What it signals
Governance that is never updated is governance that has been abandoned. Architecture evolves, technology stacks change, teams change — Steering artifacts that do not reflect these changes are no longer describing the intent behind the code. A low SF means Lenses may be evaluating PRs against rules that no longer reflect what the organisation actually believes.
The 180-day threshold is not arbitrary. It reflects the expected pace of meaningful architectural change in most engineering organisations. A Vision document that has not been touched in 200 days may be perfectly accurate — or it may be describing a system that no longer exists in the form it describes. SF flags the question; the architect answers it.
SF is most actionable when read alongside PCR. A pillar with high SF (recently updated) and declining PCR (failing evaluations) indicates a governance foundation that is current but not effective — the rules are fresh, but teams are not conforming. A pillar with low SF and declining PCR indicates both problems simultaneously: the rules are stale and conformance is declining.
How rkito produces it
Who this metric is for
SF is the signal that governance artifacts under your stewardship are current. A pillar you own with SF < 50 is a pillar whose rules have not been confirmed as accurate in over 6 months. Before reporting DCS or PCR numbers from this pillar to leadership, confirm the Lenses are still evaluating current intent.
SF contextualises DHS. A DHS of 94 with SF = 40% means nearly half of the governance foundation is describing a system that may have changed significantly in the last 6+ months. Always surface SF alongside DHS in leadership reporting.
How this metric gets misused
SF=100 does not mean governance is good — it means governance has been touched recently. A Manifesto updated with a single word change to reset the timestamp is not fresh governance. SF measures update frequency, not update quality. Use it as a staleness flag, not as a governance quality signal.
Pair SF with SCS (is the governance present), GD (is it deep enough), and PCR (is it working). SF alone is the weakest signal in the Intent Health layer. A governance foundation that is present (SCS=100), deep (GD=25), fresh (SF=90), and effective (PCR=85) is the target state. SF is one piece of that picture.
What to do at each threshold
Step-by-step response playbook for each signal state.
Governance is current. Keep it that way with routine reviews and ownership cadences.
Check /steerings/dashboard to confirm no single artifact type is silently drifting toward yellow.
Assign each pillar owner a 6-month review cadence — record it in your team calendar so reviews don't slip past the 180-day threshold.
Staleness is accumulating. Identify the drifting artifacts and schedule reviews before they cross into red.
Navigate to /steerings/manifestos, /steerings/pillars, and /steerings/policies. Sort by modifiedAt ascending to identify the stalest artifacts.
For each artifact > 180 days old: either update it to reflect current reality, or open a CHI to deprecate it. A 'reviewed and confirmed accurate' touch is valid where content is still correct.
Governance has been abandoned. An immediate audit is required before DCS or PCR numbers are reported to leadership.
Assign every stale artifact to its pillar owner for review within 14 days.
Artifacts that cannot be confirmed as current must be updated or deprecated via CHI. Do not continue reporting DCS or PCR numbers to leadership while half the governance foundation is unconfirmed.