Bound the right to act
Scope and permissions are explicit and time-bounded.
Proposed · non-normative
Make software authority explicit before consequential change begins.
The Software Authority Model is a proposed, non-normative model for structuring who may decide, act, verify, release, suspend, recover, and accept software change, and what evidence those decisions require.
The control problem
Technical capability is not the same thing as legitimate authority.
Modern teams can grant repository access, provider permissions, credentials, model tools, and deployment capability faster than they can prove who was actually authorized to use them for a specific consequential decision.
SAM makes that boundary explicit and keeps authority, evidence, review, release, exception handling, recovery, and acceptance distinguishable.
What the model addresses
Authority must remain answerable from beginning to recovery.
InitiationWho may start consequential work?
Task scope, baseline, actors, limits, exclusions, evidence expectations, and expiration are explicit before substantive action begins.
ApprovalWho may authorize progression?
Decision rights remain separate from technical access, implementation capability, provider status, and organizational title.
EvidenceWhat must support the decision?
Required evidence is current, attributable, sufficiently complete, and tied to the state the decision actually concerns.
ReviewWho may independently accept the change?
Creating or implementing a change never silently becomes authority to approve, merge, release, certify, or accept it.
RecoveryWho may reverse, restore, and close?
Rollback, restoration, service recovery, evidence recovery, provider effects, continuity, and final acceptance remain separately governable.
Potential future pathways
Any diagnostic or pilot requires separate qualification and authorization.
Possible diagnostic scope
A bounded examination could address decision rights, lifecycle states, evidence, verification, automation permissions, release, recovery, continuity, and provider dependence. This page does not indicate current availability.
Possible design-partner pilot scope
A future pilot, if separately authorized, would require an exact charter, baseline, roles, scenarios, measurements, exit decision, restoration state, and explicit stopping point.
Relationship to Causance
Model and platform remain distinct.
SAM is a proposed, non-normative governance model. Causance is the reusable upstream platform that may implement selected lifecycle controls.
Neither program silently inherits the other's authority, evidence, claims, or customer obligations.