Fluid Structure, Rigid Record: A Layered Organizational Design Framework for Agent-Native Organizations
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks
Abstract (arXiv)
An agentic organization should not be a set of model instances with corporate titles, despite most MAS still operationalizing organization as a conversational topology, a role prompt, or a fixed workflow. This paper develops an agent-native organizational structure framework that separates the persistent and dynamic layers of operations. The persistent layer consists of a four-store record architecture and a pool of resident specialization agents. A coordination layer defines Permission as the boundary of the operational world available to an agent, and Privilege as the set of organizational state changes that the agent is authorized to initiate. Together, these mechanisms compile task-specific operational worlds. A runtime layer combines an external Workflow Protocol with an isolated runtime store to dynamically assemble Task Groups. A human-interaction layer exposes the organization through a Control Plane mediated by a non-decision-making Translation Agent. Three orthogonal Role Groups further separate Operation, Review, and Supervision. Operators execute within narrowly scoped leases; reviewers receive elevated but demand-activated authority to modify organizational state; supervisors retain broad observational access while holding limited modification authority. The resulting architecture is fluid at the execution surface but structurally rigid underneath: tasks and events may alter team composition, topology, views, tools, and workflows, while records, write constraints, authority boundaries, and separation of powers remain persistent. The architecture has been implemented as a prototype and evaluated in small-sample experiments. Large-scale empirical validation remains incomplete, therefore no general performance claimed is made yet. Instead, the contribution is a coherent and falsifiable framework for designing, governing, recovering, and evaluating agent-native organizations.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. First posted on arXiv 9 Aug 2026.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Can LLM Agents Sustain Long-Horizon Organizational Dynamics?
- 2026The Organizational Behavior of Agentic AI: Collective Intelligence in Human-Agent Workflows
- 2026OrgAgent: Organize Your Multi-Agent System like a Company
- 2026Beyond the All-in-One Agent: Benchmarking Role-Specialized Multi-Agent Collaboration in Enterprise Workflows
- 2026Org-Agent: Beyond Personal Assistants Towards Organizational Agents
- 2026Organizational Control Layer: Governance Infrastructure at the Execution Boundary of LLM Agent Systems
- 2026Toward an Organizational Science of Multi-Agent LLM Systems: Decoupling Who, How, and Which Algorithm
- 2026Architecting Agentic Communities using Design Patterns