Prove that every rule reached the people it governs.
Internal acts published to the right people, confirmed one by one, against the exact version each person saw. When a supervisor asks who was bound by what and when, the answer is a query.
What it does
The problem
Sound familiar?An internal act goes out as an email attachment. Some people open it, some do not. A month later it is amended, and now two versions are in circulation. Then the supervisor asks a simple question: which employees were bound by which version of this rule on this date, and when did each of them confirm it?
Answering that means reconstructing it across mailboxes and shared folders, by hand, while the deadline runs.
The answer is one screen
Coverage is not a report somebody assembles at the end. It is the state of the act, at any moment, per unit and per person.
Coverage of one act
Every confirmation carries the version and the moment. Every reminder that went out is in the record too.
What the module does
Publication with an audience
Recipient groups defined by role, by organizational unit or by name. The act goes to the people it governs, not to everyone with an inbox.
Confirmation per person, per version
An explicit acknowledgement, stamped with the version and the moment. Not a read receipt. The superseded version stays readable and marked as superseded.
Approval before it goes out
The chain is a model: named roles, parallel steps, conditional branches. Changing it is a change to the model, not a release.
Deadlines that chase themselves
Reminders and escalation for whoever has not confirmed before the date. Nobody keeps a side list of who to nudge.
Coverage on demand
Per act, per unit, per person, at any date. Exportable as a document for the supervisor or for the board.
A record nobody edits
Publication, access and acknowledgement all land in the audit trail, append-only, with the organization stamped on every entry.
The act arrives classified.
An act comes in as a file. Agents read it and propose the document type, the scope, the effective date and which act it supersedes. From that classification they propose the recipient groups.
What changes
The supervisory answer
Which employees were bound by which version, on which date, and when they confirmed it. A filter, not a reconstruction across mailboxes.
Nobody chases confirmations
The deadline is in the model. Reminders and escalation happen without a person keeping a list.
Versions stop competing
One current version, with the superseded ones readable and marked. No two people acting on different rules.
The obligation stops being personal
Distribution no longer depends on one person's inbox discipline, or on that person being at work.
The parts that are not specific to this module. Sign-in, access rules, the audit trail, workflow and storage belong to the core underneath. This module adds the distribution logic and nothing else.
Inside OmnicornQuestions we hear
What counts as an acknowledgement?
An explicit confirmation by a named person against a named version, with the moment recorded. Opening a file is not a confirmation, and we do not present it as one.
What about acts we published before?
Historical acts and their acknowledgements can be loaded in, so coverage does not start from zero on the day you go live.
Can we change the approval chain later?
Yes, and it happens. In one deployment the chain grew from a simple sequence to seven phases with collaborative editing, without touching the data underneath.
Who can see coverage?
Access rules decide it, per role and per unit. A unit head sees their unit; a compliance officer sees the whole picture.
What if somebody leaves mid-deadline?
The obligation follows the role, so a reassignment does not leave a silent gap in the coverage.
Bring one act and its distribution list.
We will show you the publication, the confirmations and the coverage view on your own organizational structure. Not on a demo tenant.
Let's meet