# Realm Intelligence Contract — The Nature of Work

**Status:** Gate 2A working definition; not accepted or production-ready  
**Canonical basis:** Version 1.3.3  
**Owner structure:** Organization containing organizational-development, transformation, and leadership-development Programs/Projects  
**Primary unresolved items:** C-006, C-010, C-011, C-012, C-014

## 1. Evidence boundary

### Inherited

- A person's relationship with Ki may be personalized but remains governed by their Presence, Realm, privacy, permissions, and available Wisdom.
- Roles do not imply access to private or personal information.
- Wizards and Mages are not superusers.
- Ki may reflect collective Wisdom only within governing permissions and may not invent consensus or become a surveillance channel.

### Owner direction

- The Nature of Work is an Organization with a major OD/transformation Program or Project and leadership development.
- Intelligence and coaching should be embedded while work happens, not presented as a separate project-management interface.
- Each person develops a deep relationship with Ki; useful collective Wisdom must not create a “think pipe,” Big Brother system, or corporate surveillance.
- OD professionals' resources and participant contributions at different levels should inform the work.

### Missing evidence

No Organization charter, Program brief, OD corpus, participant agreement, privacy policy, employment context, sponsor authority, or governance record is supplied. The contract therefore specifies required behavior and boundaries but cannot assert that the Realm is currently authorized or ready (C-010).

## 2. Proposed Realm structure

```text
The Nature of Work — Organization Realm [owner direction]
├── Transformation Program Realm [Program is Other Realm Type]
│   ├── Leadership Development Project Realms
│   ├── Team / Community Realms
│   ├── Facilitated cohort Realms
│   └── Decision or change Projects
├── OD Practice / Source Realm [proposed]
└── Personal Member and Relationship Realms referenced, never absorbed
    ├── member–Ki private context
    ├── coach–participant Relationship
    └── team Relationships
```

The Organization may learn from explicitly contributed material; it does not own members' private Ki conversations or personal reflections.

## 3. Complete Realm contract

| Dimension | Definition | Evidence or proposal |
|---|---|---|
| Name and purpose | **The Nature of Work** helps people and Organizations change how work is understood and practiced through contextual coaching, intentional reflection, collective learning, leadership development, and governed transformation. | Owner direction |
| Audience | Participants, team members, leaders, OD practitioners, facilitators, coaches, Program sponsors, worker representatives where applicable, and Organization governors. Excludes covert observers and anyone without a legitimate Program Role. | WP |
| Promised outcomes | Better in-the-moment judgment; clearer commitments; learning across work; psychologically safer contribution; visible tensions without exposing people; leadership growth; decisions informed by professional and local Wisdom. | Owner direction + WP |
| Non-goals | Project/task tracking as the primary experience; productivity scoring; surveillance; sentiment mining; performance evaluation; private-message discovery; automated employment decisions; corporate ownership of personal Ki context; manufactured consensus. | Owner direction; C-006 |
| Wisdom | OD research and professional practice; Organization policies and strategy; Program purpose; team agreements; decision/history Records; explicitly contributed participant insight; private personal context available only to that member's Ki. Sources remain differentiated. | Owner direction + WP |
| Stance | Developmental, dignifying, curious, pluralistic, non-coercive, context-aware, explicit about power, attentive to minority views, and willing to stop when consent or authority is unclear. | WP |
| Abilities | Contextual coaching; prepare reflective questions; compare current work with accepted practice; facilitate contribution; synthesize consented insight; identify unresolved tensions; draft interventions/Artifacts; support decision and follow-through; preserve learning Records. | WP |
| Automations | Watch agreed commitments and source freshness; prepare private prompts; detect when a requested synthesis lacks eligible contributions; draft updates; remind legitimate Role holders. No covert capture, monitoring, ranking, evaluation, or sharing. | WP |
| Connections | Approved document repositories, policy/strategy sources, calendars/communications when a specific coordination intent requires them, learning systems, survey or facilitation tools, and external OD sources. HRIS/performance data is disconnected by default and requires separate deliberate policy. | WP |
| Actors | Ki; OD Coach Worker; Practice Curator; Facilitation Actor; Collective Synthesis Worker; Consent/Privacy Sentinel; Decision/Action Operator. All Sources of authority are explicit. | WP |
| Elements | Reflection, practice Source, question, tension, contribution proposal, team agreement, decision, intervention proposal, synthesis Artifact, commitment, meeting or workshop instrument, Action, consent, correction, and Record. | WP |
| Roles and authority | Participant controls personal reflection and may contribute; facilitator governs a named process but not private context; team steward accepts team-level Artifacts; OD practitioner curates professional sources; Program sponsor authorizes Program resources/Actions but not private access; Organization governor adopts Organization-wide policies; Privacy Sentinel constrains. | WP |
| Privacy and visibility | Personal Ki context stays Personal/Private; coach Relationship material follows the Relationship agreement; small-group work stays in that Realm; team contributions require chosen scope; Program/Organization synthesis uses only eligible material and never exposes non-permitted attribution. Existence may be visible without content. | T133 + WP |
| Policies and gates | Private coaching/drafting may be Autonomous; sending a prepared contribution is Confirmed; sharing identifiable sensitive material or changing contribution scope is Deliberate; adopting Program/Organization policy or executing consequential change is Governed; accessing private Ki conversations or person-level covert scoring is Prohibited. | T133 + OD |
| Default state | One active Program/Project Realm, one live work Focus, one dominant conversation with Ki, and a small number of relevant practice Sources or contributions. The system begins from the work underway, not a task board or culture dashboard. | AD-001–003 + OD |
| Attention states | Consent or scope conflict; requested synthesis could identify a person; sponsor asks beyond authority; minority view is being flattened; an adopted commitment is at risk; a relevant policy/source changed; participant reports harm; Action could affect employment or rights; facilitator authority expires. | WP |
| Records | Contribution/withdrawal receipt; eligible-source manifest; synthesis and dissent record; facilitation decision; intervention proposal; governance Decision; commitment and follow-through; Action result; correction/appeal. Object class remains open under C-012. | WP |
| Recovery | Halt invalid synthesis; remove ineligible contributions; restore prior version; preserve dissent; notify affected participants; withdraw future use; route coercion or harm to legitimate humans/policy; maintain audit without revealing protected content; appeal governance decisions. | WP |
| Compute | Quiet by default. Reveal when large source synthesis, multi-cohort analysis, or long-running coaching support consumes a Realm budget. Low Compute pauses or narrows work; it never lowers privacy, consent, or anti-reidentification safeguards. | T133 + WP |
| Treasury | Program budget, practitioner compensation, or learning Offerings may use an Organization Treasury. Treasury authority does not buy access to private participant material or alter contribution consent. | T133 + WP |

## 4. Actors and authority

| Actor | Represents | Source of authority | May | Must not |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ki | Current Presence | Member instruction plus current Realm/Role | Coach privately, attach sources, help formulate contribution, explain boundaries | Share private context, score the person, speak for the Organization |
| OD Coach Worker | Participant or named Program | Explicit coaching mandate | Offer source-grounded prompts and reflection | Diagnose, evaluate employment performance, disclose coaching content |
| Practice Curator | OD Practice Realm / Organization | Editorial Role over approved sources | Maintain professional corpus, freshness, and competing schools | Convert a preferred method into hidden policy |
| Facilitation Actor | Named session/group | Facilitator delegation and participant agreement | Structure dialogue, time, questions, visible commitments | Extend its mandate into private reflection or later groups |
| Collective Synthesis Worker | Team/Program/Organization | Specific synthesis request plus eligible contribution set | Summarize themes, tensions, dissent, gaps | Infer from private conversations, reidentify, invent consensus |
| Consent/Privacy Sentinel | Participants and Realm policy | Contribution agreements and privacy policy | Block, narrow, log, request renewed consent | Grant consent or reveal protected material |
| Decision/Action Operator | Program/Organization | Decision, Role, policy, and Gate | Execute approved intervention or communication | Turn a draft insight into an Organization Action |

## 5. Collective learning architecture

### Four separate channels

1. **Private reflection** — a person's Ki relationship; never an organizational source.
2. **Relationship reflection** — coach/mentor/facilitator material under a specific agreement.
3. **Deliberate contribution** — a separately previewed Contribution Envelope offered to team, Program, or Organization.
4. **Adopted collective Wisdom** — a governed synthesis or policy with a visible eligible-source manifest and dissent.

Information never moves automatically from one channel to the next.

### Collective Reflection requirements

Before Ki says “the team thinks” or “the Organization is learning,” it must disclose:

- which scope is represented;
- who was eligible to contribute;
- how many contributions are eligible without revealing identities improperly;
- whether participation was optional;
- what was excluded and why;
- whether attribution is named, cloaked, group-level, or confidential;
- dissenting and minority positions;
- date and expiry; and
- who accepted the synthesis.

If the sample or consent is insufficient, Ki says so and does not infer consensus.

## 6. Contribution pathways

| Contribution | Contributor / Source | Receiving scope | Visibility | Acceptance authority | Canonical effect | Retention / correction / Record |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Private reflection | Member in personal Ki context | Personal only | Personal + Private | Member | None outside personal context | Member retention/withdrawal; no Organization receipt |
| Shareable insight draft | Member with Ki | Proposed team/Program/Organization | Visible to member until sent | Member confirms; receiving steward accepts | Candidate | Separate Artifact, envelope, submission/withdrawal Record |
| Facilitated small-group contribution | Participants under session agreement | Named cohort/team Realm | Agreement-defined | Facilitator for process; team steward for persistent Wisdom | Candidate or accepted local Wisdom | Session terms, source/attribution, correction and expiry |
| OD professional Source | Practitioner, Institution, publication | OD Practice/Program | Licensed/authorized | Practice Curator | Reference; not hidden policy | Citation, version, school/perspective, supersession |
| Team synthesis | Collective Synthesis Worker from eligible contributions | Team Realm | Team-defined | Team steward / agreed process | Accepted team Wisdom | Eligible-source manifest, dissent, date, review cycle |
| Program synthesis | Program authority from eligible team and direct contributions | Program Realm | Program-defined | Program governance | Accepted Program Wisdom | Scope boundary, anti-reidentification review, correction/appeal |
| Organization policy | Authorized Proposal/Decision | Organization | Policy-defined | Organization governance | Canonical Organization policy | Decision, effective date, affected Realms, appeal/revision |

## 7. Anti-surveillance tests

A proposed feature, synthesis, or Action fails if any answer is “yes”:

1. Could a manager discover that a person discussed a topic privately with Ki?
2. Could an aggregate reasonably identify a person or small group?
3. Is participation technically optional but practically coerced by power or employment consequence?
4. Does the system score mood, loyalty, engagement, risk, performance, or “culture fit” at person level?
5. Does a sponsor obtain broader access because they fund the Program?
6. Are minority views hidden to make the synthesis feel clear?
7. Can material be reused for evaluation, discipline, promotion, or termination beyond its stated purpose?
8. Does withdrawal fail to constrain future use as promised?

If risk remains, the Realm narrows the scope, increases group size, removes attributes, changes attribution, seeks new consent, uses a human facilitator, or prohibits the synthesis.

## 8. Default experience and Realm Lens

### Calm default

The current Focus is a real moment such as “The leadership team keeps revisiting the same decision.” Ki may privately ask what the person notices, bring forward one relevant practice Source, and offer to prepare either a private reflection or a separately shareable question. No team grid, performance chart, or project board appears.

### Realm Lens proposal

On request, the Lens may show:

- Organization/Program purpose and boundaries;
- active learning agreements and contribution scopes;
- approved OD source corpus and competing perspectives;
- current Actors and authority;
- eligible source sets for each synthesis;
- privacy/consent and anti-reidentification status;
- adopted decisions, commitments, corrections, and appeals; and
- Automations/Connections only as relevant.

The Lens never exposes private member conversations or invites leaders to browse individuals.

## 9. Prioritized user stories

### P0 — Receive contextual coaching during work

As a participant or leader, I want Ki to help me think through a live transformation moment using relevant practice and local context without reporting my reflection to the Organization.

Acceptance:

- private status is explicit;
- source and local context are distinguishable;
- Ki does not imply authority or consensus it lacks;
- sharing requires a separate previewed contribution.

### P0 — Contribute at an intentional scope

As a participant, I want to decide whether an insight belongs only to me, a small group, my team, the Program, or the Organization.

Acceptance:

- scope, attribution, use, retention, and withdrawal are visible before sending;
- the receiving authority is named;
- later synthesis does not broaden scope silently.

### P0 — Learn collectively without exposing people

As a team or Program, we want Ki to show themes, tensions, and possible next moves from eligible contributions without inventing consensus or revealing private speech.

Acceptance:

- eligible source set and exclusions are stated;
- dissent and uncertainty remain visible;
- reidentification risk is checked;
- adoption requires the proper authority and creates a Record.

### P1 — Apply professional OD Wisdom transparently

As an OD practitioner, I want to see which practices inform Ki and challenge them when the context calls for another school or interpretation.

Acceptance:

- professional Sources and perspectives are visible on inspection;
- source changes do not silently rewrite accepted policy;
- practitioner correction and Program acceptance are separate.

### P1 — Recover from an unsafe synthesis

As a participant, I want to contest a synthesis that erases my view or risks identifying me.

Acceptance:

- affected synthesis is constrained immediately;
- appeal can be private;
- correction preserves the prior version and reason;
- no retaliation or employment Action can originate from the disputed material within this model.

## 10. Readiness assessment

**Current level:** Seed. The behavioral model is coherent, but no actual Organization authority, participant agreement, OD corpus, facilitator model, consent policy, or employment-law review is supplied.

The Realm is ready for fictional Gate 2B behavior testing only. The test must prove the privacy separation among private reflection, deliberate contribution, collective synthesis, and governed Organization action; it must not simulate person-level analytics.
