Feature Request: extend list of collection categories with "Division"

Overview of the Feature Request

We would like to extend the list of possible options for categories of Dataverse collections with the term "division".

What kind of user is the feature intended for?
API User, Curator, Depositor, Guest

What inspired the request?
Our board of directors recently decided that we want to unify the naming how we call our internal organizational units. They came up with the term "institute division" and are asking all services to adapt this term.

What existing behavior do you want changed?
Currently there is a hard coded enum list, which is also used for indexing/searching (thus changing the term is not just a matter of a UI change).

Any brand new behavior do you want to add to Dataverse?
We would like to extend the existing list with the term "Division" (see screenshot below) to better comply with our internal wording guidelines.

As this is a very general term it is probably applicable to many other installations as well. See also https://differencess.com/department-vs-division-whats-the-difference/ and many other places why "department" may not be the right term for everybody. (Some context: what we colloquially call "institutes" at FZJ usually is a large group of people, often divided into groups or even departments, depending on the size of an "institute" - which may range from 10 to a 1000 people. Which is why calling it a "division" makes a lot more sense... As it's not an independent "organization or institution", we refrain from using that one.)

Thus to satisfy our immediate need it would be great if we can include the term short-term (pun intended) before tackling the long-term solution of making all the terms configurable.

Any open or closed issues related to this feature request?
There is #9420 which is about removing the limitation of the list being hard coded. Something similar was done before with File Categories, see #8478. @philippconzett asked for inclusion of another term back in #3681 .

Are you thinking about creating a pull request for this feature?
Yes sure, we would be glad to add a PR for this. I expect it to be very small and very un-disruptive, as it is only about extending the list.