{ "vercy": "1.0-draft", "publication": { "status": "research-draft", "adjudicationStatus": "unreviewed", "publishableCanonical": false, "generatedAt": "2026-09-12T10:30:02Z", "providers": [ "Codex" ], "breadth": "recalled by Codex without web access - no source was read", "missingProviders": [], "pass": 2, "cost": { "grok": { "seconds": 23.6, "error": "Reading additional input from stdin...\nOpenAI Codex v0.153.4\n--------\nworkdir: R:\\02_PROJECTS\\02_Meta_Models_Platforms\\Ver.cy\\current\\thing-registry-backlog\nmodel: gpt-6-astra\nprovider: openai\napproval: never\nsandbox: read-only\nreasoning effort: none\nreasoning summaries: none\nsession id: 01a09529-af7b-7da2-85f7-ada0279e396b\n--------\nuser\nDescribe what is already known about one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: information technology consulting\nSense to describe: (none recorded)\nDomain code: ACT.ACT\nAlso known as: (none)\n\n\nContext for this batch of 1001 things:", "usd": 0.0, "recall": true }, "codex": { "seconds": 71.3, "error": "Reading additional input from stdin...\nOpenAI Codex v0.153.4\n--------\nworkdir: R:\\02_PROJECTS\\02_Meta_Models_Platforms\\Ver.cy\\current\\thing-registry-backlog\nmodel: gpt-6-astra\nprovider: openai\napproval: never\nsandbox: read-only\nreasoning effort: none\nreasoning summaries: none\nsession id: 01a09529-af6d-7733-8583-209034daf938\n--------\nuser\nYou are drafting a Vercy meta-model for one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: information technology consulting\nRegistry id: vr.tr.information-technology-consulting\nPlane / domain: ACT / ACT.ACT\nRegistry definition: (none recor" } }, "enrichment": { "pass": 3, "engine": "claude", "producedAt": "2026-10-06T12:00:00Z", "ingestedAt": "2026-10-06T08:49:30+00:00", "fields": [ "agent_conduct", "ethics", "owners" ] }, "gate": { "passed": true, "version": "1.0", "at": "2026-10-07T10:10:26+00:00", "evidence": [ "completeness 1.00", "sense: Wikidata description", "2 live sources", "review by codex: pass" ] } }, "metaModel": { "id": "THING-Q1540863", "registryId": "vr.tr.information-technology-consulting", "name": "information technology consulting", "version": "0.1.0-research.1", "entryKind": "thing", "family": "Thing Registry", "domain": [ "ACT.ACT" ], "status": "research-draft" }, "canonicalUrl": "https://ver.cy/models/thing/q1540863/", "model": { "registry_id": "vr.tr.information-technology-consulting", "name": "information technology consulting", "purpose": "Enable an AI agent to recognise an information technology consulting engagement, assess the basis and readiness of its advice, and identify justified next actions within the consultant's authority.", "definition": "Information technology consulting is the professional activity of advising organisations on how to select, design, implement, govern or improve information technology to meet their objectives, sometimes including delivery support.", "scope_statement": "This model owns information technology consulting as an activity that applies specialist judgement to a client's technology-related decisions, including diagnosis, recommendation, decision support and agreed implementation guidance; it does not model the consultancy firm or the client's technology estate as a whole.", "in_scope": [ "The client's technology-related decision, business objectives and consulting mandate", "Investigation of existing systems, information flows, technical constraints and organisational capabilities", "Development and comparison of technology strategies, architectures and sourcing options", "The evidence, assumptions, dependencies and commercial interests behind recommendations", "Consulting deliverables, decision rights, implementation guidance and knowledge transfer" ], "out_of_scope": [ "Routine operation, monitoring and support of production technology services", "Software development or infrastructure installation considered independently of consulting advice", "Technology products, platforms and infrastructure as standalone things", "The consultancy firm's corporate structure and general business administration", "General management consulting without a substantive information technology decision", "Formal certification, statutory audit or legal advice requiring a separate mandate" ], "distinguishing_features": [ "An identifiable client decision about information technology requires specialist interpretation of the client's circumstances, rather than only delivery of a predefined product or service.", "The engagement produces reasoned advice or decision support whose assumptions and alternatives can be examined, even when implementation work is also included.", "The consultant's authority to recommend can be distinguished from the client's authority to approve expenditure, accept risk or authorise production changes.", "Compared with routine technical support, success depends on resolving or structuring a technology-related decision rather than solely restoring an existing service.", "Compared with product sales, the activity includes contextual technical judgement; any restriction to a vendor's portfolio must be visible when assessing that judgement." ], "characteristics": [ { "name": "Technology decision addressed", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Strategy; architecture; modernisation; integration; sourcing; security; data; service improvement; other explicitly described decision", "why_it_matters": "Identifies the specialist judgement required and prevents a broad consulting label from concealing the actual task." }, { "name": "Engagement mandate", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Links among client sponsor, consultant, decision owner, agreed scope and authorised activities", "why_it_matters": "Establishes who requested the work and who may act on its conclusions." }, { "name": "Advisory and delivery responsibilities", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Advice only; advice with implementation guidance; combined advice and delivery; explicitly described allocation", "why_it_matters": "Clarifies accountability when recommendations lead to technical changes." }, { "name": "Engagement stage", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "Scoping; discovery; analysis; recommendation; decision support; implementation guidance; handover; closed", "why_it_matters": "Indicates which deliverables and decisions are appropriate at the current point." }, { "name": "Evidence coverage", "kind": "measurement", "unit_or_values": "Number of material assessment claims supported by reviewed evidence divided by the number of material claims assessed, with the assessment boundary recorded", "why_it_matters": "Makes gaps in the diagnosis visible without treating document volume as evidence quality." }, { "name": "Recommendation dependencies", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Links from each recommendation to prerequisites, assumptions, affected systems and responsible owners", "why_it_matters": "Shows when otherwise plausible advice cannot yet be implemented." }, { "name": "Commercial interests", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Disclosed relationships to vendors, referral payments, resale arrangements and prospective implementation revenue; unresolved disclosures recorded separately", "why_it_matters": "Supports assessment of how incentives may influence option selection." }, { "name": "Recommendation disposition", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "Proposed; under review; accepted; accepted with conditions; deferred; rejected; superseded", "why_it_matters": "Separates the existence of advice from client approval and implementation." }, { "name": "Expected technology outcome", "kind": "measurement", "unit_or_values": "Decision-specific baseline, target, unit, time horizon and measurement owner, such as service availability percentage or annual operating cost in a stated currency", "why_it_matters": "Connects recommendations to observable client outcomes." } ], "affordances": [ "Check whether a proposed task falls within the consulting mandate and identify the required decision owner.", "Request missing system evidence and mark recommendations that depend on unverified assumptions.", "Compare technology options against client constraints, including retaining the current arrangement.", "Trace advice to evidence, technical dependencies and disclosed commercial interests.", "Prepare a decision record and an implementation sequence with approval conditions.", "Assess deliverable acceptance and identify knowledge or ownership gaps before handover." ], "agent_conduct": { "may": [ "Describe what IT consultants do and how organizations engage them.", "Help a client compare options and document requirements the client has shared." ], "must_not": [ "Recommend products in which it or its operator has an undisclosed interest.", "Access client systems or data beyond what the engagement authorizes.", "Share one client's confidential information with another client.", "Present guesses about a client's systems as audited findings." ], "requires_human": [ "Signing contracts or committing a client to spending.", "Changing production systems on a client's behalf." ] }, "ethics": { "considerations": [ "Clients rely on consultants' independence; hidden conflicts of interest betray them.", "Consultants handle confidential data and access to critical systems." ], "affected_parties": [ "Client organizations", "Their staff and customers", "Consultants" ] }, "owners": { "steward": "The consulting firm and the client under their engagement contract.", "master_systems": [] }, "what_it_is_for": [ "Information technology consulting is used when organisations need specialist advice on technology strategy, systems selection, integration or improvement.", "Engagements occur during activities such as replacing business software, assessing infrastructure, planning migrations and improving technology governance.", "The work connects organisational needs with technical choices and may include implementation support within an agreed scope." ], "standards_and_regulation": [ "ISIC Revision 4, issued by the United Nations Statistics Division, classifies computer consultancy and computer facilities management activities under class 6202.", "ISO 20700, issued by the International Organization for Standardization, provides guidelines for management consultancy services and applies to information technology engagements within that scope." ], "failure_modes_and_hazards": [ "Advice based on incomplete requirements or unsupported assumptions can produce unsuitable systems and wasted expenditure.", "Poorly governed implementation or migration work can interrupt services or cause data loss.", "Excessive access or inadequate information handling can expose confidential information.", "Undisclosed commercial incentives can bias recommendations and undermine the client's interests." ], "facets_not_applicable": { "recognition": "Information technology consulting is a professional activity with no intrinsic visual features that reliably distinguish it from other advisory work." } }, "sources": [ { "id": "wikidata", "title": "Wikidata item Q1540863: information technology consulting", "url": "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q1540863", "url_status": "live", "what_it_supports": "identity and sense of the item", "checked_by": "wikidata-api" }, { "id": "wikipedia-en", "title": "Wikipedia: Information technology consulting", "url": "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_technology_consulting", "url_status": "live", "what_it_supports": "general description of the item", "checked_by": "wikidata-api sitelink" } ], "structure": { "bundles": [ { "id": "client-decision-and-mandate", "name": "Client decision and mandate", "description": "Defines the technology decision the engagement serves and the limits of the consultant's role.", "rationale": "Technology consulting needs a bounded decision and explicit authority so that advice is relevant and does not become unauthorised delivery.", "layers": [ { "id": "technology-problem-framing", "name": "Technology problem framing", "description": "Connects the stated request to the client's operating problem and decision.", "findings": [ { "id": "decision-and-success-criteria", "name": "Decision and success criteria", "description": "Record the decision to be supported, its business motivation and the observable criteria for useful advice.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which technology decision must the client make, and what business problem makes it necessary?", "kind": "definition", "id": "decision-and-success-criteria-q01" }, { "text": "Which baseline, target and time horizon will establish whether the recommended change addresses that problem?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "decision-and-success-criteria-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "consulting-authority", "name": "Consulting authority", "description": "Separates advisory responsibilities from approval, delivery and operational responsibilities.", "findings": [ { "id": "mandate-and-decision-rights", "name": "Mandate and decision rights", "description": "Record the sponsor, decision owners, authorised investigative activities and boundaries between advice and execution.", "questions": [ { "text": "Does the agreed mandate cover recommendations only, implementation guidance or direct technical delivery?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "mandate-and-decision-rights-q01" }, { "text": "Who may approve expenditure, accept residual technology risk and authorise access or changes to client systems?", "kind": "action", "id": "mandate-and-decision-rights-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "technology-estate-and-diagnosis", "name": "Technology estate and diagnosis", "description": "Captures the relevant current environment and the strength of the diagnosis.", "rationale": "Advice about information technology depends on actual system behaviour, dependencies and client capabilities.", "layers": [ { "id": "current-system-context", "name": "Current system context", "description": "Locates the affected systems within business processes, data flows and operating arrangements.", "findings": [ { "id": "estate-and-dependency-boundary", "name": "Estate and dependency boundary", "description": "Record the systems, interfaces, data flows and ownership relationships that materially affect the decision.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which applications, infrastructure services, data stores and integrations must be examined to support this decision?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "estate-and-dependency-boundary-q01" }, { "text": "Which inventories, diagrams, configurations or system-owner accounts establish the current dependencies, and when were they verified?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "estate-and-dependency-boundary-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "diagnostic-evidence", "name": "Diagnostic evidence", "description": "Distinguishes observed technical conditions from reported symptoms and inferred causes.", "findings": [ { "id": "symptoms-causes-and-gaps", "name": "Symptoms, causes and gaps", "description": "Record the evidence supporting the diagnosis, competing explanations and limitations in access or measurement.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which logs, service metrics, incidents, interviews or tests support each proposed cause of the client's problem?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "symptoms-causes-and-gaps-q01" }, { "text": "What additional observation or authorised test would distinguish the leading explanation from plausible alternatives?", "kind": "action", "id": "symptoms-causes-and-gaps-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "technology-options-and-recommendations", "name": "Technology options and recommendations", "description": "Structures alternatives and explains why a recommendation fits the client's circumstances.", "rationale": "A consulting recommendation must expose its selection logic, technical feasibility and economic assumptions.", "layers": [ { "id": "option-feasibility", "name": "Option feasibility", "description": "Examines materially different ways to address the decision.", "findings": [ { "id": "alternatives-and-technical-fit", "name": "Alternatives and technical fit", "description": "Record feasible options, including retaining or improving the existing arrangement, against explicit constraints.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which alternatives were considered, including retaining the current arrangement, and why was each retained or excluded?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "alternatives-and-technical-fit-q01" }, { "text": "What evidence establishes each option's fit with required interfaces, workloads, data handling and available client skills?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "alternatives-and-technical-fit-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "recommendation-justification", "name": "Recommendation justification", "description": "Makes evaluation criteria, costs and uncertainty inspectable.", "findings": [ { "id": "tradeoffs-costs-and-assumptions", "name": "Tradeoffs, costs and assumptions", "description": "Record the basis for ranking options, including lifecycle costs, expected benefits and assumptions that could change the result.", "questions": [ { "text": "How are migration, integration, licensing, operation, training and exit costs estimated over a common time horizon?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "tradeoffs-costs-and-assumptions-q01" }, { "text": "Which changes in demand, pricing, delivery capacity or benefit assumptions would change the preferred option?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "tradeoffs-costs-and-assumptions-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "advisory-integrity-and-technical-risk", "name": "Advisory integrity and technical risk", "description": "Records influences on the advice and risks created by investigation or recommended changes.", "rationale": "Consultants may have privileged access and commercial incentives that affect both the engagement and the reliability of its advice.", "layers": [ { "id": "commercial-influence", "name": "Commercial influence", "description": "Exposes relationships that may constrain the option set or influence recommendations.", "findings": [ { "id": "interests-and-option-restrictions", "name": "Interests and option restrictions", "description": "Record vendor affiliations, financial incentives and restrictions on what the consultant is engaged to evaluate.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which disclosed vendor relationships or financial incentives could influence the recommendation?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "interests-and-option-restrictions-q01" }, { "text": "Is the assessment restricted to particular vendors or products, and how does that restriction limit its conclusions?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "interests-and-option-restrictions-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "access-and-change-risk", "name": "Access and change risk", "description": "Connects technical investigation and proposed changes to authorisation and risk ownership.", "findings": [ { "id": "sensitive-access-and-risk-conditions", "name": "Sensitive access and risk conditions", "description": "Record required access, sensitive information handling and unresolved risks that condition further action.", "questions": [ { "text": "What client authorisation and handling conditions govern access to production systems, credentials and sensitive data?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "sensitive-access-and-risk-conditions-q01" }, { "text": "Which security, privacy, continuity or compliance risks require specialist review or client acceptance before the recommendation can proceed?", "kind": "action", "id": "sensitive-access-and-risk-conditions-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "decision-to-handover", "name": "Decision to handover", "description": "Connects accepted advice to executable next steps and usable client knowledge.", "rationale": "Consulting outputs need decision ownership, implementation prerequisites and a clear endpoint to become useful to the client.", "layers": [ { "id": "implementation-readiness", "name": "Implementation readiness", "description": "Translates recommendations into owned and sequenced actions where the mandate includes this work.", "findings": [ { "id": "approval-and-transition-conditions", "name": "Approval and transition conditions", "description": "Record recommendation disposition, prerequisites, delivery ownership and conditions for migration or rollout.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which recommendations has the authorised client owner accepted, deferred or rejected, and with what conditions?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "approval-and-transition-conditions-q01" }, { "text": "What dependencies, pilot results, migration checks and recovery arrangements must be satisfied before implementation?", "kind": "action", "id": "approval-and-transition-conditions-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "client-capability-and-closure", "name": "Client capability and closure", "description": "Establishes whether the client can understand and use the delivered advice.", "findings": [ { "id": "deliverable-acceptance-and-knowledge-transfer", "name": "Deliverable acceptance and knowledge transfer", "description": "Record accepted outputs, transferred knowledge, unresolved matters and ownership of subsequent outcome assessment.", "questions": [ { "text": "What acceptance criteria demonstrate that the client can use the delivered assessment, architecture, roadmap or sourcing recommendation?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "deliverable-acceptance-and-knowledge-transfer-q01" }, { "text": "Who owns remaining questions, knowledge transfer and measurement of outcomes after the consulting engagement closes?", "kind": "action", "id": "deliverable-acceptance-and-knowledge-transfer-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "evidence-and-external-alignment", "name": "Evidence and external alignment", "description": "What the world already says about this thing, gathered so the model can be checked against it.", "rationale": "A model that cannot be lined up against existing standards, identifiers and practice cannot be adopted by anyone who already uses them.", "layers": [ { "id": "reported-evidence", "name": "Reported evidence", "description": "Findings from the breadth pass, kept separate from the structural claims.", "findings": [ { "id": "evidence-confidence-notes", "name": "Check these first", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ "No narrower sense was supplied; this describes the professional activity rather than an occupation or industry category.", "Consulting specialisms overlap and do not form a universally standardised taxonomy.", "Classification editions and standard applicability should be checked before formal use; the listed standards are not universal legal requirements for IT consultants." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-confidence-notes-q01", "text": "Which of these check these first hold for the sense of information technology consulting this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-kinds", "name": "Kinds and varieties", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ "IT strategy and governance consulting", "Enterprise architecture and systems integration consulting", "Software and enterprise application consulting", "Cloud and infrastructure consulting", "Cybersecurity and technology risk consulting", "Data and analytics consulting" ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-kinds-q01", "text": "Which of these kinds and varieties hold for the sense of information technology consulting this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-identifiers", "name": "Identifiers and schemes", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ { "scheme": "ISIC Rev. 4", "value_or_pattern": "6202", "note": "Computer consultancy and computer facilities management activities; this statistical category includes activities beyond consulting." }, { "scheme": "NAICS", "value_or_pattern": "541512", "note": "Computer Systems Design Services; covers substantial systems-oriented IT consulting, but does not encompass every consulting specialism." } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-identifiers-q01", "text": "Which of these identifiers and schemes hold for the sense of information technology consulting this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-standards-and-regulation", "name": "Standards and regulation", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ "ISO 20700, Guidelines for management consultancy services, issued by ISO; applicable to the consultancy engagement process.", "ISO/IEC 38500, Governance of IT for the organization, issued by ISO and IEC; relevant to IT governance advice.", "ISO/IEC 27001, Information security management systems requirements, issued by ISO and IEC; relevant to security consulting.", "ISO/IEC 20000-1, Service management system requirements, issued by ISO and IEC; relevant to IT service management consulting." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-standards-and-regulation-q01", "text": "Which of these standards and regulation hold for the sense of information technology consulting this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-real-world-use", "name": "Real-world use", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ "Assessing existing systems and developing technology investment roadmaps.", "Evaluating software, cloud services and suppliers against business requirements.", "Planning system integration, modernisation and data migration.", "Assessing cybersecurity controls and recommending improvements.", "Improving IT governance, service delivery and operating processes." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-real-world-use-q01", "text": "Which of these real-world use hold for the sense of information technology consulting this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-failure-modes-and-hazards", "name": "Failure modes and hazards", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ "Recommendations that fail to address business needs or operational constraints.", "Conflicts of interest arising from vendor partnerships or implementation sales incentives.", "Underestimated integration complexity, migration effort or total ownership costs.", "Exposure of confidential information through consultant access to systems and data.", "Insufficient knowledge transfer, leaving clients dependent on consultants or proprietary solutions." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-failure-modes-and-hazards-q01", "text": "Which of these failure modes and hazards hold for the sense of information technology consulting this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-regional-variation", "name": "Regional variation", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ "Statistical classifications differ across jurisdictions and may group consulting with systems design, programming or facilities management.", "Local procurement practices and requirements concerning data protection, data location and sector oversight affect engagement scope." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-regional-variation-q01", "text": "Which of these regional variation hold for the sense of information technology consulting this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-neighbours", "name": "Neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ { "name": "Management consulting", "difference": "Management consulting addresses organisational and managerial problems broadly; IT consulting specifically centres on information technology, with overlap in technology strategy and organisational change." }, { "name": "Software development", "difference": "Software development primarily produces or modifies software; IT consulting primarily supplies advice and expertise, although one engagement may include both." }, { "name": "Systems integration", "difference": "Systems integration makes components operate together; IT consulting may recommend or oversee that work without performing it." }, { "name": "Managed IT services", "difference": "Managed services assume ongoing responsibility for operating or supporting IT; consulting usually centres on assessment, recommendations or a defined change." }, { "name": "IT support", "difference": "IT support primarily resolves users' operational problems; consulting primarily evaluates options and guides technology decisions or improvements." } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-neighbours-q01", "text": "Which of these neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart hold for the sense of information technology consulting this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] } ] } ] } ] }, "openQuestions": [ "Which authoritative definitions should anchor the boundary between information technology consulting, management consulting and computer systems design services?", "How should combined consulting and managed-service engagements be represented when advisory and operational responsibilities change over time?", "Which specialist engagement types require additional bundles, such as cybersecurity assessment, enterprise architecture or data-platform consulting?", "What evidence thresholds are appropriate for recommendations when client access is restricted or the technology estate is poorly documented?", "How should consulting contribution to outcomes be assessed when implementation and benefit realisation remain under client or third-party control?" ], "statistics": { "bundles": 6, "layers": 11, "findings": 18, "questions": 28 } }