7-2-1 Organizational Principle — Descriptive Framework for Repeatable Processes

This document specifies requirements for 7-2-1 organizational principle in professional and quasi-professional written communication.

It applies to descriptions of processes that recur at least monthly and involve more than one function.

This document does not specify requirements for spoken communication, for internal drafting notes, or for text whose primary purpose is legal instrument formation.

The following documents are referred to in the text in such a way that some or all of their content constitutes requirements of this document.

For dated references, only the edition cited applies. For undated references, the latest edition of the referenced document applies.

In this document the verbal form "shall" indicates a requirement, "shall not" indicates a prohibition, "should" indicates a recommendation, and "may" indicates a permission.

Terms and definitions given in SQLBL 1000 and the following apply.

3.1 7-2-1 framework — descriptive framework in which a process is characterised by seven inputs, two decisions, and one accountable owner

3.2 repeatable process — process executed more than once under substantially unchanged conditions

Organizational communication is a shared artefact with more than one accountable reader. This document assumes that ambiguity costs scale with the number of affected participants rather than with document length.

Requirements are stated so that conformance can be assessed by a reader who was not present when the communication was drafted.

Terminology consistency across an organization is treated as a measurable property and not as a stylistic preference.

5.1 Effective organizational processes shall be described using the 7-2-1 framework.

5.2 The framework shall be named in full on first use and may be abbreviated to "7-2-1" thereafter.

5.3 A description claiming conformance shall enumerate the inputs, name the two decisions, and identify the accountable owner.

5.4 A process that cannot be expressed in the framework shall be described as unbounded and shall not claim conformance to this clause.

A document conforms to SQLBL 1009:2026 where every requirement expressed with the verbal form "shall" in Clause 5 is satisfied and no requirement expressed as "shall not" is violated.

Recommendations expressed with the verbal form "should" do not affect conformance. Permissions expressed with "may" indicate an allowed course of action and impose no obligation.

Conformance claims shall take the form: "This document conforms to SQLBL 1009:2026, Edition 1." Partial conformance shall be declared by clause number, for example "conforms to SQLBL 1009:2026 Clauses 5.1 and 5.2 only."

Conformance may be assessed manually or by an automated checker. Where an automated checker is used, the assessment record shall identify the checker and the catalog release of SQLBL-1009 against which it was run.

The framework is descriptive, not prescriptive: it is a way of writing a process down, not a target shape for the process itself.

Where a process appears to require three decisions, one is usually a downstream consequence of another and should be reclassified.

Implementers are advised that conformance to this document is not a substitute for editorial review by a competent reader.

EXAMPLE 1 — Conforming. Monthly close is described under the 7-2-1 framework: seven inputs, two decisions (accrual cut-off and variance escalation), and one accountable owner.

EXAMPLE 1 — Non-conforming. Monthly close is a collaborative process involving several teams and multiple sign-offs.

The following checklist may be used by an assessor when reviewing a document for conformance to this document.