Seven Root Origins

Every gap traces to exactly one of seven origins. No overlap. No duplicates.

Trace order: Capture → Integration → Definition/Taxonomy → Ownership → Process/Cadence → Tooling → Behavior. Test in this sequence. Stop at the first match.

Master Example — The Late Status Report

Same symptom. The monthly status report is consistently late. Trace to the earliest structural point:

• Never required in the first place → Capture
• Waiting on Finance data that never arrives → Integration
• PMO tool export is corrupted → Tooling
• Deadline is "end of month," no specific date → Process / Cadence
• Nobody is assigned to write it → Ownership
• Writer starts on the 28th and backdates it → Behavior

1. Capture

The data was never captured at the source

Definition. The required information exists in the real world — work is happening, decisions are made, risks materialize — but it was never recorded in any system, artifact, or log. The gap entered the system at the moment of absence: the data should have been captured but wasn't.

Detection:

1. Confirm the real-world event or state EXISTS.
2. Search all declared artifacts and systems for any record of the event/state — search by function, not by name.
3. If zero records exist across all artifacts → Capture.
4. If partial records exist, assess whether the capture process is intermittent or selective.
5. Distinguish from Behavior: Capture means no mechanism or expectation to record; Behavior means a mechanism existed but was not used.

Example — Risk Never Logged. A project team identifies a supplier delay risk in a weekly standup. The risk is discussed, mitigations are agreed verbally, but no entry is made in the RAID log. The risk exists in reality. No artifact captures it. → Capture.

Common misclassification trap. "The field is blank → Capture." Blank fields in an existing record mean the capture mechanism exists but was not used. Correct: Behavior or Process / Cadence.

PMI anchor. PMBOK 8 §4.1 (Develop Project Charter) — charter is the first captured baseline. Absence of charter = Capture at project initiation.

2. Integration

The data exists but does not flow

Definition. The information is captured correctly in one artifact or system. But it never reaches the downstream consumer — the next process, the next team, the next tool, or the governance forum that needs it. The gap entered the system at the handoff point.

Detection:

1. Confirm the data EXISTS in the source artifact/system.
2. Identify the expected consumer per the standard — which process, artifact, person, or system should receive this data next?
3. Check the consumer's evidence — is the data present, referenced, or used?
4. If the data is absent in the consumer but present in the source → Integration.
5. Determine the nature of the break: no integration mechanism exists, or one exists but is broken.

Example — Schedule to Portfolio Dashboard. The project schedule (MS Project) contains current baseline and actual dates. The portfolio dashboard (Power BI) shows last month's dates — the data warehouse has not refreshed in 6 weeks. The data exists in the source. It does not reach the consumer. → Integration.

Common misclassification trap. "The tool doesn't sync → Integration." If the tool lacks sync capability entirely, the tool is structurally incapable. Correct: Tooling.

PMI anchor. PMBOK 8 §3 (Integration Management) — process outputs must feed into other processes. Integration gaps violate the fundamental integration principle.

3. Definition / Taxonomy

The data is captured but defined incorrectly

Definition. The field exists. The record exists. The data is populated. But its meaning, classification, unit, scale, or relationship is wrong — causing downstream misinterpretation, wrong routing, or invisible reporting. The gap entered the system at the point of definition.

Detection:

1. Confirm the data EXISTS and is populated.
2. Examine the definition, taxonomy, or classification applied — does it match the standard's definition?
3. Check for downstream effects: wrong process routing, incorrect metrics, or governance blind spots.
4. If the data is present but defined/classified in a way that breaks standard intent → Definition / Taxonomy.
5. Distinguish from Misclassified (a gap type, not a root origin): this is the root origin, Misclassified is the symptom.

Example — "Percent Complete" Means Different Things. The Charter does not define percent_complete. Three project managers interpret it differently — physical, duration, effort. The field exists in all schedules. The data is populated. The definitions are incompatible. Portfolio rollup is meaningless. → Definition / Taxonomy.

Common misclassification trap. "They don't know what the field means → Definition / Taxonomy." If undefined in the Charter/standard, yes. If defined but never trained, this is Process (training) or Behavior. Correct: Process / Cadence or Behavior.

PMI anchor. PMBOK 8 §2.2 — project characteristics must be defined to select the right approach. Wrong classification of project type → Definition / Taxonomy.

4. Ownership

No accountable owner

Definition. The process, data, artifact, or decision has no named owner. Or the named owner lacks authority, capacity, or accountability to perform the role. The gap entered the system at the organizational design point — where accountability should have been assigned but wasn't.

Detection:

1. Identify the required process, data, or artifact per the standard.
2. Search the Charter, org chart, RACI, or governance documents for an assigned owner.
3. If no owner is named → Ownership.
4. If an owner is named, verify authority, capacity, and accountability to perform the role.
5. If the owner lacks any of the three → Ownership (the assignment is structural but ineffective).

Example — Risk Register Has No Owner. The RAID log exists. It is updated sporadically. The Charter does not assign a risk owner role. The PM says "the team owns it." The team says "the PM owns it." No individual is named. No one is accountable. → Ownership.

Common misclassification trap. "The PM is too busy → Ownership." Being busy is a capacity issue, but if the PM is the named owner with authority/accountability, the structural assignment is correct. Correct: Behavior or Process / Cadence.

PMI anchor. PMBOK 8 §3.4 (Project Manager Competence) — PM must have authority to perform role. Assignment without authority = Ownership gap.

5. Process / Cadence

The process exists but timing is wrong

Definition. The required activity happens. The process is documented. But the timing, sequence, frequency, or governance checkpoint is incorrect — causing the right work to produce the wrong outcome at the wrong time. The gap entered the system at the process design point.

Detection:

1. Confirm the process EXISTS and is documented.
2. Confirm the process IS BEING PERFORMED.
3. Compare actual timing/sequence/frequency against the standard's requirement.
4. If the process happens but at the wrong time, order, or without required checkpoints → Process / Cadence.
5. Assess whether the wrong cadence is documented (Process / Cadence) or executed wrong (Behavior).

Example — Steering Committees Quarterly Instead of Monthly. The governance framework requires monthly steering committees for projects >$500K. The organization holds them quarterly. The meetings happen. The process exists. The cadence is wrong. No waiver exists. → Process / Cadence.

Common misclassification trap. "They skip the gate review → Process / Cadence." Skipping is not a timing error — it is non-performance. Correct: Ignored or Behavior.

PMI anchor. PMBOK 8 §2.3 (Project Life Cycle) — phases and gates must be sequenced correctly. Wrong sequence of phases/gates = Process / Cadence.

6. Tooling

The tool cannot support the standard

Definition. The standard requires a capability that the current tool, system, or platform cannot provide. Or the tool is configured in a way that structurally prevents compliance. The gap entered the system at the tool selection or configuration point.

Detection:

1. Identify the standard's requirement — what capability, field, workflow, calculation, or report does it mandate?
2. Examine the current tool — does it natively support this requirement?
3. If the tool cannot support the requirement even with configuration or workaround → Tooling.
4. If the tool CAN support it but is configured wrong, assess whether documented (Process) or accidental (Behavior).
5. Distinguish from Integration: Tooling means the tool lacks capability; Integration means it has capability but does not connect.

Example — Portfolio Tool Cannot Calculate Earned Value. The standard requires EVM for all strategic programs. The portfolio tool (Smartsheet) does not support BCWS, BCWP, or SPI calculation. The organization uses percent complete instead. The tool is structurally incapable of EVM. → Tooling.

Common misclassification trap. "The tool is slow → Tooling." Performance is not a capability gap. Slow tools cause Behavior (workarounds) or Underutilization. Correct: Behavior or Underutilized.

PMI anchor. PMBOK 8 §4.3 (Direct and Manage Project Work) — tools must support process requirements. Tool incapability = Tooling origin.

7. Behavior

People bypass, ignore, or manipulate the process

Definition. The standard is clear. The process is documented. The tool works. The owner is assigned. But individuals or teams deliberately choose not to follow the process — and there is evidence of this choice. The gap entered the system at the human decision point.

Detection:

1. Verify the standard EXISTS.
2. Verify the process IS DOCUMENTED.
3. Verify the tool WORKS.
4. Verify the owner IS ASSIGNED AND CAPABLE.
5. Verify the process TIMING/SEQUENCE IS CORRECT.
6. If all of the above are correct but the practice still deviates → Behavior, with evidence of deliberate choice.

Example — Backdated Status Reports. The reporting process requires weekly status reports by Friday 5 PM. The PM consistently writes the report Monday morning and changes the file date to Friday. They admit "I don't have time on Fridays." Everything else is correct; the PM deliberately bypasses it. → Behavior.

Common misclassification trap. "They didn't know → Behavior." Ignorance is not deliberate choice. If the standard was not communicated → Process or Definition. Correct: Process / Cadence or Definition / Taxonomy.

PMI anchor. PMBOK 8 §3.4 (Project Manager Competence) — ethical conduct and compliance. Deliberate bypass of standards violates ethical conduct.

Gap Type vs. Root Origin

Two closed taxonomies, applied in sequence to every finding: Classify, then Trace.

Stage 4 — Classify. Gap Type tells you what is wrong. Every finding belongs to exactly one of seven closed gap types: Missing, Ignored, Disconnected, Untrusted, Underutilized, Misclassified, Divergent. This is the observable classification of the finding itself.

Stage 5 — Trace. Root Origin tells you why it is wrong. Every gap traces to exactly one of seven closed root origins: Capture, Integration, Definition/Taxonomy, Ownership, Process/Cadence, Tooling, Behavior — the earliest structural point where the gap entered the system.

One finding, both taxonomies. "The risk register exists but nobody updates it" → Gap: Ignored (what — the standard is not followed) → Root: Ownership (why — no accountable owner assigned).

The root origin is not the symptom — it is the earliest structural point where the gap entered the system. Never assign two gap types or two root origins to a single finding; split the finding if two distinct problems exist. The report fixes causes, not symptoms.

Originally published on LinkedIn.