OCE.5:11 - SoTA-Echoing
OCE.5:11.1 - Current-Line Selection for Position Design
| Comparison position | Selected result for practice |
|---|---|
| Current question | Does this recurring expected contribution need a stable organization-dependent position, or can direct assignments, tasks, projects, or other arrangements carry it? |
| Selected current line | Establish or preserve a position only when vacancy, holder replacement, continuation, institutional force, and identity-bearing expected contribution or eligibility change the decision. Otherwise keep the contribution and direct assignments without inflating a durable position. |
| Serious alternative | Treat the job title, job description, chart box, role taxonomy, or fully deconstructed task/project market as the default organization design. |
| When the alternative is sufficient | A direct task, project, or assignment is sufficient when no stable institutional locus must persist across holders and no establishment or continuation claim is needed. |
| When the selected line changes action | If the organization must recognize vacancy, continuation, abolition, eligibility, or the same contribution locus across holder changes, recover the owning organization and establishment predicate, then define identity-bearing criteria. |
| Reopen | Reconsider when unlike institutional settings defeat the identity test, current work-design evidence changes the position versus direct-assignment choice, or the institutional locus must persist outside any one owning organization. |
OCE.5:11.2 - Source Contributions and Boundaries
An organization position can persist across holders, carry several expected contributions and remain vacant. Determine which position is in force from the organization’s rules for establishing and continuing it.
| Source line | Retained contribution | Use boundary |
|---|---|---|
Current FPF A.2.1, A.2.2, A.6.REL, A.10, A.13, and A.15.1 | Role-kind classification, assignment, capability, relation obtaining, evidence, performer, and Work remain separately governed. | FPF does not currently define the organization-dependent institutional position. |
| Rogiers and Collings, job-deconstruction paradoxes | Task- and project-based alternatives can add adaptability, while deconstructing jobs creates persistent human and organization paradoxes rather than a universal replacement for positions. | Make the local position-versus-direct-arrangement choice using the organization’s contribution and institutional conditions. |
| Grote et al., contribution-based engineering role modeling | Deriving contribution bundles from required process contributions and stakeholder evidence can expose gaps hidden by titles. | Test transfer beyond the bounded engineering cases; establish local positions and assignments under the owning organization’s rules. |
| Albert, organization-structure perspectives | Activity grouping, decision representation, and legal-entity perspectives can give different evidence about a position’s place. | Use the perspective as evidence, then recover the position’s establishment basis and any separate authority relation. |
| Fraccaroli, Zaniboni, and Truxillo, work-design review | Work characteristics and affected-person outcomes must inform position design and later holder use. | Combine work-design evidence with the organization’s establishment basis; assess a proposed holder’s current capability separately when a holder decision is current. |
Reopen when a representative institutional setting cannot distinguish position identity from assignment, a stronger source changes the position-versus-direct-arrangement choice or identity-bearing criteria, or the required institutional locus must persist outside any one owning organization.