Decision Architecture

Our Approach

Design for better decisions. Better outcomes follow.

Our Frameworks

Capable Agency Theory (CAT)

A framework for analyzing and designing decision-making systems through the capabilities required for mature agency, including perception, action, reaction, outcomes, impact, governance, delegation, and execution.

Decision Model and Notation (DMN)

An open standard for modeling and executing business decisions in a way that is understandable to both business experts and software developers. Maintained by the Object Management Group, it complements process modeling by making decision logic explicit, reusable, and portable across tools.

Rights–Responsibility Balance Theory (RRBT)

Every capable agent operates under a set of rights and responsibilities. Stable and effective systems require these to remain appropriately balanced. Persistent imbalance creates adaptive pressure that is resolved through structural change, cultural adaptation, or system degradation.

Decision Opportunity Representation (DOOR)

Decision Opportunity Representation (DOOR) is a framework for formally representing decision opportunities—the situations in which an agent can deliberately impact the environment.

Decision Organization Map (DOM)

The Decision Organization Map (DOM) is a framework for mapping how an organization organizes its recurring decision opportunities. Rather than evaluating business performance, DOM describes how decision opportunities are coordinated throughout the organization and identifies opportunities to improve decision organization. 

DOM is built on three independent dimensions: Objective Orientation, Decision Opportunity Portfolio, Decision Opportunity Representation.

Functional Integrity Theory (FIT)

Every functional system is composed of inputs, rules, objectives, and constraints. Together, these components determine the function the system serves. Functional Integrity Theory (FIT) proposes that this function can be understood through two dimensions: Functional Clarity, the extent to which the function is explicitly represented, and Functional Reality, the function the system actually serves in practice. Together, these dimensions define ten functional archetypes that characterize how systems discover, preserve, or drift from the functions they serve.