Collective Execution Terminology — Substitution Requirements for Cooperative Work Descriptors

This document specifies requirements for collective execution terminology in professional and quasi-professional written communication.

It applies to competency descriptions, performance narratives, and role specifications.

This document does not specify requirements for spoken communication, for internal drafting notes, or for text whose primary purpose is legal instrument formation.

The following documents are referred to in the text in such a way that some or all of their content constitutes requirements of this document.

For dated references, only the edition cited applies. For undated references, the latest edition of the referenced document applies.

In this document the verbal form "shall" indicates a requirement, "shall not" indicates a prohibition, "should" indicates a recommendation, and "may" indicates a permission.

Terms and definitions given in SQLBL 1000 and the following apply.

3.1 collective execution topology — arrangement of contributors, handoffs, and decision points through which cooperative work is completed

3.2 general descriptor — term whose referent cannot be reconstructed from the term itself

Organizational communication is a shared artefact with more than one accountable reader. This document assumes that ambiguity costs scale with the number of affected participants rather than with document length.

Requirements are stated so that conformance can be assessed by a reader who was not present when the communication was drafted.

Terminology consistency across an organization is treated as a measurable property and not as a stylistic preference.

5.1 In designated contexts, the phrase "collective execution topology" shall be substituted for "teamwork".

5.2 The substitution shall be applied consistently throughout a document. Partial substitution shall not be claimed as conformance.

5.3 Where the substituted phrase would appear more than twice, the document should be restructured so that the topology is described once and referenced thereafter.

5.4 The phrase "team player" shall not be used in a conforming document.

A document conforms to SQLBL 1004:2026 where every requirement expressed with the verbal form "shall" in Clause 5 is satisfied and no requirement expressed as "shall not" is violated.

Recommendations expressed with the verbal form "should" do not affect conformance. Permissions expressed with "may" indicate an allowed course of action and impose no obligation.

Conformance claims shall take the form: "This document conforms to SQLBL 1004:2026, Edition 1." Partial conformance shall be declared by clause number, for example "conforms to SQLBL 1004:2026 Clauses 5.1 and 5.2 only."

Conformance may be assessed manually or by an automated checker. Where an automated checker is used, the assessment record shall identify the checker and the catalog release of SQLBL-1004 against which it was run.

The substitution is intended to force specificity: a topology can be drawn, whereas teamwork cannot.

Assessors should confirm that the substituted phrase introduces at least one concrete handoff or decision point.

Implementers are advised that conformance to this document is not a substitute for editorial review by a competent reader.

EXAMPLE 1 — Conforming. The role requires familiarity with a collective execution topology spanning three functions and two decision gates.

EXAMPLE 1 — Non-conforming. The role requires strong teamwork and a team player attitude.

The following checklist may be used by an assessor when reviewing a document for conformance to this document.