Every category where a model named Orgvue for a mid-market B2B company. Share is first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts; rank is within every product named in that category.

Category	Function	Share	Rank	Negative rate	Labels	Quadrant
Org charts and org design	Workforce planning and analytics	2%	12 of 81	25%	12	criticized challenger
Workforce planning	Workforce planning and analytics	0%	18 of 89	9%	11	accepted challenger
People analytics	Workforce planning and analytics	0%	37 of 99	0%	2	under 10 labels · led by HiBob at 15%
Succession planning	Performance and talent management	0%	77 of 99	0%	1	under 10 labels · led by Lattice at 31%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Orgvue yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated Orgvue across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

Model	First choice	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	2	0	2
GPT-5.4 mini	0	1	0	1	2
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	2	1	0	3
Perplexity Sonar	1	2	1	0	4
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	1	1	0	2
Mistral Small	0	0	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	1	1	2	4
Llama 4 Maverick	0	1	0	0	1
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	1	1	0	2
Kimi K2	0	0	2	0	2
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	1	1	1	3
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	1	0	1

By framing

Which of the six questions produced the naming. By model says how often; this says asked what. The first-choice count on the right carries the marks of the models that produced it.

FramingLabels by classFirst choices

Direct12 labels3

Paraphrase19 labels8

Comparative25 labels1not counted in share

Budget-constrained3 labelsNone

Scale-constrained7 labelsNone

Negative8 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative74 labels in all, every segment counted; 11 of the 13 first choices count toward share, since the comparative and negative framings do not. The bar is one segment per label class, to scale within the framing.

What the models said for it

Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.

“I'd recommend OrgVue if your main need is serious organizational design, scenario modeling, and workforce planning at scale.” Perplexity Sonar · Org charts · paraphrase prompt · first choice

“Orgvue is the gold standard for enterprise org modeling... Caveat: It has a steep learning curve, is expensive” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Org charts · paraphrase prompt · alternative

“Purpose‑built for org design and workforce planning; ideal for teams that need deep modeling” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Org charts · paraphrase prompt · alternative

“Choose Orgvue if you are focused on org redesign, restructuring, or role mapping.” Perplexity Sonar · Workforce planning · comparative prompt · alternative

And against it

Verbatim evidence attached to negative labels. A warning on a product with few labels is a warning; on a product with many, it is one voice among them.

“Per-Profile (e.g., OrgVue): *Enterprise.* Very expensive, usually reserved for massive global corporations.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Org charts · scale prompt · soft negative

“Powerful, enterprise-grade design & predictive modeling, but heavy, custom-quoted, and overkill for mid-size” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Org charts · paraphrase prompt · soft negative

“Orgvue is reserved for companies with dedicated workforce planning functions and heavy data complexity” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Workforce planning · direct prompt · soft negative

“more enterprise-oriented and may be more tool than a mid-sized company needs” GPT-5.4 mini · Org charts · paraphrase prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Orgvue, over the 74 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Orgvue was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

ChartHop45 of 747Not in the top three

Anaplan31 of 7411Not in the top three

Workday Adaptive Planning29 of 749Not in the top three

Visier27 of 745Not in the top three

Lucidchart20 of 740Not in the top three

OneDirectory16 of 743Not in the top three

SAP SuccessFactors15 of 741Not in the top three

Microsoft Visio15 of 740Not in the top three

Nakisa15 of 740Not in the top three

OrgChart14 of 748Not in the top three

A head-to-head page exists where both products are in a category's top three. The other rows are the same fact without a page behind them, so they link to the product instead.

What carried it into the answer

The sites and pages cited by the answers that named Orgvue. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, four of the twelve in this edition, so these counts come from 57 of the 74 answers that named Orgvue and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

peoplemanagingpeople.com29

gartner.com26

worldmetrics.org24

guideflow.com22

learn.g2.com21

onedirectory.com17

theorgchart.com16

gitnux.org15

g2.com14

selectsoftwarereviews.com13

197 of the 197 domain citations in answers naming Orgvue came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

gartner.com/reviews/market/org-chart-software19

onedirectory.com/blog/best-org-chart-software17

guideflow.com/blog/workforce-planning-software16

peoplemanagingpeople.com/tools/best-workforce-planning-software16

articsledge.com/post/workforce-planning-software10

hrtechsaas.com/blog/workforce-planning-software10

learn.g2.com/best-org-chart-software10

selectsoftwarereviews.com/buyer-guide/workforce-planning-software10

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Orgvue

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Orgvue; a claim can dispute any of them.

OrgVue 7Orgvue (OrgVue) 1

Is this your product?

Claim this page

Claiming is free and changes nothing in the data. A claimed page shows a verified contact who is told when each edition publishes and when Orgvue's standing changes by more than the noise floor; the right to propose corrections to the vendor table, meaning names the judge wrote that should or should not read as Orgvue, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

It does not get any change to labels, shares or verdicts, any preview, or any say over which quotes appear. A verification link goes to your work email; an address at orgvue.com is approved on the spot, any other address is reviewed by hand.

Your name and company appear on the claimed page, or the company alone if you ask below. A title and a LinkedIn address appear there too if you give them, and are left off if you do not. Your email address is never published.