Organization Charts for E-2 Employee Cases

The chart should make clear who reports to whom and which function, department, or major component the employee controls or supports.

An organization chart should show the proposed E-2 employee's actual place in the US enterprise, not merely a planned future hierarchy. The current FAM treats organizational placement as relevant to executive and supervisory analysis, including the employee's level, responsibility, and relationship to other personnel. The chart should identify the department or major component involved, reporting lines above and below the position, and the functions performed by surrounding employees. If the company is small, the chart should still accurately reflect the real operating structure rather than exaggerate layers of management.

Where practical, include employee names or position titles, employment status, and relevant departments rather than generic boxes without factual support.

A useful chart identifies real personnel and positions with enough detail to be checked against the rest of the record. Depending on the company's size and privacy needs, it may list employee names, job titles, departments, employment status, and reporting relationships. Generic boxes labeled staff or operations can be less persuasive when the employee theory depends on who performs particular functions. The chart should also distinguish current employees from genuinely planned positions so that existing staffing is not confused with future hiring projections in the business plan.

The chart can show the executive's relationship to owners, board members, senior managers, department heads, and operational employees.

For an executive employee, the chart can help demonstrate the position's high level in the enterprise and the scope of authority over overall operations or a major component. The FAM directs officers to consider organizational placement, duties, degree of control and responsibility, level of pay, and qualifying experience. The chart should therefore show the executive's relationship to owners, directors, senior managers, department heads, and operational staff. It should support, rather than substitute for, evidence showing the decisions and policy responsibilities the employee will actually exercise.

The chart should help establish the number and skill levels of personnel supervised and the employee's responsibility for their work.

For a supervisory employee, the chart should make the claimed supervision concrete. Current FAM guidance considers the number and skill levels of employees supervised as part of the analysis. The filing should identify direct and, where relevant, indirect reports, the functions those employees perform, and where the E-2 employee sits in the reporting chain. A chart showing only one or two low level workers may require additional explanation of the employee's responsibility for a significant component of the enterprise. Payroll and job descriptions should corroborate the staffing shown.

An essential employee may not supervise staff, but the chart can identify the function in which the specialized knowledge or skill is needed.

An essential employee may qualify without supervising anyone, so the chart serves a different purpose. It can identify where the specialized function sits within the enterprise, who relies on the employee's expertise, and how that function connects to production, service delivery, quality control, technology, training, or another operational need. The chart should not imply supervisory authority that the position does not have. Instead, it should help explain why the specialized role is operationally important and how the employee's duties fit with the responsibilities of managers, technical staff, and other personnel.

Payroll reports, employee lists, job descriptions, contracts, and tax records should not materially contradict the organization chart.

The organization chart should be consistent with objective company records. Payroll reports, employee rosters, Forms W-2 or 1099 where relevant, job descriptions, contracts, tax records, business licenses, and prior immigration filings should not materially contradict the personnel or reporting relationships shown. If staffing changed after an earlier filing, the new chart should identify the current structure and the record should explain material changes. A polished chart cannot cure inaccurate staffing claims; its value comes from presenting a clear visual summary of facts that other business records independently support.