Organizational Unit

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

1. 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?identity
   Expected answer

   • assigning system name and reference
   • identifier scheme code
   • assignment authority role
   • assignment timestamp (RFC 3339)
2. 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?interoperability
   Expected answer

   • ICD value
   • organization identifier
   • organization part identifier
   • OPI source indicator
   • composed iso6523Code string
3. Does the identifier survive renaming, reparenting and merger of the unit, and is it guaranteed never to be reassigned to a different unit?constraint
   Expected answer

   • stability policy statement
   • reuse-prohibited boolean
   • events that force a new identifier
4. If no master-system identifier exists, which UUID or ULID does the adopting Dimension mint, and where is that minting act recorded?provenance
   Expected answer

   • locally minted identifier
   • identifier type (UUID/ULID)
   • minting Dimension
   • minting record reference

Artifacts

• Unit Identifier RegisterThe authoritative register of unit identifiers, their scheme, assignment act and retirement state, held by the parent organization.

Units carry an official name, display and short names, abbreviations, language variants and superseded historical names.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

1. Which name is the official designation of the unit, in which language, and which instrument fixed it?definition
   Expected answer

   • official name string
   • language tag (BCP 47)
   • fixing instrument reference
   • effective date
2. Which former names remain in use downstream and over which validity periods were they current?temporal
   Expected answer

   • alias string
   • alias type (former, short, acronym, trade)
   • validity start and end (RFC 3339)
3. Is the unit name required to be unique within its parent, within the whole organization, or not at all?constraint
   Expected answer

   • uniqueness scope
   • collision handling rule
   • qualified-path naming convention

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

1. Against which named and versioned classification scheme is the unit's kind asserted, and is that scheme resolvable to a published code list?classification
   Expected answer

   • scheme identifier or IRI
   • scheme version
   • code value
   • code label
2. Does the unit carry codes from more than one scheme (internal kind, public-sector function, industry activity), and which one governs behaviour?interoperability
   Expected answer

   • list of scheme/code pairs
   • governing scheme flag
   • mapping notes
3. Is this subdivision also a formal organization recognized in a legal jurisdiction, requiring dual classification and a link to WM-ORG-001?definition
   Expected answer

   • dual-classification boolean
   • legal entity identifier if any
   • jurisdiction
   • basis of legal recognition
4. What evidence is required before a unit's kind may be reclassified, and does reclassification require a reorganization act?authority
   Expected answer

   • reclassification authority role
   • required evidence
   • linked reorganization act reference

Artifacts

• Unit Kind Code ListThe governed, versioned code list of unit kinds used by the adopting Dimension, with definitions, deprecations and mappings to org:classification and CPOV codes.

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

1. Which status values are permitted for a unit, and is 'created in error' modelled separately from 'ceased to operate'?state
   Expected answer

   • status code list
   • error-vs-cessation distinction rule
   • terminal status set
2. Which status transitions are legal, and which of them require a reorganization act rather than a simple correction?lifecycle
   Expected answer

   • allowed transition matrix
   • transitions requiring an act
   • transitions allowed as corrections
3. 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?state
   Expected answer

   • dormant status code
   • dormancy entry criteria
   • maximum dormancy duration
   • review trigger
4. After a unit is disbanded, is its record tombstoned with its relationships retained for historical reconstruction, or removed?retention
   Expected answer

   • tombstone policy
   • retained relationship set
   • redirect or successor pointer

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

1. What kind is this unit, in which classification scheme, and is that kind intrinsic or merely a directory grouping?classification
   Expected answer

   • unit-kind-code (string): Code or SKOS concept for the kind
   • kind-scheme (iri): Concept scheme or value set
   • kind-is-intrinsic (boolean): Whether kind affects other properties
2. Is this body an internal unit, a committee treated as a unit, or a cross-organization collaboration?classification
   Expected answer

   • body-mode (code): unit, committee-as-unit, or collaboration
3. May this unit carry more than one classification at once, and if a profile forbids that, which scheme is the unique classifier?constraint
   Expected answer

   • allows-multiple-classifications (boolean): Whether multiple classifications are permitted
   • unique-scheme (iri): Scheme used if uniqueness is required

Artifacts

• Unit kind schemeControlled list or SKOS concept scheme used by the parent organization to classify units

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

1. Which organization (WM-ORG-001 instance) does this unit ultimately belong to, and is that link mandatory and immutable for the unit's lifetime?composition
   Expected answer

   • parent organization identifier
   • link mandatory boolean
   • transfer-between-organizations rule
2. Which unit is the immediate parent within the named hierarchy, and what is the depth and root of that path?relationship
   Expected answer

   • parent unit identifier
   • hierarchy name
   • root unit identifier
   • materialised path or depth
3. How are cycles, orphaned units and multiple parents within a single hierarchy detected and prevented at write time?validation
   Expected answer

   • acyclicity check definition
   • orphan rule
   • single-parent constraint per hierarchy
   • rejection behaviour
4. 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?interoperability
   Expected answer

   • edge semantics code
   • target entity type
   • export mapping note
   • loss warning

Artifacts

• Organization Chart ProjectionA rendered or serialised view of the containment hierarchy with unit names and kinds, deliberately omitting mandate detail and staffing figures.

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

1. Which named hierarchies exist over the unit set, who owns each, and which one is the default for display?composition
   Expected answer

   • hierarchy identifier
   • hierarchy purpose
   • owning role
   • default flag
2. Where does a unit's position differ between hierarchies, and is that divergence intentional or an integrity defect?quality
   Expected answer

   • divergence report rows
   • intentional flag
   • justification
   • reviewer
3. Which hierarchy corresponds to the internal reports reviewed by the chief operating decision maker for the purposes of segment identification?decision
   Expected answer

   • hierarchy identifier
   • CODM role reference
   • attestation date
   • scope of internal reports
4. When two hierarchies imply conflicting authority over the same unit, which precedence rule resolves the conflict?constraint
   Expected answer

   • precedence ordering
   • conflict class
   • escalation path

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

1. What type is each reporting line - administrative, functional, professional, operational or advisory - and is it solid or dotted?relationship
   Expected answer

   • line type code
   • solid/dotted flag
   • source unit
   • target unit or post
2. Does the reporting line hold between units, between posts, or between the units' heads, and which representation is authoritative?definition
   Expected answer

   • subject type (unit/post/agent)
   • authoritative representation flag
   • derivation rule for the other representations
3. Where unit-to-unit reporting is asserted, is the departure from org:reportsTo recorded as an explicit extension with a mapping rule?interoperability
   Expected answer

   • extension declaration
   • target standard property
   • mapping rule
   • non-conformance note
4. Over which period is each reporting line valid, and can two lines of the same type to different targets overlap in time?temporal
   Expected answer

   • validity start and end (RFC 3339)
   • overlap-permitted boolean per line type
   • conflict detection rule

Artifacts

• Reporting Line MatrixEdge list of all reporting relations with type, direction, validity and standards-mapping note, usable for matrix-management analysis and for detecting conflicting lines.

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

1. What kind of non-hierarchical relation is this - shared service, joint body, service agreement, secondment or partnership - and does it imply any control?relationship
   Expected answer

   • affiliation type code
   • implies-control boolean
   • counterparty reference
2. Does the counterparty sit inside the same parent organization or in a different legal entity, and does that change which model owns the relation?composition
   Expected answer

   • internal/external flag
   • counterparty organization identifier
   • owning model reference
3. Which instrument establishes the affiliation, over what period, and what obligations does it place on the unit?authority
   Expected answer

   • instrument reference
   • validity period
   • obligation summary
   • review date

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

1. What is the unit's stated remit, and is it expressed as free text, as codes from a governed scheme, or both?definition
   Expected answer

   • remit statement text
   • purpose code and scheme
   • coverage dimensions
2. Which instrument delegates this mandate to the unit, and from which higher authority or charter power does it derive?authority
   Expected answer

   • delegating instrument reference
   • delegating body
   • upstream charter power reference
   • approval date
3. Over which spatial, market, legal-entity or process scope does the mandate apply, and where does it explicitly not apply?spatial
   Expected answer

   • covered region or scope codes
   • excluded scope
   • basis of exclusion
4. Does this mandate overlap or conflict with the remit of another unit, and which rule resolves the overlap?exception
   Expected answer

   • overlapping unit identifiers
   • overlap classification
   • resolution rule
   • arbiter role

Artifacts

• Delegation InstrumentThe formalized document or decision by which a governing body delegates a mandate to a unit, including the delegated scope, conditions and assurance arrangements.

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

1. Which decision types may this unit take without escalation, and what quantitative or categorical limits bound each of them?constraint
   Expected answer

   • decision type code
   • limit value and unit of measure
   • currency where monetary
   • escalation threshold
2. May the unit sub-delegate any part of its authority to a contained unit or post, and under what conditions?authority
   Expected answer

   • sub-delegation permitted boolean
   • conditions
   • maximum sub-delegated limit
   • notification requirement
3. Which assurance process verifies that delegated authority is being exercised within its limits, and at what cadence?evidence
   Expected answer

   • assurance process reference
   • cadence
   • assurance owner
   • last assurance date
4. Under what circumstances is delegated authority suspended or withdrawn, and does withdrawal take effect immediately or at a stated date?lifecycle
   Expected answer

   • withdrawal trigger
   • withdrawing authority
   • effective instant (RFC 3339)
   • residual authority during transition

Artifacts

• Delegation of Authority ScheduleThe consolidated schedule mapping units to decision types, limits, escalation paths and assurance owners, used for both operation and audit.

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

1. Which post or role is designated as head of the unit, and is that designation a property of the unit or of the post?ownership
   Expected answer

   • head post reference (WM-ORG-004)
   • role code
   • designation basis
   • validity period
2. How is an acting, interim or vacant headship represented, and who holds the accountability while the slot is unfilled?state
   Expected answer

   • headship state code
   • acting arrangement reference
   • fallback accountable role
   • expected resolution date
3. What evidence exists that the accountable role has the authority, competence and resources matching the unit's responsibilities?evidence
   Expected answer

   • assessment reference
   • assessment date
   • identified gaps
   • remediation owner

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

1. Which pairs or sets of mandates must never be held by the same unit, and which rule set encodes that prohibition?constraint
   Expected answer

   • incompatible mandate pairs
   • rule identifier
   • rule source (policy or regulation)
   • severity
2. Which units require an independent reporting line that bypasses their operational parent, and to which body does that line run?requirement
   Expected answer

   • unit identifier
   • independence basis
   • target governing body
   • line type
3. How are segregation violations detected when a reorganization is proposed, and does detection block the change or only warn?validation
   Expected answer

   • check definition
   • evaluation point (pre-commit/post-commit)
   • blocking boolean
   • override authority
4. Under what conditions may a segregation rule be waived, who may approve the waiver, and for how long?exception
   Expected answer

   • waiver conditions
   • approving role
   • waiver expiry (RFC 3339)
   • compensating control

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

1. How many posts is the unit authorized to carry, expressed as post count and as budgeted full-time equivalents?measurement
   Expected answer

   • authorized post count
   • authorized FTE
   • budget period
   • approving instrument reference
2. Who may increase or decrease the establishment, and does a change require a reorganization act or only a budget decision?authority
   Expected answer

   • approving role
   • change instrument type
   • reorganization-act-required boolean
3. Which specific posts (WM-ORG-004) are seated in this unit, and can a post be seated in more than one unit at once?composition
   Expected answer

   • post identifiers
   • seating validity period
   • multi-seating permitted boolean
   • apportionment rule
4. What is the tolerated variance between authorized establishment and actual staffing before escalation is triggered?constraint
   Expected answer

   • variance threshold
   • measurement basis
   • escalation trigger
   • responsible role

Artifacts

• Establishment TableThe approved table of authorized posts per unit with counts, FTE, cost centre linkage and the instrument that approved each line.

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

1. How many authorized posts in this unit are currently filled, vacant, frozen or in notice period, and as of which instant?state
   Expected answer

   • filled count
   • vacant count
   • frozen count
   • as-of instant (RFC 3339)
2. Is the unit carrying more filled posts than authorized, and under which approved exception?exception
   Expected answer

   • over-establishment count
   • exception reference
   • expiry date
   • approver
3. Is occupancy asserted directly on the unit or derived from employment records, and which is authoritative when they disagree?provenance
   Expected answer

   • derivation source system
   • authoritative source flag
   • reconciliation rule
   • last reconciliation instant

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

1. 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?measurement
   Expected answer

   • basis code (headcount/FTE)
   • point-in-time vs average
   • period start and end
   • FTE conversion rule
2. Which worker categories are included - permanent, temporary, non-guaranteed hours, contingent, contractors - and which are excluded?definition
   Expected answer

   • included category codes
   • excluded category codes
   • definition source
   • treatment of shared or apportioned staff
3. What is the difference between the snapshot's as-of date and the instant it was computed and ingested, and are both recorded?temporal
   Expected answer

   • as-of date
   • computation timestamp (RFC 3339)
   • ingestion timestamp (RFC 3339)
   • source system
4. Under what conditions is a prior snapshot restated rather than superseded, and how is the restatement flagged to consumers?quality
   Expected answer

   • restatement trigger
   • restatement flag
   • original value retained
   • reason text

Artifacts

• Headcount Snapshot SeriesThe dated series of staffing measurements per unit with basis, population definition, preparer and restatement flags, supporting trend analysis and external disclosure.

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

1. Below which cell size must a unit's staffing figure be suppressed or rolled up to its parent, and who sets that threshold?privacy
   Expected answer

   • minimum cell size
   • suppression action (suppress/roll-up/round)
   • policy owner
   • policy reference
2. Which breakdowns of staffing by unit are permitted for which audiences, and which combinations are prohibited because they enable re-identification?access
   Expected answer

   • permitted breakdown dimensions
   • prohibited combinations
   • audience class
   • justification
3. How is the application of a suppression rule recorded so that a consumer can tell a suppressed value from a true zero?evidence
   Expected answer

   • suppression marker
   • rule identifier applied
   • suppression log entry
   • reviewer

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

1. 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?event
   Expected answer

   • act kind code
   • affected unit identifiers
   • role per unit (original/resulting/unchanged)
   • narrative summary
2. What are the decision instant, the effective instant and the record instant of this act, each with an explicit offset?temporal
   Expected answer

   • decision timestamp (RFC 3339)
   • effective timestamp (RFC 3339)
   • recorded timestamp (RFC 3339)
   • timezone rationale
3. Which body took the decision, under which delegated power, and is the decision instrument attached as evidence?authority
   Expected answer

   • deciding body
   • power or instrument relied on
   • evidence document reference
   • approval quorum or signatures
4. Which downstream obligations does the act trigger - segment restatement, employee information and consultation, directory reprovisioning, contract novation?process
   Expected answer

   • triggered obligation codes
   • responsible party per obligation
   • deadline
   • completion status
5. May an act be recorded with an effective date in the past, and what compensating controls apply to retroactive entries?exception
   Expected answer

   • retroactivity permitted boolean
   • maximum backdating window
   • approval role
   • audit marker

Artifacts

• Reorganization Decision RecordThe evidenced record of one structural change act: decision instrument, authority, affected units and roles, the three timestamps, and the list of triggered downstream obligations.

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

1. Which units are the predecessors and successors of this unit, and through which act was each lineage edge created?provenance
   Expected answer

   • predecessor identifiers
   • successor identifiers
   • creating act reference
   • edge type
2. 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?identity
   Expected answer

   • continuation rule per act kind
   • identifier retained boolean
   • lineage edge type
3. When a consumer dereferences the identifier of a disbanded unit, what is returned - a tombstone, a redirect to the successor, or an error?interoperability
   Expected answer

   • resolution behaviour
   • tombstone payload fields
   • redirect target rule
   • status code convention
4. 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?composition
   Expected answer

   • apportionment basis
   • transferred post identifiers
   • transferred mandate elements
   • residual retained by source

Artifacts

• Unit Lineage GraphThe directed acyclic graph of predecessor and successor edges across all acts, including tombstoned nodes, used to resolve historical unit references.

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

1. What kind of structural change occurred, which units were original and resulting, and did any resulting unit receive a new identity?event
   Expected answer

   • change-kind (code): create, rename, reparent, merge, split, disband, spin-out, absorb
   • original-unit-ids (array): Units that existed before
   • resulting-unit-ids (array): Units that existed after
   • new-identity-minted (boolean): Whether a new URI or master id was assigned
2. When was the change decided, when did it start to be effective, when did it end, and when was it recorded?temporal
   Expected answer

   • decision-time (datetime): RFC 3339 decision time
   • started-at-time (datetime): RFC 3339 prov:startedAtTime
   • ended-at-time (datetime): RFC 3339 prov:endedAtTime
   • recorded-at (datetime): RFC 3339 observation time
3. Which law, policy, board minute or reorganization notice authorized the change?authority
   Expected answer

   • formal-framework-id (string): Legislation, policy or decision identifier
   • framework-title (string): Title of the authorizing instrument
4. Which affected parties must receive advance notice of this structural change?requirement
   Expected answer

   • notice-audience (array): Units, posts or counterparties to notify
   • notice-required-by (string): Policy or legal basis for notice

Artifacts

• Reorganization actDecision record that reshapes one or more units, with kind, times, original and resulting units and formal framework

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

1. What are the validity start and end of this assertion in world time, and is an open-ended end represented explicitly or by absence?temporal
   Expected answer

   • valid-from (RFC 3339)
   • valid-to (RFC 3339) or open marker
   • open-end convention
   • granularity (instant or date)
2. When was this assertion first recorded and when was it last modified or superseded in the record, independently of its world-time validity?provenance
   Expected answer

   • recorded-from (RFC 3339)
   • recorded-to (RFC 3339)
   • modifying actor
   • change reason
3. Which time offset is used for effective dates in a multi-jurisdiction organization, and is a legal local midnight or a UTC instant intended?constraint
   Expected answer

   • offset policy
   • legal-local-time flag
   • jurisdiction reference
   • conversion rule
4. Are gaps or overlaps permitted in the validity of successive parent assignments for the same unit and hierarchy?validation
   Expected answer

   • gaps permitted boolean
   • overlaps permitted boolean
   • detection rule
   • remediation action

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

1. Given a world-time instant and a record-time instant, can the full unit set, hierarchy and reporting lines be reproduced deterministically?process
   Expected answer

   • query parameters accepted
   • determinism guarantee
   • excluded elements
   • reproduction test result
2. How is a structure version identified so that two consumers can prove they are looking at the same state?identity
   Expected answer

   • structure version identifier
   • content digest
   • generation timestamp (RFC 3339)
   • digest algorithm
3. Does the model support producing both the pre-reorganization and post-reorganization views of a prior period for comparative reporting?requirement
   Expected answer

   • dual-view supported boolean
   • mapping between old and new units
   • apportionment method
   • limitations
4. How far back is full reconstruction guaranteed, and what happens to reconstruction after retention-driven deletion?retention
   Expected answer

   • reconstruction horizon
   • post-deletion behaviour
   • residual summary retained
   • disposition authority reference

Artifacts

• Structure As-Of ViewA frozen, digest-identified export of the complete unit set, hierarchies, reporting lines and mandates valid at a stated world-time and record-time pair.

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

1. For each attribute group - identity, hierarchy, mandate, establishment, staffing - which system and which role is the master?ownership
   Expected answer

   • attribute group
   • master system reference
   • accountable role
   • delegation basis
2. When two systems assert different values for the same attribute, which precedence order applies and who adjudicates a persistent conflict?exception
   Expected answer

   • precedence ordering
   • adjudicating role
   • adjudication record reference
   • resolution deadline
3. Is any part of the structure externally verifiable (a registered branch, a statutory committee), and against which register?evidence
   Expected answer

   • externally verifiable elements
   • register reference
   • verification date
   • verification outcome
4. For an ingested assertion, what are the source system, extraction instant and transformation applied before it reached this model?provenance
   Expected answer

   • source system identifier
   • extraction timestamp (RFC 3339)
   • transformation description
   • operator or agent

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

1. Which validation rules apply to a unit record, at which severity, and which of them block a write?validation
   Expected answer

   • rule identifier
   • rule expression
   • severity
   • blocking boolean
2. What is the minimum viable unit record that may be persisted, and does it require at least one name or identifier?requirement
   Expected answer

   • mandatory field set
   • name-or-identifier rule
   • provisional record allowance
   • completion deadline
3. Which assertions require attached documentary evidence before they are treated as authoritative rather than provisional?evidence
   Expected answer

   • assertion types requiring evidence
   • acceptable evidence forms
   • evidence reference
   • verifier role
4. Which quality measures are tracked over the structure graph - orphan rate, stale-record age, unmandated units, over-establishment - and what are their thresholds?quality
   Expected answer

   • metric name and definition
   • current value
   • threshold
   • measurement instant (RFC 3339)

Artifacts

• Structure Validation ReportDated report of all rule evaluations over a structure version, listing failures with severity, affected units, owner and remediation state.

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

1. Which disclosure classes exist for structure data - public, counterparty, auditor, internal, restricted - and which fields belong to each?access
   Expected answer

   • disclosure class code
   • included field set
   • excluded field set
   • policy reference
2. Which structure fields can identify a natural person, directly or by combination, and what safeguard applies to each?privacy
   Expected answer

   • field name
   • identification risk (direct/indirect)
   • safeguard applied
   • legal basis reference
3. Which structural changes are embargoed until announcement, and what is the release trigger and the holder of the embargo?security
   Expected answer

   • embargoed act reference
   • embargo end condition
   • embargo owner
   • leak handling procedure
4. Where employee information and consultation duties apply before a reorganization takes effect, how is that dependency represented as a precondition on the act?requirement
   Expected answer

   • jurisdiction
   • consultation body reference
   • required notice period
   • completion evidence

Artifacts

• Structure Disclosure PackageA scoped, audience-specific release of structure information with suppression rules applied, listing exactly which fields were included, redacted and suppressed.

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

1. Which disposition authority or retention schedule governs each class of structure record, and who approved it?retention
   Expected answer

   • schedule identifier
   • record class
   • retention period
   • approving authority
2. Which structure records are permanent or archival - founding acts, lineage edges, mandate instruments - and which are transitory?classification
   Expected answer

   • record class
   • permanent/temporary flag
   • appraisal rationale
   • transfer destination
3. How is deletion of a unit record reconciled with the need to keep lineage edges resolvable for historical references?constraint
   Expected answer

   • tombstone retention rule
   • minimum retained fields
   • resolution behaviour after deletion
   • exception process
4. How does a legal hold suspend disposition for affected structure records, and how is the hold released and evidenced?exception
   Expected answer

   • hold identifier
   • scope of records
   • imposing authority
   • release evidence

Artifacts

• Structure Disposition ScheduleThe approved schedule binding each class of structure record to a retention period, disposition action and appraisal rationale, including permanent classes such as founding acts and lineage.

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

1. For each external target vocabulary, which local element maps to which term, in which direction, and with what cardinality mismatch?interoperability
   Expected answer

   • target vocabulary and version
   • source element
   • target term IRI or path
   • direction
   • cardinality note
2. Is a conformance claim being made against any target, and if so what evidence - a passing test suite or a validation profile - supports it?evidence
   Expected answer

   • claim scope
   • evidence artifact reference
   • test suite version
   • result
3. 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?constraint
   Expected answer

   • conflict description
   • affected elements
   • chosen resolution
   • consumer warning text
4. How are target vocabulary version changes detected, and what is the review cadence for the crosswalk?lifecycle
   Expected answer

   • monitored version endpoints
   • review cadence
   • last review instant (RFC 3339)
   • responsible role

Artifacts

• Crosswalk MapMachine-readable mapping table from this model's elements to W3C ORG, CPOV, FHIR, LDAP, SCIM, schema.org and ISO/IEC 6523 terms, with direction, fidelity notes and target versions.

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

1. For each defined projection, which elements are omitted, flattened or aggregated, and is that loss declared to consumers?quality
   Expected answer

   • projection name
   • omitted elements
   • flattened elements
   • loss declaration text
2. May any projection be re-imported as a source of truth, and what guard prevents an accidental round-trip overwrite?constraint
   Expected answer

   • re-import permitted boolean
   • guard mechanism
   • reconciliation-only pathway
   • violation handling
3. How stale may a projection be before consumers must be warned, and how is its generation instant and source version published with it?temporal
   Expected answer

   • maximum staleness
   • generation instant (RFC 3339)
   • source structureVersionId
   • staleness warning mechanism