Before you delete an organization, you must first remove or transfer any locations and users within it. Deleting an organization can't be undone. Google Help. Send feedback on Help Center Community Announcements. Google My Business Contact us. Sign in with an email address on your agency's domain. Confirm that this is your agency's primary Google My Business account. Enter more information about your agency and additional owners. Follow the prompts to create your organization.
About organization accounts An organization account is a type of Google My Business account designed for third parties who are responsible for managing locations on behalf of business owners. Add owners and members Only the owner of an organization can add owners and members to it. To add an owner or member to your organization: Sign in to Google My Business. For example, org:FormalOrganization s are free to contain other org:FormalOrganization s.
In many organizations there is a hierarchy of unit structures. For example we might see a containment hierarchy like:. Such hierarchies are specific to the particular organization, or class of organization being modelled. Profiles of ORG may include sub-classes of org:Organization and org:OrganizationalUnit to represent such structures and specialize or restrict the use of org:hasSubOrganization to match the desired hierarchy. In a number of circumstances we wish to classify organizations. There are many approaches that could be taken for this. It can be based on the legal structure under which the organization operates.
For example in UK legislation there are defined notions of Partnership, Limited Company etc that can be used as a basis for classification.
Alternatively organizations can be classified by the service they provide e. ORG is neutral with respect to such choices. It is anticipated that profiles will either introduce sub-classes of org:Organization or define a classification scheme for organizations. Which of these mechanisms to use depends on the situation.
- YGOrganization | Ending Misinformation.
- Follow The Organization of Scientific Area Committees for Forensic Science at NIST.
- A Flash In Time (Time Series Book 2).
- The Organization Ontology.
- Wilderness Peril (Mills & Boon Love Inspired Suspense).
- Works of Henrietta Elizabeth Marshall.
- Use 'organization' in a Sentence?
If the classification is not intrinsic to the organization but simply some way to group organizations, for example as part of a directory, then org:classification should be used. If the classification is a reflection of the intrinsic nature of the organization and affects other properties then the sub-class approach should be used. For example, only charities have charity numbers so it would be better to represent a charity as a sub-class of org:FormalOrganization rather than via a taxonomic labelling.
Leading the Organization
ORG provides a number of ways to represent the relationship between people and organizations, together with the internal reporting structure of an organization. Experience with early versions of the ontology demonstrated that there is no "one size that fits all". In some cases a very simple direct representation is preferred for ease of consumption.
In other cases a more complex representation is needed to capture the nuances of the situation. An ORG profile may specify that a particular subset of these mechanisms be used.
This simplest representation provided by ORG is to directly state that some individual represented as a foaf:Agent is org:memberOf an organization. To represent specific roles that the person plays, ORG profiles may define sub-properties of org:memberOf. In particular, the notion of a leader or head of a organization is so common that ORG provides a built in property specialization of org:memberOf , namely org:headOf for this purpose.
However, in general it is advantageous to have an explicit representation of the organizational role that the person fulfils e. This is supported by the org:Role class. The situation of an Agent fulfilling that role within an organization is then expressed through instances of the org:Membership n-ary relationship. This also makes it possible to annotate the relationship with qualifying information such as duration, salary, reference to the employment contract and so forth. Since this representation can be a little less convenient to query and explore via linked data browsing tools the core allows both explicit roles and simple direct relations to be used simultaneously.
The relationship between the Role resource and the corresponding property can be indicated through the org:roleProperty annotation. Thus we might extend the above example with:. The semantics of org:roleProperty can be expressed using a second closure rule:. Tool chains may generate org:Membership instances and then apply this closure rule to add any corresponding short-cut specializations of org:memberOf. The third representation that is provided by ORG is that of a org:Post which represents some position in the organization that may or may not be currently filled.
Posts enable reporting structures and organization charts to be represented independently of the individuals holding those posts. Posts can report to other Posts. So a org:Post can exist without someone holding that post. In contrast, a org:Membership represents the relationship between a particular individual Agent and the organization and does not exist unless there is an Agent to partake of the relationship. While commonly a Post would be held by a single person there are situations in government organizations where a Post may itself be, or be treated as, an Organization.
There are no disjointness constraints precluding an application of ORG from treating an entity as both a org:Post and an org:Organization simultaneously, if that is an appropriate modelling of the situation.
In many situations only one of Post or Membership is needed, and ORG profiles may specify that use of one of the two is preferred. In cases where the structure of the organization is to be given, independently of the people within that structure, then org:Post is the appropriate representation to choose. In cases where the aim is to record the people who make up the organization and those memberships are likely to be annotated e. We can state a formal relationship between these representations in the form of two entailment rules:.
ORG provides org:Site to represent locations at which organizations exist. The relations org:siteOf and org:hasSite establish links between a org:Site and an organization. We distinguish a primary site org:hasPrimarySite to indicate the default means by which an organization can be contacted, and a registered site org:hasRegisteredSite to indicate a legally registered site for the organization.
The ontology provides org:siteAddress to define the address of a site using a vocabulary such as the vCard [ vcard-rdf ] vocabulary. Any aspect of organizational structure is subject to change over time.
Managing the Organization: From Organizational Design to Execution
For the most part this should be handled by an external mechanism such as named graphs. When Organizations change substantially not simply a change of personnel or internal structure , for example a merger to create a new organization, then the new Organization will typically be denoted by a new URI.
In that case we need some vocabulary to describe that change over time and the relationship between the original and resulting resources. For example to indicate that an organization now called "Department for Education" was formed as a result of rebranding and restructuring and organization called "Department for Children Schools and Family" we might state:. An application can use terms from the PROV-O vocabulary to further describe the change event, for example the period of time over which it occurred.
It is sometimes convenient to be able to directly link from an organization to a previous organization from which it descended. This is supported by using the prov:wasDerivedFrom relationship. ORG declares the property chain axiom:. Thus in our previous example, given that org:resultedFrom and org:resultingOrganization are inverse of each other, we can deduce:.
We believe that the PROV-O terms used here are equivalent to the corresponding OPMV terms previously used and that this change does not affect the semantics of the ontology. Use of inverses: designers differ on whether providing pairs of inverse relationships between concepts is good practice compared to declaring each relationship in just one direction. In this design we provide inverses for most relations omitting attribute-like relations.
This makes it easier to query the data in linked data settings where a non-symmetric closed bounded description is often the default description of each resource. This does incur a cost in terms of maintenance of those relationships. Particular applications of the ontology may adopt a profile in which only certain directions are asserted in the data and leave it up to clients to apply any inverseOf reasoning they require.
Naming: some designers prefer to name properties by nouns which describe the object of the property, others prefer to treat property names as names of the link and use a pattern to indicate the direction of the link. Here we adopt the latter approach for those properties which are relational and especially when the direction is ambiguous. As well as sections marked as non-normative, all authoring guidelines, diagrams, examples, and notes in this specification are non-normative. Everything else in this specification is normative. The person running off with the suitcase with the money is pursued by some of the gang through the construction site for the unfinished Montgomery Street Station.
Tibbs after that goes to the house of the wife of the security guard. When Tibbs' colleague arrives, Tibbs confronts the wife as the runner of the gang, shows heroin in a package she has just brought home and tells her she can choose between prison or getting killed by the mob like her husband. She gives in and identifies the two chiefs of the organization. The chiefs are arrested by a large group of police officers, including Tibbs.
When they are taken to the police car, a mob hit man takes them out, before they can talk. Tibbs now sees that he won a battle, but lost the war.
The Organization (film) - Wikipedia
The film received largely poor reviews from critics, with Roger Ebert giving it a two-star review and stating that "the plot is not exactly believable",  while A. Weiler in The New York Times wrote " The Organization can be rough on super-city sleuths as well as movie-goers who've been through much the same melodramatics before".
- Board of Directors.
- Thoughts and Memories?
- Quelles alternatives pour lAfrique ? (Sociétés Africaines & Diaspora) (French Edition)?
- Course Orientation.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. September 8,
Related THE ORGANIZATION
Copyright 2019 - All Right Reserved