Acceptance criteria
Provide role-scoped views that withhold individual identity while preserving team, department and tool-level analysis, so monitoring can proceed where works councils, unions or local law restrict individual attribution.
Why it matters
Where works councils or local law restrict individual attribution, monitoring still has to be possible.
How to verify
Pilot data viewed at team level with individual identity withheld.
OWASP adoption context
Privacy-appropriate reporting views can be needed across the listed employee AI contexts; the tier itself does not determine whether individual attribution is permissible.
Framework mappings
Role-scoped views that withhold identity implement access restriction and masking while enabling team-level monitoring aligned with relevant stakeholder and privacy requirements. Pseudonymization or aggregation does not guarantee anonymity; the buyer must establish the permitted use and validate re-identification and alternate-access risks. SOC 2: P4.1 requires the Privacy category and relevant information in scope. ISO/IEC 27001: Operate masking within the buyer’s ISMS scope and enforce restrictions before access; monitoring or warnings alone are insufficient. Check local law and workforce-consultation duties separately.
Withholding identity supplies a concrete privacy-risk treatment and evidence for evaluating impacts on individuals and relevant AI obligations. It does not replace the privacy/individual-impact assessment or determine which workforce-monitoring obligations apply.