You could do, using custom security.
However, as Clive says, its probably not the way to go. It would be a nightmare to implement, and suspect the custom security invocation would drag the system to its knees.

"If we did it this way what value does the organization hierarcy have?"

Reporting. If it's no good for that either, then it does look like you need to review the decision made on the organisation definitions.

If you were going to secure by the cost code, I imagine you'd only need to do it based on 2 - 3 segments? In which case the performance hit might not be too bad. At BAA (other airports are available) we used to set up Absence Administrators using some quite complex custom security rules (Find the User's Assignment Organisation, find that in the Org Hierarchy and allow those to be seen for example) and found that performance was acceptable and a way of not having to have hundreds of different security profiles littering the system!

If your Security List Maintenance is cripplingly slow, it is worth deleting old and unused security profiles as these are still being processed - takes some effort to detach them from old responsibilities, but we did that at BAA and it was well worth the effort.

Marina

Thanks for this it is useful.

Just picking up on this again as it continues to cause me confusion. If I was to use the diagrammer to change the hierarchy would the changes made then be directly reflected onto the positions attached to assignments?

Best wishes

Gareth

ohhh.... another Q.

How are you guys coping with large scale restructures and making changes in a timely fashion to represent the needs of business reporting.

Hi Gareth,

Yes, if you make the change in the diagrammer it updates the parent organisation that can be viewed on the organisation form.

Take care

Marina