TAOM knows not only what is affected
But who has to act.
Process step
Release batch
ACT-17
Responsible
QA Specialist
ORG-044
Person
Anna Keller
accountable
Approval
Global Process Owner
Decision by a human
Escalation
Quality Lead
when nobody is there
A position may be vacant. A responsibility may not. If a position stays vacant, TAOM says so explicitly and escalates – instead of quietly sending the question to whoever happens to open the editor next.
Who owns which field
As soon as a model writes to Confluence and Jira, one question decides between success and frustration: who may change what without it disappearing on the next run?
Blue backgroundComes from the model. Overwritten on every update – change it in the process diagram.
WhiteBelongs to you. What you maintain here flows back into the model and is not overwritten.
The same colour rule appears on every generated Confluence page. It is not decoration but a promise: If you cannot see which field is yours, you either maintain nothing or the wrong thing.
The views at a glance
| View | For what | Who works there |
|---|---|---|
| Process Studio | Modelling, maintaining attributes, drawing the organisation | Process owners |
| Confluence | Reading, elaborating, approving – with the diagram on the page | Business, development |
| Jira | Delivery, status, effort, transport | Development, project management |
| Org chart | Who decides, who is consulted, where it escalates | Project management, leadership |
| AI agents | Proposing, elaborating, checking – in the same context | on behalf of the accountable person |
For AI agents too
An agent needs the same question answered as a human: what is it responsible for, where does its authority end, who approves, and where does it go when it is unsure.
Because agents hang in the same organisation model, the same chain applies to them – with an accountable person at the end, not a system account.