Use accurate dates and explain any differences. A corrected historical chart and a chart showing a later reorganization answer different questions.
Make the change traceable
Preserve the original record and describe what was incorrect or what changed. Do not portray a later employee or reporting line as existing at the earlier date merely to make the role appear better supported.
The organizational chart is the document officers read most sceptically, because it is the easiest one to draw optimistically. A holding structure created a week before filing, or an American company that has done nothing since incorporation, invites a different set of questions and possibly a different rule about first-year approvals. An organizational chart should show the owner's new U.S. position, the Canadian manager's position, and the subordinate staff on each side. Date-stamping each chart version and keeping a brief change log describing what triggered the update, such as a hire, a departure or a reorganization, lets an officer see why the structure moved rather than only that it did. Cross-referencing the chart against payroll records and offer letters for each listed position confirms that a box on paper corresponds to a funded role. A chart, however current, does not by itself establish that subordinate positions are filled; supporting records for each named role still carry the weight.