft","generatedAt":"2026-08-23T23:43:44Z","builder":"tools/build_cards.py@1.0.0"},"completeness":{"sections":{"classifiers":"filled","whatItIs":"filled","purpose":"filled","distinguishingFeatures":"filled","structure":"filled","agentConduct":"filled","ethics":"filled","owners":"filled","relations":"filled","interaction.identity":"filled","interaction.properties":"not-applicable","interaction.recognition":"filled","interaction.capabilities":"filled","interaction.hazards":"filled","interaction.interfaces":"filled","interaction.context":"filled","sources":"filled"},"notes":{"interaction.properties":"Institutional or informational subject: no invented physical properties.","_supplement":"Sections authored in card supplement 1.0.0 by Claude (Opus 5.5) (2026-10-05, unreviewed). Written from the published specification and established practice in the field; no new sources were read. Unreviewed."},"score":1.0}}