ARQUA • Architecture in Practice • Context Library • Request a Briefing
This context is a sector-specific manifestation of the structural requirement for authority to be explicit before decisions are permitted to act.
This context arises when intelligence flows between two independent organisations — typically a platform provider and its client — and recommendations begin to influence real-world actions.
Why this context matters
As platforms evolve from observability into recommendation and optimisation, they increasingly shape operational decisions without holding formal authority or accountability for the outcomes.
When this boundary is left implicit, responsibility becomes blurred and decisions become difficult to defend after the fact.
Where execution outpaces permitted authority, downstream governance fails (see ).
Defining characteristic
Two distinct sovereign actors are present:
- one that produces signals, analysis, or recommendations
- one that owns execution authority, regulatory obligation, and outcome accountability
Intelligence may cross this boundary freely.
Authority must not — unless explicitly delegated.
Common failure mode
The platform is perceived as having “decided”, while the institution is perceived as having merely “approved”.
In post-incident review, neither party can clearly demonstrate ownership of the action or the rationale for allowing it to occur.
How SCIA applies
SCIA introduces an explicit execution-governance layer that governs when authority may be delegated across sovereignty boundaries.
Action is only permitted when meaning, authority, coherence, and accountability are made explicit in the execution context.
Related contexts
- Often appears alongside: Large Insurance-Led Financial Group — Operating Context
- Common in: Large Diversified Financial Group — Operating Context
Context Only
This page reflects an operating context, not an assessment or recommendation.
Relevance evolves as organisational priorities and external conditions change.
© Arqua Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.