Reference Progression Model¶

01.030.031.020.010 v20260810.001

Purpose and Authority¶

This document defines the structure and governance of Reference Progressions within the canonical Maturity Progression model family.

A Reference Progression is portable VRBoK guidance. It explains how one canonical adjacent-level Maturity Progression may commonly operate across the Value Realization Pillars, Priority Outcomes or Effects, Plays or Efforts, enabling conditions, evidence, and characteristic value risks. It is intentionally more applied than the canonical transition definition and intentionally less specific than a registered Progression Pattern or subject-specific Progression Application.

Reference Progression. A governed, portable, and explicitly illustrative interpretation of one canonical Maturity Progression that identifies common Value Realization Pillar relationships, Priority Outcomes or Effects, Plays or Efforts, enabling conditions, evidence, boundary conditions, and value risks without prescribing an exhaustive or universally mandatory implementation.

Progression Architecture¶

The maturity progression architecture has four layers.

Layer	Function	Authority and specificity
Canonical Maturity Progression	Defines the universal adjacent-state transition logic.	Canonical and portable; least implementation-specific.
Reference Progression	Illustrates how the transition may operate across Pillars, Effects, Plays, evidence, and risks.	Canonical reference guidance; portable and non-exhaustive.
Progression Pattern	Defines reusable prescribed logic applicable to one or more subjects, Pillars, contexts, or maturity transitions.	Governed pattern; may be portable or Alescent-specific according to its knowledge system.
Progression Application	Applies one or more Progression Patterns to a specific subject, scope, source position, target level, and evidence basis.	Context-specific governed application.

The term Progression Application is preferred. Progression Instance is discouraged and appears here only to explain that it must not be used as a current valid synonym.

Illustrative, Not Comprehensive¶

Reference Progressions must state clearly that their contents are illustrative rather than comprehensive.

A Reference Progression must not be interpreted as:

a universal checklist;
a complete set of required Practices, Proficiencies, Plays, or evidence;
a substitute for subject-specific entry and exit criteria;
a requirement that every Pillar receive equal intervention;
proof that the cited Effects will occur;
a prohibition against other valid Progression Patterns;
a one-to-one mapping between one Pattern and one Capability or Maturity Progression.

Applicable requirements are established through governed Progression Patterns and Progression Applications using the declared subject, scope, materiality, risk, dependencies, and evidence basis.

Relationship to Value Realization Pillars¶

Each Reference Progression should identify Pillar relationships using the canonical roles:

Primary Pillar. The Pillar principally changed or governed by the reference transition.
Contributing Pillar. A Pillar supplying material conditions, dependencies, or constraints.
Affected Pillar. A Pillar whose state, obligations, performance, or value may change.
Evidence-producing Pillar. A Pillar expected to produce evidence supporting the transition or designation.
Excluded Pillar. A Pillar deliberately excluded from a Progression Application, with rationale and limitation.

A Pillar relationship is contextual. A Pillar identified as primary in one Progression Application may be contributing or evidence-producing in another.

Relationship to Effects and Priority Outcomes¶

An Effect is a canonical outcome class. A Priority is the contextual designation of an Effect as a scope-defining intended outcome.

The phrase Priority Outcome may be used as reader-facing language for an Effect designated as a Priority. It does not create a separate ontology class unless future canonical governance establishes a distinct meaning.

Reference Progressions may identify:

illustrative principal Priority Outcomes;
contributing Effects;
Effects to be protected;
adverse or displaced Effects requiring trade-off analysis.

Citing an Effect identifies a value hypothesis or relationship. It does not prove that the Effect occurred or that maturity advancement created net value.

Effort, Play, and Playbook¶

Effort. A bounded intentional action, intervention, or coordinated set of activities undertaken to establish, change, protect, sustain, or evidence a realization condition or Effect.

Play. A reusable prescribed Effort that may be selected and applied within a Playbook, Maturity Progression, Progression Pattern, Initiative, or other governed context.

Playbook. A governed composition of Plays and supporting guidance used to pursue one or more Effects within a defined context.

A Play is a subtype of Prescribed Pattern and a reusable form of Effort. An Effort may be unique and need not be reusable. A Playbook coordinates Plays but is not itself an Effect, Project, Practice, or Maturity Progression.

Reference Progression Content Model¶

Each Reference Progression should contain:

Purpose and transition. Source anchor, target anchor, and canonical progression name.
Reference posture. Explicit statement that the content is illustrative and non-exhaustive.
Transition conditions. Common reasons advancement may be justified.
Pillar relationships. Primary, contributing, affected, and evidence-producing Pillars.
Illustrative Priority Outcomes and Effects. Principal, contributing, protected, and trade-off Effects.
Illustrative Plays and Efforts. Reusable prescribed Efforts commonly associated with the transition.
Illustrative Practices and Proficiencies. Common requirements without implying completeness.
Enabling conditions. Relevant Players, Partners, Platforms, Products, information, controls, and Projects.
Illustrative evidence. Typical evidence categories subject to the Evidence Sufficiency rules.
Characteristic value enablement and risk. How the transition may enable value and where it may create leakage or harm.
False positives and boundary conditions. Activity that should not be mistaken for advancement.
Related Progression Patterns. Registry relationships where known.

Many-to-Many Relationship Rule¶

A Progression Pattern may relate to:

one or more Capabilities;
one or more Competencies;
one or more canonical Maturity Progressions;
one or more Pillars in different relationship roles;
one or more Effects in different contextual roles;
one or more Plays, Practices, Platforms, Products, Partners, Projects, and evidence sources.

The registry must therefore store explicit relationship records rather than force one fixed classification.

Reference Progression Metadata¶

reference_progression:
  id: ""
  name: ""
  version: ""
  status: "draft"
  canonical_progression: ""
  source_maturity_level: ""
  target_maturity_level: ""
  reference_posture: "illustrative_non_exhaustive"
  domain_relationships:
    primary: []
    contributing: []
    affected: []
    evidence_producing: []
  effects:
    illustrative_priorities: []
    contributors: []
    protected: []
    adverse_or_tradeoff: []
  illustrative_plays: []
  illustrative_practices: []
  illustrative_proficiencies: []
  enabling_conditions: []
  illustrative_evidence: []
  value_enablement: []
  value_risks: []
  false_positives: []
  related_progression_patterns: []
  limitations: []

Governance¶

Changes to the definition, four-layer architecture, relationship roles, or semantic distinctions among Effort, Play, Playbook, Progression Pattern, and Progression Application require canonical governance.

Reference Progression content may evolve as evidence, professional practice, market conditions, or the relevant state of the art advances. Revisions must preserve the canonical transition and remain explicitly illustrative.