| Table of Contents | ||
|---|---|---|
|
...
A Rationale provides the logical reasoning behind a strategic or operational response. It is triggered by connects a specific condition (Trigger) , and it guides the alignment of to a reasoned explanation that guides actions across one or more business architecture domains. Rationales are formalised formalized objects in the Strategic Response Model and are central to decision transparency and traceability. See: https://orthogramic.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/OM/pages/286228485 Strategic Response Model
Rationales help ensure that every action taken by the organisation organization is grounded in strategic intent and can be clearly explained through a documented reasoning process.
Every Rationale must reference the Trigger that prompted it. This is represented either by linking to a triggerID or embedding the full Trigger object (via schema reference). This linkage ensures traceability from external condition through to internal response.
Rationales may arise from performance insights, stakeholder needs, risk exposures, compliance obligations, or strategic opportunitiesvarious considerations in response to triggers, including risk assessment, compliance requirements, strategic opportunities, or performance insights.
Usage in
...
Business Architecture
In the Orthogramic Metamodel, rationales serve to:
Justify Explain why an initiative, policy, or change exists.
Link strategic drivers to responses in a structured way.
Support transparency and traceability from high-level drivers to operational change.
Bridge the gap between organizational triggers and strategic objectives
Rationales may be connected to multiple elements across the business architecture, including:
Initiatives and Strategies that require justification.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 is categorised by a Driver Type, which is derived from the Strategic Response Model. This provides a consistent basis for understanding and classifying business responses across the organisation.
Strategic Response Model drivers
The Strategic Response Model defines the following categories of drivers:
...
Driver Type
...
Description
...
Common Triggers
...
Example Rationales
...
Related Domains
...
Regulatory change
...
Changes in legal or regulatory requirements
...
New legislation, audits
...
Align with safety standards; address compliance risks
...
Policy, Initiatives, Capabilities, Performance
...
Customer demand shift
...
Shifting customer expectations or behaviours
...
Feedback, usage patterns
...
Improve onboarding; redesign mobile services
...
Strategy, ValueStream, Capabilities, Stakeholders
...
Operational risk
...
Threats to continuity or operational efficiency
...
System failure, safety incidents
...
Enhance cyber resilience; strengthen recovery plans
...
Capabilities, Performance, Information, Organisation
...
Technology obsolescence
...
Legacy or unsupported systems impacting operations
...
End-of-life systems, innovation lag
...
Modernise tech stack; enable data interoperability
...
Information, Capabilities, Initiatives
...
Cost pressure
...
Financial constraints requiring efficiency or cost optimisation
...
Budget cuts, benchmarking
...
Consolidate platforms; automate manual processes
...
Performance, Capabilities, Initiatives, Organisation
...
Workforce change
...
Evolving workforce dynamics
...
Hybrid work, attrition
...
Reskill staff; adapt HR policies
...
Organisation, Policy, Capabilities
...
Stakeholder expectation
...
Pressure or concern from internal or external stakeholders
...
Board expectations, ESG concerns
...
Increase transparency; implement ethical compliance
...
Stakeholders, Policy, Performance
...
Market opportunity
...
New market trends or emerging business opportunities
...
Competitor gap, new segment demand
...
Launch services; localise products
...
Strategy, ValueStream, Capabilities, Initiatives
Implementation guidance
Classification: Each rationale must include a driver type. Multiple drivers may be selected if appropriate.
Traceability: Rationales should link to the relevant strategy, initiative, or performance goal.
Consistency: Use the https://orthogramic.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/OM/pages/290914315#Trigger-Catalogue to guide classification.
Relationship to Triggers
Every rationale originates in response to a defined Trigger—an external event, internal insight, or strategic condition that prompts consideration or action. The Rationale captures the logical reasoning for why a specific response is necessary, based on that triggering context. This link is formalised via the trigger field, which connects each rationale directly to its source condition using the
For further details on how triggers are defined, classified, and managed, see: https://orthogramic.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/OM/pages/290914315 and the associated https://orthogramic.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/OM/pages/290914315#Trigger-Catalogue, which outlines recognised types such as Regulatory, Risk, Opportunity, and Performance Insight.
...
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:
Rationale Orientation:
...
Primary Driver: The fundamental reasoning type (Risk, Compliance, OpportunityWhether the rationale is reactive to existing conditions or proactive to anticipated conditions
Rationale Type: The response category (Preventative, Remedial, Opportunistic, etc.)
Reasoning Pattern: The logical structure of the rationale (Causal, Comparative, Normative, etc.)
Evidence Base: The foundation for the rationale (Data-driven, Expert judgment, Regulatory requirementIndustry best practice, etc.)
Strategic Alignment: How the rationale connects to organizational strategy (Direct support, Indirect enablement, Risk mitigation, etc.)Objective Reference: Direct link to the strategic objective this rationale supports
Business Value Type: The nature of value creation or preservation (Cost reduction, Revenue growth, Risk reductionMarket creation, etc.)
This classification framework enables organizations 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
The framework enhances governance by providing a consistent structure for documenting decision rationales, making it easier to audit decision-making processes and demonstrate the logical foundation for strategic responses.
How rationales are formed in response to specific triggers
Rationales are formed by analysing the implications of a specific trigger—whether external (e.g. regulatory change, market shift) or internal (e.g. performance trend, operational failure)—and articulating the reasoning behind a proposed strategic response. Each rationale provides the logical and contextual justification for why a response is appropriate, necessary, or valuable. This step bridges the gap between situational awareness (the trigger) and deliberate action (the response), ensuring decisions are traceable, defensible, and aligned with organisational goals.
By linking a rationale to its originating trigger, organisations can ensure transparency in decision-making, assess the consistency of responses over time, and identify patterns that inform future strategic planning. Rationales also provide auditability for governance, especially when responses involve major investments or policy changes.
Linked domains and rationale classification
A rationale may influence multiple business architecture domains. These are listed under the linkedDomains property and allow downstream actions to be traced back to justifying logic. The classification field allows rationales to be categorised according to:
Risk
Compliance
Opportunity
Mandate
Performance Insight
Stakeholder Need
Other
...
Distinguishing reactive and proactive rationales
The Orthogramic Metamodel now explicitly distinguishes between reactive and proactive rationales:
Reactive Rationales: Respond to existing conditions, events, or triggers that have already occurred
Proactive Rationales: Anticipate future conditions or opportunities that have not yet materialized
Proactive rationales should document:
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
Rationale and Trigger linkage examples
See: https://github.com/Orthogramic/Orthogramic_Metamodel/blob/main/examples/trigger-rationale-links.md
Rationale Schema
See: https://github.com/Orthogramic/Orthogramic_Metamodel
Schema properties
Field | Type | Required | Description | Example |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| string (uuid) | Yes | Unique identifier for the rationale |
|
| ||||
| string | Yes | Title or summary of the rationale |
|
| ||
| string | Yes |
Detailed explanation |
supporting a strategic response |
|
| ||
| string (uuid) | Yes |
Reference to the trigger that prompted this rationale
Primary trigger this rationale responds to |
| |||
| array of uuid | No | Optional multiple triggers this rationale addresses |
|
| array of |
enum |
No |
Business architecture domains influenced or justified by this rationale |
|
|
| string (enum) | Yes |
The justification type for this rationale |
|
| ||||
| string (enum) | Yes | Whether the rationale is responding to existing conditions or anticipating future conditions |
|
| array of string | No | For proactive rationales, the expected benefits or outcomes |
|
| array of objects | No | Other strategic options that were evaluated but not selected | See example below |
| string (enum) | No | The logical structure of the rationale |
|
| ||||
| string (enum) | No | The foundation for the rationale |
|
|
|
| string ( |
uuid) | No |
Reference to the |
strategic objective this rationale supports |
| |||
| string (enum) | No | The nature of value creation or preservation |
|
| ||||
| object | No | How this rationale advances competitive stance | See example below |
| string (date) | No | The date the rationale was first recorded |
|
| string (date) | No | The most recent date of rationale review |
|
| integer (1–5) | No | Optional evaluation of rationale effectiveness |
|
| string | No | The person or team who documented the rationale |
|
| |||
| string | No | The |
organisational unit that owns or authored the rationale |
|
| |
| array of |
uuid |
No | References to other related rationales |
|
These updated schema properties tables provide a clear overview of the enhanced Trigger and Rationale schemas, including field types, requirement status, descriptions, and example values. The tables reflect the expanded taxonomy features that enable better categorization, analytics, and auditability within the Orthogramic Metamodel.
| ||||
| array of enum | No | Type of relationship with each related rationale |
|
Example of alternativeConsidered
| Code Block |
|---|
"alternativeConsidered": [
{
"alternativeID": "c1d2e3f4-a5b6-7890-cdef-123456789012",
"alternativeDescription": "Third-party partnership with established analytics provider",
"reasonForRejection": "Insufficient data sovereignty and competitive advantage dilution"
},
{
"alternativeDescription": "Acquisition of AI analytics startup",
"reasonForRejection": "Due diligence revealed technical debt and integration challenges"
}
]
|
Example of competitivePositioning
| Code Block |
|---|
"competitivePositioning": {
"positioningType": "Differentiation",
"positioningDescription": "Position our products as uniquely responsive to emerging customer needs through superior predictive analytics capabilities",
"competitiveTarget": "Premium segment currently dominated by competitors relying on retrospective analytics"
}
|
Enumeration Values
rationaleOrientation
"Reactive"- Responding to existing conditions or events that have already occurred"Proactive"- Anticipating future conditions or opportunities that have not yet materialized
rationaleType
"Preventative"- Aims to prevent potential negative outcomes before they occur"Remedial"- Addresses existing problems or deficiencies that need correction"Opportunistic"- Leverages an emerging situation to create value or advantage"Proactive"- Initiates change in anticipation of future needs or conditions"Reactive"- Direct response to a specific trigger or event"Compliance_Fulfillment"- Ensures adherence to legal, regulatory, or policy requirements"Strategic_Advancement"- Supports forward movement on strategic objectives or positioning
reasoningPattern
"Causal"- Based on cause-and-effect relationships between events or conditions"Comparative"- Based on similarities or differences with other situations or organizations"Normative"- Based on standards, best practices, or what should ideally be done"Predictive"- Based on forecasts or projections of future conditions"Analogical"- Based on parallels with similar situations encountered previously"Deductive"- Based on applying general principles to specific situations"Inductive"- Based on recognizing patterns from specific observations
evidenceBase
"Data_Driven"- Primarily supported by quantitative metrics or analysis"Expert_Judgment"- Based on specialized knowledge or experience of subject matter experts"Industry_Best_Practice"- Informed by recognized standards or approaches in the industry"Customer_Feedback"- Derived from direct customer or user input"Internal_Analysis"- Based on internal studies, assessments, or evaluations"External_Research"- Supported by third-party research or market analysis"Competitive_Analysis"- Informed by assessment of competitor strategies or positions
businessValueType
"Cost_Reduction"- Decreasing operational or production expenses"Revenue_Growth"- Increasing income or sales volume"Risk_Reduction"- Mitigating potential threats or vulnerabilities"Customer_Experience"- Enhancing interactions and satisfaction for customers"Operational_Efficiency"- Improving internal processes or productivity"Competitive_Advantage"- Strengthening position relative to competitors"Brand_Perception"- Enhancing how the organization is viewed in the market"Stakeholder_Trust"- Building confidence among investors, partners, or regulators"Market_Creation"- Developing entirely new markets or customer segments"First_Mover_Advantage"- Gaining benefits from being first to market with an offering"Market_Disruption"- Changing existing market structures or business models"Innovation_Leadership"- Establishing recognized leadership in innovative practices"Ecosystem_Development"- Building or expanding a network of partners or complementary offerings"Strategic_Positioning"- Improving long-term strategic position or capabilities
competitivePositioning.positioningType
"Differentiation"- Setting the organization apart based on unique attributes or capabilities"Cost_Leadership"- Competing primarily on price or value through operational efficiency"Focus_Strategy"- Targeting specific market segments with tailored offerings"Blue_Ocean"- Creating uncontested market space rather than competing in existing markets"Industry_Leadership"- Establishing the organization as a dominant force in the industry"Fast_Follower"- Quickly adopting innovations after market validation by others"Niche_Dominance"- Commanding a specialized market segment or application area"Strategic_Alliance"- Leveraging partnerships or collaborations for competitive advantage
relationshipTypes
"supports"- This rationale reinforces or enhances another rationale"contradicts"- This rationale conflicts with or opposes another rationale"expands"- This rationale builds upon or extends the scope of another rationale"duplicates"- This rationale substantially overlaps with another rationale"supersedes"- This rationale replaces or makes obsolete another rationale
This schema supports structured reasoning and traceability across strategy, policy, and initiative development, ensuring that every response is grounded in a documented justificationrationale that bridges from trigger events to strategic objectives.