# Relationships (Engagements) The kinds of working relationships between parties. See [README.md](README.md#engagement-proposed--replaces-vague-relationship) for the proposed term **engagement** and [the table of engagement types](README.md#engagement-type-and-the-roles-in-it-proposed) for the canonical roles each side plays. ## Engagement types ### subcontract One party (the **Prime**) owns the client relationship and delegates work to another party (the **Subcontractor**). - **Transparent** — the end client knows who's actually doing the work (Conversion Geek prime → PlusROI subcontractor; Adi subcontractor → Bowden Works prime → PlusROI prime on most projects). - **Opaque** — the subcontractor poses as the prime to the end client (former PlusROI → NewGrowth on Qualia; Adi using a PlusROI email). Visibility level on the project (see README) is set per-engagement. When the user previously asked "what is McAllister when McAllister hires PlusROI?", McAllister is the **Prime** in that engagement and PlusROI is the **Subcontractor**. ### freelance One party (the **Engager**, typically an agency or person hiring out) engages a person or small org (the **Freelancer**) to do work, without ongoing partnership equity. - Usually billed **per-unit**, sometimes **hourly** or **fixed-price**. - Examples: Yulia ↔ PlusROI; Carmen ↔ What Works; Summer ↔ McAllister. - Mechanically similar to subcontract but used when the engaged party is a person or solo shop rather than an agency. ### partnership Shared upside (profit-share) on a project or book of work. Both sides are **Partners**. Usually undocumented but contractually defensible. - Bowden Works ⇄ PlusROI: the canonical case. - Heather ⇄ Bowden Works on direct projects: same pattern. - Could become 3-way (Rian + Heather + Summer, etc.). ### referral The **Referrer** introduces the work and collects a commission, without doing the work or having ongoing operational visibility. The receiving party is the **Operator**. - AISV → PlusROI on Community Financials. - McAllister → PlusROI on *some* projects (referrer on some, prime on others — same parties, different engagement types per project). - TCIR → PlusROI on most resorts. ### referral-pass-through A referrer (the **Referrer-of-Record**) that also routes the client-side billing. They invoice the client and pay through to the **Operator**, even though they don't deliver the work themselves. - Legacy McAllister on Copernic when PlusROI delivered but the client paid McAllister. ### direct-client The end **Client** paying the **Operator** for delivered work. - Community Financials, Copernic, Hartling Group resorts, DaxTech, etc. ### employment Salaried **Employer** ↔ **Employee**. **Not currently in use.** Tingang may have some workers in this category that aren't visible from outside. ### official-partnership A documented co-ownership of an org. Both sides are **Owners**. May or may not include actual work. - Nicole Bowden (Bowden Works, no work). - Danielle Cooper (PlusROI, bookkeeping work + gross-percentage cut). ## Compensation models Independent of engagement type — see [README.md](README.md#compensation-model-proposed) for the enum. A party may have **multiple compensation models** in play with the same counter-party, scoped per-project or per-engagement. Heather has a per-unit engagement with PlusROI AND a partnership engagement with Bowden Works simultaneously. ## Engagement lifecycle Engagements evolve. The model should treat each change as a new state, not erase the old. Examples seen in the data: - **Falling out**: Hartling Group fired PlusROI, kept Bowden Works. - **Dissolution**: NewGrowth dissolved; Mark joined Qualia; PlusROI's engagement shifted from Subcontractor-of-NewGrowth to direct operator/agency for Qualia. - **Brand swap**: Customer First Design's public face went Salty Waffle → AISV. The commission entitlement (legal entity) didn't change. - **Role flip**: McAllister often flips between **Prime** (subcontract engagement, owning the client relationship) and **Referrer** (referral engagement, just collecting commission) on different projects with PlusROI. ## Visibility level See [README.md](README.md#visibility-level-proposed) for the proposed enum. Critically: - Visibility is **per-engagement on a project**, not per-party globally. - The same party can be operator on one project and referrer-blind on another. - The project's *owning agency* (operator) chooses what to expose to each other engaged party. --- ## A worked example of the worst case A real chain that could exist today, in order from worker outward: 1. A **Tingang freelancer** (Zeina) tracks time in Clockify against a Copernic project. 2. **Adi** receives that time, divides it by the freelancer's rate proportion, and invoices Bowden Works on the *converted* hours (Adi-equivalent hours), hourly. 3. **Bowden Works** receives Adi's invoice, marks it up, and bills PlusROI for the time as part of the partnership. 4. **PlusROI** absorbs Bowden Works' invoice + per-unit costs from other freelancers (e.g., Summer also worked on the project), and invoices McAllister. 5. **McAllister** receives PlusROI's invoice and bills **Copernic** (the end client). 6. **Copernic** pays McAllister. McAllister pays PlusROI. PlusROI computes net profit (after Danielle's cut, freelancer payouts, accounting fees) and pays Bowden Works half. Bowden Works pays Adi per his earlier invoice. Simultaneously, on the same project: - McAllister may have a **separate side scope** they engaged Bowden Works on directly — Bowden Works invoices McAllister directly. - Summer might be doing some of her work on the project through McAllister rather than PlusROI — she invoices McAllister directly for that portion. Then, mid-project, Copernic decides to drop McAllister and contract PlusROI directly. The work continues unchanged from Bowden Works' and Adi's perspective. But now: - McAllister's engagement type flips from **Prime** (in a subcontract with PlusROI) to **Referrer** (commission only) on all future work. - Summer's portion is consolidated under PlusROI; OR Copernic engages Agent Noir directly; OR a mix. - A new commission entitlement is established for McAllister on future work, with **referrer-blind** visibility. **Implication for the data model:** - A single project carries multiple engagements (operator, subcontractor, referrer, possibly more). - Each engagement on a project has its own visibility level. - Each engagement has its own compensation model and rate, independent of the others. - Engagement state changes over time and the system should preserve history (when did McAllister stop being the billing layer? when did the commission entitlement start?). - Reporting "what did each party earn on this project" needs to walk the full chain — gross revenue minus pass-throughs minus commissions minus subcontractor costs at each layer.