Ask AwraIQ about features, pricing, onboarding, login, integrations, security, demos, mobile apps, automation, reports, or support.
The shape of an organisation is three separate facts that most systems keep in three separate places: the titles, the departments, and the reporting lines. AWRA OpsHub holds all three — and then does the thing almost nobody does, which is check them against who actually has access.
Position catalogue with grades · Departments as cost centres and asset owners · Manager-line org chart · Access reconciliation
NO MANAGER · ROOT OPERATIONS FINANCE PROCUREMENT OPERATIONS OPERATIONS FINANCE The chart is drawn, not maintained. There is no separate hierarchy to keep in step — the tree is assembled from each employee's manager, so promoting somebody redraws it. And if a manager leaves, their reports rise to the top of the chart rather than vanishing from it, which is exactly when you most need to see them.
Conflating them is the usual mistake, and it is why so many org charts are wrong. A Warehouse Supervisor in Operations reporting to the Operations Manager is three independent statements, each of which can change without the others.
A catalogue of job titles held once for the whole organisation, so "Warehouse Supervisor" means the same thing in three branches.
All of it behind one permission, manage_positions, because a title catalogue is a settings-shaped thing rather than a per-record one.
The organisational unit — and it does more work here than in most systems, because it is not only a label on a person.
Two departments ship as protected defaults so a new workspace is never structureless, and reading is a lower grant than changing.
One field on the employee — their manager — from which the whole chart is derived rather than separately maintained.
That second-to-last point is the one that matters in practice. A chart that silently loses people when a manager leaves is a chart you cannot use during exactly the reorganisation you need it for.
In a great deal of HR software, creating an employee creates a user account, because the software was designed for office workforces where everybody has a screen. That assumption breaks the moment you employ a storekeeper, a driver, a night guard or a machine operator — people who are rostered, paid, given assets and issued payslips, and who will never log in to anything.
So in AWRA OpsHub the link is optional. An employee record stands entirely on its own: it can hold a contract, a compensation package, bank details, statutory identifiers, attendance, leave, timesheets and payslips without any platform account existing at all. Where a person does need access, the employee record is linked to a login — and the two remain separate objects with separate lifecycles.
That is the right design, and it creates exactly one problem, which is worth naming plainly: two lifecycles can drift. Somebody is terminated in HR and nobody disables their login. Somebody joins, gets an email address recorded, and waits three weeks for access. Somebody comes back from a long absence and their login is still switched off. Each of these is invisible from either side on its own — HR sees an employment record that is correct, and user management sees an account that is correct, and only the comparison is wrong.
Access reconciliation compares employment state against login state and puts every disagreement in front of you in three buckets. Nothing here is a new record to maintain — it is a comparison of two things you already keep.
Employees who are terminated or archived, whose linked login is still active. This is the bucket that matters most and the one nobody notices, because everything about it looks correct from either side alone.
Archived employees are deliberately included. Leaving them out would have been the natural implementation and would have hidden the exact case the screen exists to catch — somebody removed from HR whose access outlived them.
edit_employees, mirroring the termination path itself. The onboarding gap, in the other direction. An active employee with an email address recorded and no account yet is somebody waiting on IT — and this is the list that turns that from a series of individual chases into one queue.
It only lists people with an email, because an employee with no email address is not waiting for access — they are one of the many people who correctly never need any.
view_employees. Somebody back from long leave, a suspension lifted, or an account disabled during an earlier off-boarding that has since been reversed.
Re-enabling stays a deliberate act on the user screen rather than a button here. Turning access back on is a decision that deserves the friction; turning it off is the one that should be one click from the list that found it.
edit_users — it can be an administrator or contractor who was never in HR at all. Notice the asymmetry in those permissions, because it is not an accident. Revoking an employee's access is an HR action and takes the HR grant. Revoking a login that has no employee behind it is a user-management action and takes the user-management grant — because that account might belong to an administrator, a consultant or an integration that was never part of the workforce. Using one permission for both would either lock HR out of half the screen or hand HR the ability to disable the platform owner.
Worth being precise about, because a headcount limit that counts the wrong people is a headcount limit that punishes you for keeping good records.
A seat is a live employee — anyone not terminated. People you have terminated do not consume one, and neither do archived records. That means your headcount reflects the people you are actually managing today, and you are never charged for keeping the history of someone who left in 2023. Keeping good records has no price attached to it.
Where a plan is unlimited, the allowance is unlimited and add-ons are simply irrelevant rather than being quietly counted anyway.
The limit is a hard block at creation, and it is re-checked when the form is submitted rather than only when the form is opened — so a direct submission cannot slip past a check that only ran on the way in. The same block applies to bulk import, which is the obvious way somebody would otherwise add four hundred people to a plan that allows fifty.
Org structure is where software promises the most and delivers the least, so here it is precisely.
What AWRA OpsHub does today
More we can add to your workspace
Where we point you to a specialist
Salary bands and establishment planning are the two most-asked items here, and both attach cleanly to the position record that already exists. Tell us your grades, bands and approval flow and we will come back with a written spec, a timeline and a price.
One thing to set up early: the org chart is only as good as the manager field, and an employee with no manager is treated as a root rather than as an error. On a first import it is worth checking the chart's top tier — a wider top row than you expected usually means manager lines that did not come across.
Titles held once, departments that own real things, a chart that redraws itself, and a screen whose only job is telling you where employment and access have stopped agreeing.