...
Initiatives and Strategies that require explanation
Policies, Capabilities, and Value Streams being introduced or adjusted
Performance goals or KPIs in the Performance domain
Relationship to strategic response model
Each rationale bridges the gap between a trigger event and organizational action. While triggers explain what happened to prompt a response, rationales explain why we're responding in this specific way.
Rationale classification framework
Rationales in the Orthogramic Metamodel follow a structured classification system that supports analytics, reuse, and auditability. Each rationale is categorized according to:
...
Trace patterns in decision-making across similar situations
Evaluate the distribution of rationales by type, evidence base, and strategic alignment
Establish a rationale library that can be referenced for similar future decisions
Support knowledge management and organizational learning
Distinguishing reactive and proactive rationales
The Orthogramic Metamodel explicitly distinguishes between reactive and proactive rationales:
...
Anticipated outcomes that justify the proactive approach
Alternatives that were considered but not selected
Competitive positioning benefits expected
Key distinctions between triggers and rationales
It's important to understand the relationship between Triggers and Rationales:
Triggers represent external or internal events/conditions that prompt a response (what happened)
Rationales explain the reasoning behind a specific response to that trigger (why we're responding this way)
A single Trigger (e.g., "New Safety Regulation") might prompt multiple Rationales with different types:
Preventative: "Implementing these changes will prevent future incidents"
Compliance-focused: "We must implement to meet regulatory requirements"
Opportunistic: "This gives us a competitive advantage in safety reputation"
Implementation guidance
Clarity: Each rationale should clearly articulate the reasoning that connects the trigger to the chosen response
Traceability: Rationales should link to the relevant trigger, strategic objective, and affected domains
Consistency: Use the defined rationale types to ensure consistent classification
Evidence: Document the evidence base that supports each rationale
Strategic Alignment: Always connect rationales to strategic objectives to maintain alignment
Alternatives: Document alternative approaches considered and reasons for their rejection
Orientation: Clearly classify rationales as reactive or proactive
Competitive Context: For market-facing rationales, document competitive positioning impact
Relationship with domains
Rationales bridge between Triggers and organizational responses across multiple domains:
...
Strategy: Rationales explain strategic adjustments based on triggers
...
Capabilities: Rationales describe why capabilities need to be developed or modified
...
Initiatives: Rationales provide the foundation for launching initiatives
...
Policy: Rationales explain policy changes in response to triggers
...
Performance: Rationales describe modifications to performance metrics
...
Customer: Rationales justify changes to customer approaches and experiences
...
Market: Rationales explain market-related decisions and competitive responses
...
Finance: Rationales support financial resource allocation decisions
...
Risk Management: Rationales document risk-based decision processes
...
Supply Chain: Rationales justify supply chain configuration choices
...
Innovation: Rationales explain innovation investments and experimental approaches
...
Sustainability: Rationales articulate the basis for environmental and social initiatives
...
People: Rationales document the reasoning behind workforce and cultural decisions
...
Technology: Rationales explain technology selection and architecture choices
...
Relationship with Other aspects of the Metamodel
The Rationale schema has relationships with multiple domains in the Orthogramic Metamodel:
Strategic Response Model: Rationales provide the reasoning component that connects triggers to responses.
Triggers: Each rationale must reference at least one trigger that prompted it.
Domain-Specific Elements: Rationales can reference elements from all domains including Customer, Market, Finance, Risk, Supply Chain, Innovation, Sustainability, People, Technology, and Channel domains.
Performance Indicators: Rationales may link to performance indicators that measure their effectiveness.
This consolidated schema supports structured reasoning and traceability across strategy, policy, and initiative development, ensuring that every response is grounded in a documented rationale that bridges from trigger events to strategic objectives.
Relationship with domains
Rationales bridge between Triggers and organizational responses across multiple domains:
Strategy: Rationales explain strategic adjustments based on triggers
Capabilities: Rationales describe why capabilities need to be developed or modified
Initiatives: Rationales provide the foundation for launching initiatives
Policy: Rationales explain policy changes in response to triggers
Performance: Rationales describe modifications to performance metrics
Customer: Rationales justify changes to customer approaches and experiences
Market: Rationales explain market-related decisions and competitive responses
Finance: Rationales support financial resource allocation decisions
Risk Management: Rationales document risk-based decision processes
Supply Chain: Rationales justify supply chain configuration choices
Innovation: Rationales explain innovation investments and experimental approaches
Sustainability: Rationales articulate the basis for environmental and social initiatives
People: Rationales document the reasoning behind workforce and cultural decisions
Technology: Rationales explain technology selection and architecture choices
Channel: Rationales justify distribution channel strategies and partnerships
Relationship to strategic response model
Each rationale bridges the gap between a trigger event and organizational action. While triggers explain what happened to prompt a response, rationales explain why we're responding in this specific way.
Key distinctions between triggers and rationales
It's important to understand the relationship between Triggers and Rationales:
Triggers represent external or internal events/conditions that prompt a response (what happened)
Rationales explain the reasoning behind a specific response to that trigger (why we're responding this way)
A single Trigger (e.g., "New Safety Regulation") might prompt multiple Rationales with different types:
Preventative: "Implementing these changes will prevent future incidents"
Compliance-focused: "We must implement to meet regulatory requirements"
Opportunistic: "This gives us a competitive advantage in safety reputation"
Rationale and Trigger linkage examples
See: https: Orthogramic_Metamodel/examples/trigger-rationale-links.md at main · github.com/Orthogramic/Orthogramic_Metamodel
Rationale Schema
Introduction
A Rationale provides the logical reasoning behind a strategic or operational response. It connects a specific condition (Trigger) to a reasoned explanation that guides actions across one or more business architecture domains. Rationales are formalized objects in the Strategic Response Model and are central to decision transparency and traceability.
See: GitHub - Orthogramic/Orthogramic_Metamodel
Core Schema Properties
The following core schema properties apply to all rationales, regardless of domain:
...
Field
...
Type
...
Required
...
Description
...
Example
...
rationaleID
...
string (uuid)
...
Yes
...
Unique identifier for the rationale
...
"7a98e34d-f2b4-4ad1-9ac9-ecda9f145d79"
Implementation guidance
Clarity: Each rationale should clearly articulate the reasoning that connects the trigger to the chosen response
Traceability: Rationales should link to the relevant trigger, strategic objective, and affected domains
Consistency: Use the defined rationale types to ensure consistent classification
Evidence: Document the evidence base that supports each rationale
Strategic Alignment: Always connect rationales to strategic objectives to maintain alignment
Alternatives: Document alternative approaches considered and reasons for their rejection
Orientation: Clearly classify rationales as reactive or proactive
Competitive Context: For market-facing rationales, document competitive positioning impact
Rationale Schema
Introduction
A Rationale provides the logical reasoning behind a strategic or operational response. It connects a specific condition (Trigger) to a reasoned explanation that guides actions across one or more business architecture domains. Rationales are formalized objects in the Strategic Response Model and are central to decision transparency and traceability.
See: GitHub - Orthogramic/Orthogramic_Metamodel
Core Schema Properties
The following core schema properties apply to all rationales, regardless of domain:
Field | Type | Required | Description | Example |
|---|---|---|---|---|
rationaleID | string (uuid) | Yes | Unique identifier for the rationale | "7a98e34d-f2b4-4ad1-9ac9-ecda9f145d79" |
rationaleTitle | string | Yes | Title or summary of the rationale | "Responding to new safety regulation" |
description | string | Yes | Detailed explanation supporting a strategic response | "The new regulation requires immediate updates to inspection protocols" |
triggerReference | string (uuid) | Yes | Primary trigger this rationale responds to | "uuid-of-trigger" |
triggerReferences | array of uuid | No | Optional multiple triggers this rationale addresses | ["uuid-1", "uuid-2"] |
linkedDomains | array of enum | No | Business architecture domains influenced or justified by this rationale | ["Policy", "Performance"] |
rationaleType | string (enum) | Yes | The justification type for this rationale | "Compliance_Fulfillment" |
rationaleOrientation | string (enum) | Yes | Whether the rationale is responding to existing conditions or anticipating future conditions | "Proactive" |
anticipatedOutcomes | array of string | No | For proactive rationales, the expected benefits or outcomes | ["Market leadership", "20% cost reduction"] |
alternativesConsidered | array of objects | No | Other strategic options that were evaluated but not selected | See example below |
reasoningPattern | string (enum) | No | The logical structure of the rationale | "Deductive" |
evidenceBase | string (enum) | No | The foundation for the rationale | "External_Research" |
strategicObjectiveReference | string (uuid) | No | Reference to the strategic objective this rationale supports | "uuid-of-objective" |
businessValueType | string (enum) | No | The nature of value creation or preservation | "Risk_Reduction" or "Market_Creation" |
competitivePositioning | object | No | How this rationale advances competitive stance | See example below |
dateCreated | string (date) | No | The date the rationale was first recorded | "2025-04-20" |
lastReviewed | string (date) | No | The most recent date of rationale review | "2025-06-01" |
effectivenessRating | integer (1–5) | No | Optional evaluation of rationale effectiveness | 4 |
author | string | No | The person or team who documented the rationale | "Business Architecture Team" |
orgUnitTitle | string | No | The organisational unit that owns or authored the rationale | "Regulatory Compliance Division" |
relatedRationales | array of uuid | No | References to other related rationales | ["uuid-1", "uuid-2"] |
relationshipTypes | array of enum | No | Type of relationship with each related rationale | ["supports", "supersedes"] |
Example of alternativesConsidered
...
When a rationale relates to the Customer domain, the following additional properties can be specified:
Field | Type | Description | Example |
|---|---|---|---|
customerSegmentIDs | array of string | Customer segments this rationale relates to | ["CUST-SEG-001", "CUST-SEG-003"] |
customerInsightSource | string (enum) | Source of customer insights supporting this rationale | "Voice_of_Customer", "Customer_Behavior_Analysis", "Market_Research" |
reasoningPattern | string (enum) | Customer-specific reasoning patterns | "Customer_Needs_Based", "Journey_Friction_Based", "Segment_Value_Based" |
businessValueType | string (enum) | Customer-specific value types | "Customer_Retention_Value", "Customer_Experience_Value", "Brand_Loyalty_Value" |
Market Domain Extensions
When a rationale relates to the Market domain, the following additional properties can be specified:
Field | Type | Description | Example |
|---|---|---|---|
marketIDs | array of string | Markets this rationale relates to | ["MKT-ENTSW-001", "MKT-CLOUD-002"] |
marketInsightSource | string (enum) | Source of market insights supporting this rationale | "Market_Research", "Competitive_Intelligence", "Industry_Analysis" |
competitiveImplications | object | How this rationale affects competitive position | {"implicationType": "offensive", "targetCompetitors": ["Competitor A"], "expectedResponse": "Price matching"} |
marketRisks | array of objects | Market risks associated with this rationale | [{"riskDescription": "Increased competition", "likelihood": 4, "impact": 3, "mitigation": "Accelerated innovation"} ] |
Finance Domain Extensions
When a rationale relates to the Finance domain, the following additional properties can be specified:
Field | Type | Description | Example |
|---|---|---|---|
financeIDs | array of string | Financial elements this rationale relates to | ["FIN-INV-001", "FIN-BUD-002"] |
financialInsightSource | string (enum) | Source of financial insights supporting this rationale | "Financial_Analysis", "Budget_Analysis", "Investment_Review" |
financialImpactAssessment | object | Assessment of financial implications | {"impactType": "income_statement", "estimatedAmount": 1500000, "impactTimeframe": "Q3-Q4 2025"} |
financialRisks | array of objects | Financial risks associated with this rationale | [{"riskDescription": "Capital cost overrun", "financialExposure": 500000, "likelihood": 3, "mitigation": "Phased funding approach"}] |
Risk Management Domain Extensions
When a rationale relates to the Risk Management domain, the following additional properties can be specified:
Field | Type | Description | Example |
|---|---|---|---|
riskIDs | array of string | Risks this rationale relates to | ["RISK-CYBER-001", "RISK-COMP-002"] |
riskInsightSource | string (enum) | Source of risk insights supporting this rationale | "Risk_Assessment", "Incident_Analysis", "Control_Monitoring" |
riskImpactAssessment | object | Assessment of risk implications | {"impactType": "operational", "impactSeverity": "significant", "impactLikelihood": "moderate", "confidenceLevel": 4} |
Supply Chain Domain Extensions
When a rationale relates to the Supply Chain domain, the following additional properties can be specified:
Field | Type | Description | Example |
|---|---|---|---|
supplyChainIDs | array of string | Supply chain elements this rationale relates to | ["SC-MFG-001", "SC-MFG-002"] |
supplyChainInsightSource | string (enum) | Source of supply chain insights supporting this rationale | "Supply_Chain_Analytics", "Supplier_Feedback", "Market_Intelligence" |
supplyChainImpactAssessment | object | Assessment of supply chain implications | {"impactAreas": ["supplier_network", "inventory"], "impactSeverity": "significant", "impactTimeframe": "medium-term"} |
Innovation Domain Extensions
When a rationale relates to the Innovation domain, the following additional properties can be specified:
Field | Type | Description | Example |
|---|---|---|---|
innovationIDs | array of string | Innovation elements this rationale relates to | ["INN-DIGITAL-001", "INN-AI-003"] |
innovationInsightSource | string (enum) | Source of innovation insights supporting this rationale | "Experiment_Results", "Innovation_Metrics", "Prototype_Feedback" |
innovationImpactAssessment | object | Assessment of innovation implications | {"impactType": "acceleration", "affectedCapabilities": ["Experimentation", "Idea Management"], "timeframeChange": "35% reduction in cycle time"} |
Sustainability Domain Extensions
When a rationale relates to the Sustainability domain, the following additional properties can be specified:
Field | Type | Description | Example |
|---|---|---|---|
sustainabilityIDs | array of string | Sustainability elements this rationale relates to | ["SUST-ENV-001", "SUST-SOC-002"] |
sustainabilityInsightSource | string (enum) | Source of sustainability insights supporting this rationale | "ESG_Assessment", "Climate_Scenario_Analysis", "Stakeholder_Materiality_Assessment" |
sustainabilityImpactAssessment | object | Assessment of sustainability implications | {"impactDimensions": ["Carbon Footprint", "Biodiversity"], "stakeholderExpectations": "Visible progress on emissions reduction", "complianceRelevance": "Supports anticipated regulatory requirements"} |
People Domain Extensions
When a rationale relates to the People domain, the following additional properties can be specified:
Field | Type | Description | Example |
|---|---|---|---|
peopleIDs | array of string | People elements this rationale relates to | ["PEOPLE-WORKFORCE-001", "PEOPLE-CULTURE-002"] |
peopleInsightSource | string (enum) | Source of people insights supporting this rationale | "Engagement_Assessment", "Skills_Analysis", "Cultural_Assessment" |
peopleImpactAssessment | object | Assessment of workforce implications | {"impactAreas": ["Talent Development", "Organizational Culture"], "affectedRoles": ["Engineering", "Product Development"], "timeframeForChange": "6-12 months"} |
Technology Domain Extensions
When a rationale relates to the Technology domain, the following additional properties can be specified:
Field | Type | Description | Example |
|---|---|---|---|
technologyIDs | array of string | Technology elements this rationale relates to | ["TECH-API-001", "TECH-CLOUD-002"] |
technologyInsightSource | string (enum) | Source of technology insights supporting this rationale | "Technology_Assessment", "Security_Monitoring", "Vendor_Notification" |
technologyImpactAssessment | object | Assessment of technology implications | {"impactAreas": ["System Architecture", "Security Framework"], "technicalDebt": "Significant reduction potential", "timeframeForImplementation": "3 release cycles"} |
Channel Domain Extensions
When a rationale relates to the Channel domain, the following additional properties can be specified:
Field | Type | Description | Example |
|---|---|---|---|
channelIDs | array of string | Channel elements this rationale relates to | ["CHAN-RETAIL-001", "CHAN-DIGITAL-002"] |
channelInsightSource | string (enum) | Source of channel insights supporting this rationale | "Channel_Performance_Analysis", "Partner_Feedback", "Distribution_Network_Assessment" |
channelImpactAssessment | object | Assessment of channel implications | {"impactAreas": ["Partner Network", "Digital Touchpoints"], "customerJourneyEffects": "Improved cross-channel consistency", "implementationComplexity": "Medium"} |
Enumeration Values
Core Enumerations
...
Channel_Reach_Value- Expanding access to customersDistribution_Efficiency_Value- Optimizing channel operationsPartner_Network_Value- Strengthening channel relationshipsChannel_Integration_Value- Creating seamless customer experiencesChannel_Innovation_Value- Developing new distribution approachesCustomer_Access_Value- Improving availability to customers
Relationship with Other Domains
The Rationale schema has relationships with multiple domains in the Orthogramic Metamodel:
Strategic Response Model: Rationales provide the reasoning component that connects triggers to responses.
Triggers: Each rationale must reference at least one trigger that prompted it.
Domain-Specific Elements: Rationales can reference elements from all domains including Customer, Market, Finance, Risk, Supply Chain, Innovation, Sustainability, People, Technology, and Channel domains.
Performance Indicators: Rationales may link to performance indicators that measure their effectiveness.
...