Have the company explain the differences and identify the current governing arrangement. Do not select the chart that makes the applicant appear most senior.
Preserve an accurate explanation
Date the records and distinguish legal entity ownership from functional reporting. Add a factual explanation of delegated powers where needed. A consistent presentation should reflect resolved facts rather than conceal conflicting evidence.
The chart problem is rarely a disagreement about facts; it is three artefacts built for three purposes. The human-resources chart shows cost centres, the sales chart shows account coverage, the deck prepared for a board meeting shows an intended future state, and all three are honest within their own scope. Trouble begins when someone picks the one that flatters the applicant and files it without a date.
One record usually settles the question: the current delegation-of-authority or approval matrix, the document the company itself uses to decide who may sign what. Ask who owns it, when it was last revised, and whether the applicant appears in it by name or by position. Where a chart is used at all, date it, say what it depicts, and identify who approved it.
Where two records genuinely conflict, explain the conflict rather than choosing between them silently. A reviewer who finds the second chart later reads the first one differently.