Poesis
Pains
Where work becomes difficult
- Pain point Partial
Collection scope, incomplete runs and stale evidence are mistaken for current coverage.
Reviews rely on uninspected or outdated inputs and repeat work when collection failures emerge late.
Addressed by Affordances(1)
Addressed by Capabilities(1)
Addressed by Features(2)
Experienced by Actor types(4)
Addressed through Use cases(6)
- Pain point Partial
Access assignments drift from responsibilities and identity-provider changes.
Excess privileges persist while legitimate work is blocked by missing or stale assignments.
Addressed by Features(2)
Experienced by Actor types(2)
Addressed through Use cases(2)
- Pain point Partial
Reviewers work from different selections and lose related decisions across meeting notes.
Decisions cannot be compared or reconstructed against the same agenda, subject set and evidence boundaries.
Addressed by Affordances(1)
Addressed by Capabilities(1)
Addressed by Features(2)
Experienced by Actor types(7)
- Pain point Partial
A blocking finding identifies a problem without a clear route to correction and renewed review.
Rejected proposals and uncovered obligations remain unresolved while reviewers repeat the same checks.
Addressed by Affordances(1)
Addressed by Capabilities(1)
Addressed by Features(1)
Experienced by Actor types(5)
- Pain point Partial
Selected vocabulary and unbound templates are mistaken for complete, applicable obligations.
Subjects or concerns are omitted and requirements are applied without a justified adopting scope.
Addressed by Affordances(1)
Addressed by Capabilities(2)
Addressed by Features(7)
Experienced by Actor types(5)
Addressed through Use cases(6)
- Pain point Partial
Incorrect bindings, unsupported narrative and partial files pass for completed deliverables.
Reviews discover missing evidence and output errors only after reports have been distributed.
Addressed by Affordances(1)
Addressed by Capabilities(3)
Addressed by Features(4)
Experienced by Actor types(6)
Addressed through Use cases(13)
- Author and maintain reusable output bindings
- Preview bindings before generating an artifact
- Set grounding constraints for generated narrative
- Operate recurring report production
- Investigate partial or failed generation
- Deliver a reviewed artifact through a local workflow
- Validate a mediated artifact write
- Define a deliverable schema and template
- Publish artifacts through configured CI checks
- Produce a named IT document family from pinned definitions
- Check a produced artifact against its contract
- Gate an advancement on an authenticated human decision
- Generate artifacts through declared workflows
- Pain point Partial
Dependent definitions remain trusted after a foundation is invalidated.
Continued use relies on obsolete eligibility and bypasses the renewed review required by changed foundations.
Addressed by Affordances(1)
Addressed by Capabilities(1)
Addressed by Features(1)
Experienced by Actor types(5)
- Pain point Implemented
Evidence is discarded too early or retained indefinitely without a justified preservation policy.
Historical decisions become unreviewable or unnecessary retained information creates avoidable exposure.
Addressed by Features(1)
Experienced by Actor types(3)
Addressed through Use cases(1)
- Pain point Partial
A rule revision changes established verdicts without an inspected explanation.
New false positives, missed violations and unknown outcomes alter decisions before their causes are understood.
Addressed by Capabilities(1)
Addressed by Features(1)
Experienced by Actor types(5)
Addressed through Use cases(2)
- Pain point Partial
Host or model selection changes behavior without verifying workload quality, instruction delivery or disclosure limits.
Required guidance and checks disappear or unsuitable model routes produce costly, untrustworthy work.
Addressed by Capabilities(1)
Addressed by Features(3)
Experienced by Actor types(3)
- Pain point Partial
Individually valid parallel agent outputs overwrite or contradict accepted work.
Combined artifacts lose coherence and attribution despite each isolated output passing its checks.
Addressed by Capabilities(1)
Addressed by Features(1)
Experienced by Actor types(2)
Addressed through Use cases(2)
- Pain point Planned
Service commitments have no agreed map of dependencies and accountable owners.
Changes and ownership transfers leave obligations unassigned and affected services overlooked.
Experienced by Actor types(4)
Addressed through Use cases(2)
- Pain point Planned
Temporary exceptions remain in force after their justification or controls expire.
Exposure accumulates without a current decision, a responsible risk owner or proof that compensating controls still work.
Experienced by Actor types(3)
Addressed through Use cases(2)
- Pain point Planned
A shared API changes before all affected consumers and migration conditions are known.
Uncoordinated upgrades and deprecations disrupt dependent services and force emergency compatibility work.
Experienced by Actor types(3)
Addressed through Use cases(2)
- Pain point Planned
Security findings are ranked without reliable deployed-service context or mitigation evidence.
Teams spend effort on the wrong exposure and close findings without establishing that affected services are protected.
Experienced by Actor types(4)
Addressed through Use cases(2)
- Pain point Planned
Supplier assurances and exit promises are detached from the services that depend on them.
Procurement and renewal decisions accept obligations or transition risks that service owners cannot substantiate.
Experienced by Actor types(3)
Addressed through Use cases(2)
- Pain point Planned
Recovery targets assume dependency sequences and restoration results that exercises have not demonstrated.
Services miss recovery commitments when shared resources, upstream dependencies or data restoration behave differently than assumed.
Experienced by Actor types(5)
Addressed through Use cases(2)
- Pain point Planned
Data producers and consumers discover incompatible meanings or quality expectations only after a change.
Downstream decisions and integrations fail while teams reconstruct what each party believed the data contract guaranteed.
Experienced by Actor types(4)
Addressed through Use cases(2)
- Pain point Planned
We know which software failed, but not which business processes are disrupted or whom to notify.
Response priorities follow technical alarms instead of confirmed business consequences, delaying workarounds and recovery for critical activities.
Experienced by Actor types(5)
Addressed through Use cases(1)
- Pain point Partial
The architecture repository is out of date the day it’s written.
Hand-maintained models detach from the territory the moment delivery moves on — and every decision made on them inherits the drift.
Addressed by Affordances(1)
Addressed by Capabilities(3)
Addressed by Features(2)
Experienced by Actor types(4)
Addressed through Use cases(7)
- Author and approve a shared definition
- Reconcile code evidence into reviewed definitions
- React to a committed definition change
- Extract definition candidates from a code revision
- Source IT definitions from inspected evidence
- Hold definitions as the authoritative, revision-bound source
- Review candidates from selected sources
- Pain point Partial
Compliance is reconstructed in spreadsheets before every audit.
Posture exists only at audit time; between audits, nobody can answer what is actually covered.
Addressed by Affordances(1)
Addressed by Capabilities(2)
Addressed by Features(3)
Experienced by Actor types(7)
Addressed through Use cases(7)
- Retrieve the basis of a historical decision
- Review a scoped IT appraisal
- Review recurring patient-portal appraisal
- Inspect retained contribution evidence
- Run a scoped IT compliance appraisal
- Hold definitions as the authoritative, revision-bound source
- Evaluate identified inputs against supported Norms
- Pain point Planned
Impact analysis is a guess made in a meeting.
Coupling is discovered in incident reviews, after the change shipped.
Addressed by Capabilities(1)
Addressed by Features(1)
Experienced by Actor types(6)
- Pain point Partial
Every deliverable is hand-crafted, again and again.
ADR packs, evidence, baselines, and roadmaps are rebuilt by hand — and stale against each other by the time they ship.
Addressed by Affordances(1)
Addressed by Capabilities(2)
Addressed by Features(2)
Experienced by Actor types(7)
Addressed through Use cases(8)
- Author and maintain reusable output bindings
- Operate recurring report production
- Generate and review an architecture decision pack
- Reuse captured delivery evidence as definition proposals
- Extract definition candidates from delivery history
- Produce a named IT document family from pinned definitions
- Turn delivery history into definition candidates
- Generate artifacts through declared workflows
- Pain point Partial
Governance drifts from what actually runs.
The declared estate and the running estate diverge silently — until an audit or an incident exposes the gap.
Addressed by Affordances(1)
Addressed by Capabilities(3)
Addressed by Features(3)
Experienced by Actor types(6)
Addressed through Use cases(8)
- Set and review evidence-refresh expectations
- Reconcile code evidence into reviewed definitions
- Review recurring patient-portal appraisal
- Submit a contribution to a declared panel
- Close a contribution collection for review
- Collect competing contributions on a shared blackboard
- Obtain a reproducible verdict for supplied inputs
- Review candidates from selected sources
- Pain point Partial
AI agents act on stale wikis and tribal knowledge.
Without a trustworthy machine-readable source of truth, agent autonomy is either blocked or reckless.
Addressed by Affordances(1)
Addressed by Capabilities(2)
Addressed by Features(2)
Experienced by Actor types(5)
- Pain point Partial
Anything can change anything — there is no approval trail.
Definitions, standards, and obligations mutate without review; who approved what, and when, is unanswerable.
Addressed by Affordances(1)
Addressed by Capabilities(4)
Addressed by Features(7)
Experienced by Actor types(8)
Addressed through Use cases(9)
- Review a governance package upgrade
- Author and approve a shared definition
- Execute a bounded response and inspect the receipt
- Read and revise definitions through the API
- Qualify an execution adapter for an integration
- Enforce definition lifecycle boundaries
- Run a Mechanism inside declared bounds
- Serve authorized definition context to a model
- Make review and activation boundaries explicit
- Pain point Partial
Every framework lives in its own silo — and they collide on your desk.
TOGAF, ISO, GDPR, and NIS2 each demand their own registry and their own reconciliation; overlaps and conflicts are discovered by accident.
Addressed by Affordances(1)
Addressed by Capabilities(2)
Addressed by Features(11)
Experienced by Actor types(6)
Addressed through Use cases(7)
- Compose and reuse a governance selection
- Resolve competing obligations before adoption
- Review sourced obligations before binding them
- Review a governance package upgrade
- Compose an IT governance fabric for an adopting scope
- Adopt a sourced framework or regulation
- Review selected obligations together
- Pain point Implemented
Your governance model is trapped in a vendor’s proprietary format.
Obligations, architecture, and compliance mappings live in tool-specific silos — migrating tools means re-authoring your governance.
Addressed by Capabilities(1)
Experienced by Actor types(3)
Addressed through Use cases(1)
- Pain point Partial
Architecture, compliance, and quality tools don’t speak to each other.
Each tool keeps its own model of the same IT reality; integrations are bespoke mappings that rot, and knowledge stays siloed per tool and per team.
Addressed by Affordances(1)
Addressed by Capabilities(6)
Addressed by Features(17)
Experienced by Actor types(9)
Addressed through Use cases(16)
- Inspect one subject across framework perspectives
- Agree a reusable domain typing contract
- Qualify transfer between independent processors
- Read and model a governance decision
- Describe a service contract and its attribution
- Describe payment request and notification boundaries
- Describe payment settlement and recovery boundaries
- Incorporate an accepted grammar extension
- Read and revise definitions through the API
- Qualify an execution adapter for an integration
- Maintain a governed IT definition inventory
- Type a governance concern with the systemic primitives
- Define a domain vocabulary as an Archetype
- Express an obligation in the governance grammar
- Describe an interaction with sourced protocol vocabulary
- Work from shared, typed definitions
- Pain point Partial
AI agents ship work nobody scoped, gated, or can replay.
Agentic delivery state is trapped in chat sessions; pull requests appear without a mandate; there is no event log and no human authority at the layer where it matters.
Addressed by Affordances(1)
Addressed by Capabilities(4)
Addressed by Features(7)
Experienced by Actor types(5)
Addressed through Use cases(14)
- Approve an agent resource and action mandate
- Deliver a reviewed artifact through a local workflow
- Set up a workspace and publish checked artifacts
- Resolve the next eligible workflow step
- Inspect a captured harness invocation sequence
- Assign a delivery responsibility from the role catalog
- Select a practice playbook for a delivery task
- Define a delivery ceremony and its handoffs
- Select versioned instructions for an engineering role
- Run an agentic workflow with deterministic controls
- Adopt the agentic SAFe operating model
- Gate an advancement on an authenticated human decision
- Deliver from a local-first, reproducible plane
- Generate artifacts through declared workflows
- Pain point Partial
A modeling decision cites an example as though it were an executed test.
A reviewer cannot distinguish a plausible explanation from evidence that rules out alternatives.
Addressed by Capabilities(1)
Addressed by Features(6)
Experienced by Actor types(2)
- Pain point Partial
The reason for a decision stays in an email thread instead of reaching the next reviewer.
In a manual handoff, the next reviewer repeats interviews to recover assumptions and unresolved objections.
Addressed by Capabilities(2)
Addressed by Features(1)
Experienced by Actor types(7)
Addressed through Use cases(6)