LensReading which lens this session carries.

End-to-end outcomes · contested ownership

The boundary dispute register

Where a chain waits at a handoff, somebody owns that wait.

2/9
decided
Each entry names how many assembled chains it affects, and those sets overlap — a single chain can sit inside three arguments at once. The counts below are therefore never added together, and there is deliberately no total population on this page. The widest single entry touches 300 chains. The delay and the cost on each entry were recorded independently, so 6 entries carry a measured wait and 5 carry a dollar figure — and they are not the same entries. An entry showing neither is not one that costs nothing; it is one nobody has measured, and it will lose every prioritization argument to an entry that has a number beside it.

The register by status

An exhaustive split of all 9 entries into 4 states

Open3
Both positions are written down but nobody has taken the decision yet.
Scheduled3
A hearing date is set with a named arbiter, and the delay accrues until then.
Decided2
An arbiter has ruled and the ruling is recorded against the entry.
Escalated1
The named arbiter could not settle it at their level and it now sits above them.

Both sides, in their own words

9 contested boundaries

Nothing below is summarized into a neutral house position.

Who owns the wait between the payables platform and treasury

BD-0001 · Invoice to payment · Finance → AI GBS

Scheduled
Invoices approved for payment sit until the next scheduled run.
Procurement says
The invoice is approved and matched.
Finance says
Payment runs are scheduled to protect liquidity.
Delay in dispute
31.4 h
$214k a week at the modeled holding rate
Chains affected
296
Overlaps other entries; never added to them
Arbiter
Anneke de Vries
Group treasurer
Decision due
Sep 11, 2026
Raised Jun 24, 2026
No ruling has been recorded. Until Anneke de Vries decides, 31.4 h of delay sits on neither function’s scorecard and the 296 chains keep crossing the boundary anyway.

Delivery raised against invoice issued

BD-0002 · Order to cash · not anchored to a mapped handoff

Open
Distribution reports on the day the goods leave.
Supply chain says
Goods left on time against the promised date.
Finance says
Billing cannot issue until proof of delivery returns.
Delay in dispute
18.9 h
$169k a week at the modeled holding rate
Chains affected
141
Overlaps other entries; never added to them
Arbiter
Beatriz Salgado
Head of order to cash
Decision due
Aug 28, 2026
Raised Jul 2, 2026
No ruling has been recorded. Until Beatriz Salgado decides, 18.9 h of delay sits on neither function’s scorecard and the 141 chains keep crossing the boundary anyway.

The mapped flow and the measured chain disagree about the route

BD-0003 · Hire to productive · HR → IT

Escalated
The mapped flow routes a hire from people services through the service desk to administration and then finance.
Human resources says
The mapped flow was signed off two planning cycles ago and administration was removed from onboarding in the last reorganization.
Administration says
Workspace and equipment are still provisioned by administration.
Delay in dispute
not measured
Neither a delay nor a dollar figure has been recorded
Chains affected
190
Overlaps other entries; never added to them
Arbiter
Katarzyna Nowak
Head of process architecture
Decision due
Aug 25, 2026
Raised May 19, 2026
No ruling has been recorded. Until Katarzyna Nowak decides, no delay has been measured against this entry, so nothing lands on either scorecard and the 190 chains keep crossing the boundary anyway.

Whether an unevidenced deduction is a marketing cost or a revenue loss

BD-0004 · Deduction to settlement · not anchored to a mapped handoff

Decided
When a retailer deducts against a promotion nobody can evidence, the money is written off.
Marketing says
The deduction reflects activity the retailer genuinely ran.
Finance says
A payment with no supporting agreement is not investment.
Delay in dispute
not measured
$1.3m a week is claimed even though no wait has been timed
Chains affected
166
Overlaps other entries; never added to them
Arbiter
Rafael Duarte
Head of trade and revenue control
Decided
Jul 29, 2026
Raised Apr 8, 2026
Ruling — for Finance
Split at the evidence line.

The certification stage sits outside the close

BD-0005 · Close to report · not anchored to a mapped handoff

Scheduled
Four of the five close stages are owned by finance.
Finance says
The close is not finished until the number is certified.
Information technology says
Certification is a control on the reporting layer, not a close task.
Delay in dispute
12.5 h
No dollar figure has been put against this delay
Chains affected
165
Overlaps other entries; never added to them
Arbiter
Nils Andersen
Group financial controller
Decision due
Sep 30, 2026
Raised Jul 15, 2026
No ruling has been recorded. Until Nils Andersen decides, 12.5 h of delay sits on neither function’s scorecard and the 165 chains keep crossing the boundary anyway.

A receipt that never posts

BD-0006 · Requisition to receipt · Procurement → Supply Chain

Open
Requisitions close when the order is placed.
Procurement says
The order is complete and correct.
Supply chain says
Sites receipt what they are told to expect.
Delay in dispute
26.8 h
$96k a week at the modeled holding rate
Chains affected
118
Overlaps other entries; never added to them
Arbiter
Diego Fuentes
Head of source to pay
Decision due
Aug 21, 2026
Raised Jun 11, 2026
No ruling has been recorded. Until Diego Fuentes decides, 26.8 h of delay sits on neither function’s scorecard and the 118 chains keep crossing the boundary anyway.

Artwork approval sits between two functions and belongs to neither

BD-0007 · Concept to shelf · not anchored to a mapped handoff

Scheduled
Development specifies the pack.
Research and development says
The launch date is a development commitment.
Marketing says
Artwork carries brand and regulatory risk in every market it ships to.
Delay in dispute
41.2 h
No dollar figure has been put against this delay
Chains affected
155
Overlaps other entries; never added to them
Arbiter
Yasmin Chaudhry
Head of innovation delivery
Decision due
Oct 15, 2026
Raised Jun 30, 2026
No ruling has been recorded. Until Yasmin Chaudhry decides, 41.2 h of delay sits on neither function’s scorecard and the 155 chains keep crossing the boundary anyway.

Duplicate entry between the payables platform and the bank gateway

BD-0008 · Invoice to payment · not anchored to a mapped handoff

Decided
Payment instructions are keyed once in treasury and again in the bank gateway because no reference survives between them.
Finance says
The gateway requires its own format.
Information technology says
An interface has been specified twice and deprioritized twice by the same finance planning process that now reports the cost of not having it.
Delay in dispute
not measured
$187k a week is claimed even though no wait has been timed
Chains affected
300
Overlaps other entries; never added to them
Arbiter
Marcus Adeyemi
Chief information officer
Decided
Jun 26, 2026
Raised Mar 17, 2026
Ruling — split between both functions
The interface is funded and dated.

Whether an agent failure is an incident or a model problem

BD-0009 · Query to resolution · not anchored to a mapped handoff

Open
A ticket raised because an agent did the wrong thing is triaged by service operations and diagnosed by the agent platform.
Service operations says
The user experienced a failure of a service.
Agent platform says
A model behaving inside its own tolerance is not a fault.
Delay in dispute
8.4 h
No dollar figure has been put against this delay
Chains affected
210
Overlaps other entries; never added to them
Arbiter
Wei Lin Tan
Head of service operations
Decision due
Sep 4, 2026
Raised Jul 21, 2026
No ruling has been recorded. Until Wei Lin Tan decides, 8.4 h of delay sits on neither function’s scorecard and the 210 chains keep crossing the boundary anyway.

Why the register exists at all

Read before treating any figure here as a total

A function-level report can only ever attribute a wait to the function that was holding the work. A chain that stops between two functions therefore lands nowhere: neither scorecard degrades, and the outcome absorbs it. The register is the mechanism for forcing that hour onto somebody, and its own numbers say the mechanism is barely used — 2 of 9 entries carry a ruling.

The largest priced claim is Whether an unevidenced deduction is a marketing cost or a revenue loss at $1.3m a week between Marketing and Finance. Costs are derived from the modeled holding rate applied to a measured delay, so the delay is an observation and the dollars are an assumption. The boundaries themselves are priced in full on the handoff economics page, and the chains that cross them are assembled on the outcomes page.

Actions

What is waiting on a person

Every row in this register is a delay that two functions both believe belongs to the other.

7

Rule on a boundary dispute

3 open, 3 scheduled and 1 escalated.

6

Map a dispute onto a named handoff

The argument is not anchored to a boundary in the cross-flow map, so fixing the flow would not obviously fix the dispute.

4

Put a number on a dispute nobody has priced

The disagreement is real but no dollar figure has been attached to it, so it will always lose a prioritization argument to one that carries a number.

3

Freeze a handoff while its ownership is contested

Work keeps crossing this boundary at the same rate while the two functions argue about who owns the wait it creates.

1

Take an escalated dispute to the executive

The named arbiter could not settle it at their level, so it is waiting above them while the delay continues to accrue.

Operations

What this desk is allowed to start

A surface that only reports is not operable.

Trigger and bound

This page can record where two functions disagree about who owns a delay, hold both positions in their own words, name an arbiter and a decision date, and price what the disagreement is costing where the delay was measured.

Live observability

What the record shows right now

The register by status, an exhaustive partition of all 9 disputes into 4 states …

Current distribution

9 disputes

Open333%
Scheduled333%
Decided222%
Escalated111%

Is policy and strategy coming to fruition

Whether the written intent is holding here

2 of 9 boundary disputes have been decided

Not holding on the record

The design intent is that no delay is ownerless: every hour a chain spends waiting should land on somebody’s scorecard, and where two functions disagree an arbiter settles it on a date.