What is the “development organization” that the Scrum Guide refers to?

It is the organization to which the Scrum Team(s) belong. This could be a product development organization within a company, a business unit, the company itself. The entire point is that the Scrum Team exists in some kind of context and this broader organization provides some of the structure around the Scrum Team.

Many thanks for the reply. So far I am with you, however, let me elaborate: I am facing a scenario with different Scrum teams working on different products and belonging to different business units. And while it is clear to me that we would benefit from an organizational level DoD we do not have any development organization over and above the Scrum teams. My questions, then, is who should / is best suited to set the organizational level DoD?

My questions, then, is who should / is best suited to set the organizational level DoD?

Suppose the products failed to satisfy stakeholders. Who, above and beyond the Scrum Teams, would be exposed to financial, legal, or reputational risk?

I am facing a scenario with different Scrum teams working on different products and belonging to different business units. And while it is clear to me that we would benefit from an organizational level DoD we do not have any development organization over and above the Scrum teams. My questions, then, is who should / is best suited to set the organizational level DoD?

If all of the Scrum Teams are part of the same company, there's someone that is above all of the Scrum Teams.

Alternatively, I'd wonder if there is a need for a common Definition of Done if the Scrum Teams all work on different products for different business units. Having a common Definition of Done is useful for aligning multiple teams working on a single product or in cases where you have a portfolio of multiple products. But it doesn't seem like there's that kind of coupling here.

Ian / Thomas: My thinking is that IT is a good candidate to set the organizational DoD. Although IT is not above the Scrum teams, I believe the cross-organizational non-functional requirements are best formulated here. (E.g. coding standards, documentation, testing criteria) Do you have any thoughts on this?

Thomas: There are interdpendencies between the products in terms of e.g. information modelling, availabiliy of data, and infrastructure. But perhaps these aspects should be broken out and handled by another team, rather than considering the products as part of the same portfolio. 

My thinking is that IT is a good candidate to set the organizational DoD. Although IT is not above the Scrum teams, I believe the cross-organizational non-functional requirements are best formulated here. (E.g. coding standards, documentation, testing criteria) Do you have any thoughts on this?

I don't fully understand your organizational structure - it seems very strange to me, at least how it's described in text, so I may just be having trouble visualizing it correctly. To me, I consider that the Definition of Done "flows down" from broader parts of the organization to more specific parts of the organization, with each adding different levels. Perhaps compliance and regulatory considerations come from the highest levels and technical or integration items come from closer to the teams, for example. If you have the kind of horizontal structure that you're describing, then maybe horizontal groups (such as IT) may also contribute to the Definition of Done.

There are interdpendencies between the products in terms of e.g. information modelling, availabiliy of data, and infrastructure. But perhaps these aspects should be broken out and handled by another team, rather than considering the products as part of the same portfolio.

I don't think that moving things away from the team is the right thing to do at all. I tend to look at products, portfolios, and enterprises. An enterprise has 1 or products and 0 or more portfolios of products. A product belongs to at most 1 portfolio (but could also be stand alone). Considerations flow from the enterprise into the products and portfolios and from portfolios into their products. Each level can adopt the appropriate degrees of agility as necessary to serve their customers.

So far IT has mainly been a support function and there have been few or no compliance or regulatory considerations when it comes to software development. There is no cross-functional layer between the product organizations and the executive management group. I.e. no one possesses both competence and mandate to contribute to an organizational DoD.

My suggestion:

Set up a steering committee, or vision group as you would like to think, this group would be composed by the as senior as possible manager of each affected area.

If those guys can't guide DoD into company strategy none would.

I know it can be hard, but after the first interaction they will get use, just keep this event sharp and smart :)

If I understand correctly, each of your business units have a separate software development and product management organization with no common oversight across business units.  That is unique and hard to imagine.  

You say that it is clear to you that an organizational Definition of Done would be useful.  If it is apparent, then you should be able to identify the people that would contribute to the definition. I would also ask anyone else that shares your perception that it is needed to help define who would be best contributors.

I question whether IT is right. I can see where they could provide some corporate guidelines to limit the technologies and tools that can be used but I wouldn't see that as part of the Definition of Done.