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:

1. Rationale Orientation: Whether the rationale is reactive to existing conditions or proactive to anticipated conditions

2. Rationale Type: The response category (Preventative, Remedial, Opportunistic, etc.)

3. Reasoning Pattern: The logical structure of the rationale (Causal, Comparative, Normative, etc.)

4. Evidence Base: The foundation for the rationale (Data-driven, Expert judgment, Industry best practice, etc.)

5. Strategic Objective Reference: Direct link to the strategic objective this rationale supports

6. 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

Schema properties

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

• Proactive

rationaleType

• Preventative

• Remedial

• Opportunistic

• Proactive

• Reactive

• Compliance_Fulfillment

• Strategic_Advancement

reasoningPattern

• Causal

• Comparative

• Normative

• Predictive

• Analogical

• Deductive

• Inductive

evidenceBase

• Data_Driven

• Expert_Judgment

• Industry_Best_Practice

• Customer_Feedback

• Internal_Analysis

• External_Research

• Competitive_Analysis

businessValueType

• Cost_Reduction

• Revenue_Growth

• Risk_Reduction

• Customer_Experience

• Operational_Efficiency

• Competitive_Advantage

• Brand_Perception

• Stakeholder_Trust

• Market_Creation

• First_Mover_Advantage

• Market_Disruption

• Innovation_Leadership

• Ecosystem_Development

• Strategic_Positioning

competitivePositioning.positioningType

• Differentiation

• Cost_Leadership

• Focus_Strategy

• Blue_Ocean

• Industry_Leadership

• Fast_Follower

• Niche_Dominance

• Strategic_Alliance

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.