What breaksOpaque Decision · Context loss · Fragmentation · Institutional Dependency
SCN-023Decisions lose their why
A Billion-Dollar Project. Nobody Can Reconstruct Why.
Costs, requirements and risks change for years; the institution must still be able to explain each major turn.
ScaleNational
UrgencyHigh
Coordination gapHigh
StakesMoney · Public value · Service quality
Opaque DecisionContext lossFragmentationInstitutional Dependency
What Koali changes
← Back to the full MosaicKoali binds major decisions to the evidence, options, dissent, cost assumptions, risks, approvals and downstream work they created. The project becomes a decision graph rather than a pile of files.
Who holds part of the picture
frontline practitioners • domain experts • decision-makers
Koali response
Koali binds major decisions to the evidence, options, dissent, cost assumptions, risks, approvals and downstream work they created. The project becomes a decision graph rather than a pile of files.
Real-world parallels
- CASA/SAAQclic — Auditor General of Québec
- Phoenix pay system — Auditor General of Canada
- ArriveCAN — Auditor General of Canada
What success looks like
The relevant state remains visible across handoffs and time. • Responsibilities, unresolved questions and escalation paths are explicit.
Documented parallels show that the failure mechanism is real; they do not claim Koali would have changed a specific outcome.
A Billion-Dollar Project. Nobody Can Reconstruct Why.
Costs, requirements and risks change for years; the institution must still be able to explain each major turn.
The problem
A major transformation produces thousands of documents and meetings. Requirements shift, costs rise, testing reveals new risks and suppliers propose changes. Years later, an auditor can find the decision but not the full chain of evidence and trade-offs that produced it.
What breaks
- Opaque Decision
- Context Loss
- Fragmentation
- Institutional Dependency
Who holds part of the picture
- frontline practitioners
- domain experts
- decision-makers
- affected people
With Koali
Koali binds major decisions to the evidence, options, dissent, cost assumptions, risks, approvals and downstream work they created. The project becomes a decision graph rather than a pile of files.
Human authority
Authorized humans and institutions retain their existing legal, professional and democratic authority. Koali structures knowledge, coordination and traceability; it does not take sovereign or professional decisions.
What success looks like
- The relevant state remains visible across handoffs and time.
- Responsibilities, unresolved questions and escalation paths are explicit.
- The outcome produces reusable memory for the next comparable case.
Real-world parallels
Vérificateur général du Québec — CASA/SAAQclic
The Auditor General reported major cost growth not clearly communicated to decision-makers and weaknesses around project readiness and testing.
Relation to scenario: DIRECT
Source: https://www.vgq.qc.ca/Fichiers/Publications/rapport-annuel/212/25.02_VGQ_Fiche_descriptive%20-%20CASA-SAAQclic.pdf
Auditor General of Canada — Phoenix example
The Auditor General reiterated that Phoenix executives prioritized schedule and budget over critical elements and did not provide senior officials a complete picture of project risks.
Relation to scenario: DIRECT
Source: https://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/docs/parl_oag_202310_07_e.pdf
Auditor General of Canada — ArriveCAN
The audit documented weak procurement records, non-competitive professional-services contracting and cases where resources were routed through intermediaries at likely additional cost.
Relation to scenario: STRONG ANALOGUE
Source: https://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/docs/parl_oag_202402_01_e.pdf
Boundary
The documented cases illustrate analogous failure mechanisms. They do not establish that Koali would have prevented the event or guaranteed a different outcome.
Koali loop
signals → shared meaning → evidence → choice → responsibility → action → verification → memory → better knowledge