EM-WRK-03 · Subject model · W2
Program and Benefits Management
Coordinated projects and other work pursued for joint benefits, with management of the transition and the sustainability of the effect.
Partially published; research continues
Claude: complete-frozen-audit-once-remediated-without-rerun; Grok: complete-exact-prompt-reconciled.
Published results
Research note, in Russian: Canonical/runtime promotion remains governed by the package allocation, identity and dependency holds.
Subject boundary and candidate types
- Program
- ProgramComponent
- Tranche
- BenefitDependency
- TransitionPlan
Deep research questions
- What additional benefit justifies grouping the work?
- How are non-project components and benefit completion after the projects accounted for?
- How is the Program discriminator of the existing WM-ACT-029 applied?
Verifiable invariants
- Components are not limited to projects
- The program owner does not own all facts of the projects
- The joint effect has an explicit justification
End-to-end acceptance scenario
Model a program with two projects and an operational transition; a closed project does not mean the joint benefit has been achieved.
Negative case
An arbitrary folder of unrelated projects is called a program.
Approaches to compare
- PMI: project/program/portfolio
- Process-based and flow-based organization of work; compare Scrum/Kanban against primary sources
- Tracker object practice: container, issue, workflow and binding to the business initiative
Candidates in the live catalogue
- WM-ACT-029 · Program / Portfolio · 0.3.0-research.1 · installable
Semantic fit requires boundary research; a published model does not by itself complete this card.
Result requirements
Every card is executed together with the full research contract: definitions, fields and cardinalities, lifecycle, sources, data mastership, rights, the five object facets, at least eight invariants, positive and negative examples, dependencies, migration and applicability limits.