Rationale

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: Strategic Response Model

Rationales help ensure that every action taken by the 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 by linking to a triggerID. This linkage ensures traceability from external condition through to internal response.

Rationales may arise from various 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:

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 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:

Rationale Orientation: Whether 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, Industry best practice, etc.)
Strategic 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, Market 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

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: Orthogramic_Metamodel/examples/trigger-rationale-links.md at main · Orthogramic/Orthogramic_Metamodel

Rationale Schema

See: GitHub - Orthogramic/Orthogramic_Metamodel

Schema properties

Field	Type	Required	Description	Example

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"]`
`alternativeConsidered`	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 alternativeConsidered

"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

"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 rationale that bridges from trigger events to strategic objectives.