Definition and Description of Organizational Individuals

Organizational individuals are the basic building blocks of an organization. It is necessary to define organizational individuals because no individual is absolutely isolated or indivisible; every individual is a larger entity composed of smaller individuals. Therefore, it is essential to provide a precise definition of organizational individuals.

For example, in the context of a company organization A, most observers would naturally consider the employees of company A as its organizational individuals. However, employees, as human individuals, are themselves biological organizations composed of cells. Thus, both the employees and their cells are subsets of organization A. This necessitates clear and explicit rules to determine who qualifies as the organizational individuals of company A. In another scenario, if the shareholders of company A are also employees of organization B, and the employees of organization B are defined as its organizational individuals, does this mean that organization B, which includes employees who are also shareholders of company A, is an organizational individual of company A?

To address these questions and ambiguities, I propose the following definition:

Under the Intelligenism framework, the organizational individuals of an organization (Intelligent Consortium) are defined as any individuals who have direct rights and responsibilities delineated by the organization and are directly constrained by its rules. Under this setting, it implies that individuals must have some form of uncompleted rights Conversion with the organization. Therefore, theoretically, as long as there is an uncompleted rights Conversion, an individual can be defined as an organizational individual. (The concept of rights Conversion will be discussed in detail below.)

For instance, if an employee of an Intelligent Consortium organization is directly constrained by the organization’s rules and has corresponding rights and responsibilities with the organization, they can be considered an organizational individual of that organization. However, the employee’s cells or organs are not directly constrained by the organization’s rules, nor do they have direct rights or responsibilities with the organization. In other words, the organization’s rules do not target the employee’s cells, and the rules and rights-responsibility relationships of the cells are accountable to the human body, not the organization. Therefore, the employee’s cells are not organizational individuals of the organization.

Based on this definition, if a movie theater operates as an Intelligent Consortium, a customer who enters the theater to watch a movie is also considered an organizational individual of the theater. Similarly, a consumer dining at a restaurant is an organizational individual of the restaurant organization. The theater’s service providers or outsourced employees, who also have corresponding rights and responsibilities and are constrained by the organization’s rules, are likewise organizational individuals.

When two cooperating entities (organization A and organization B) are both organizations and have mutual rights and responsibilities and are constrained by each other’s rules, they can be defined as mutual organizational individuals. From the perspective of modern corporate structures, this resembles a cross-shareholding relationship between organization A and organization B.