Эта статья является препринтом и не была отрецензирована.
О результатах, изложенных в препринтах, не следует сообщать в СМИ как о проверенной информации.
From KPI Dashboards to Auditable Decision Execution: PRGDAI-SD 360+ as a Design-Science Meta-Architecture for Evidence-Based Strategic Governance
Complex organisations increasingly possess abundant indicators, dashboards, risk registers, data platforms, and artificial-intelligence pilots, yet often lack an integrated architecture that converts these assets into auditable decisions and corrective action. This paper develops PRGDAI-SD 360+ as a design-science meta-architecture for evidence-based strategic governance. The artefact integrates seven decision dimensions - Performance, Risk, Governance, Data, Artificial Intelligence, Sustainability, and Decision Execution - and links them through indicator taxonomy, data-quality gates, decision protocols, accountability design, dashboard intelligence, and post-decision learning. The paper is conceptual and design-science based rather than empirical: it synthesizes established work in design science research, systems thinking, performance management, risk management, data governance, AI governance, sustainability, and the author's prior KPI-governed frameworks. A worked demonstration translates the model into an airline Chief Logistics Officer context, where AOG recovery, spare-parts availability, supplier delay risk, traceability, data quality, AI forecasting, inventory sustainability, and corrective-action completion must be governed as a single decision chain. The contribution is threefold: it reframes KPIs as decision instruments rather than reporting artefacts; it proposes an auditable seven-dimensional governance architecture; and it offers a validation pathway for future empirical, Delphi, AHP, dashboard, and longitudinal implementation studies. The model's claims are bounded to architecture development and analytical demonstration; causal performance effects require field validation.
1. Kaplan RS, Norton DP. The balanced scorecard: Translating strategy into action. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press; 1996.
2. Meadows DH. Thinking in systems: A primer. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green Publishing; 2008.
3. Hevner AR, March ST, Park J, Ram S. Design science in information systems research. MIS Quarterly; 28(1):75-105, 2004. doi:10.2307/25148625.
4. Peffers K, Tuunanen T, Rothenberger MA, Chatterjee S. A design science research methodology for information systems research. Journal of Management Information Systems; 24(3):45-77, 2007. doi:10.2753/MIS0742-1222240302.
5. International Organization for Standardization. ISO 31000:2018 risk management - Guidelines. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization; 2018.
6. [6] DAMA International. DAMA-DMBOK: Data management body of knowledge (2nd ed.). Basking Ridge, NJ: Technics Publications; 2017.
7. National Institute of Standards and Technology. Artificial intelligence risk management framework (AI RMF 1.0) (NIST AI 100-1). Gaithersburg, MD: U.S. Department of Commerce; 2023. doi:10.6028/NIST.AI.100-1.
8. ISO/IEC. ISO/IEC 42001:2023 artificial intelligence - Management system. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization / International Electrotechnical Commission; 2023.
9. OECD. Recommendation of the Council on Artificial Intelligence (OECD/LEGAL/0449). Paris: OECD Legal Instruments; 2019.
10. ISO/IEC. ISO/IEC 27001:2022 information security, cybersecurity and privacy protection - Information security management systems - Requirements. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization / International Electrotechnical Commission; 2022.
11. National Institute of Standards and Technology. The NIST cybersecurity framework (CSF) 2.0 (NIST CSWP 29). Gaithersburg, MD: U.S. Department of Commerce; 2024. doi:10.6028/NIST.CSWP.29.
12. United Nations General Assembly. Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (A/RES/70/1). New York: United Nations; 2015.
13. MoghadasNian SAH. 7S-360 strategic indicator architecture: A KPI-governed framework for integrated governance. Qom: University of Religions and Denominations; 2025. doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.15665.24160.
14. MoghadasNian SAH. Integrated KPI Excellence Framework (IKEF-360+): A universal model for role-based airline performance management. Tehran: Tarbiat Modares University; 2025. doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.17285.46562.
15. MoghadasNian SAH. PRGDAI-SD 360+ decision architecture: Integrating performance, risk, governance, data, artificial intelligence, sustainability, and decision execution. Qom: University of Religions and Denominations; 2026. doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.17495.02729.
16. MoghadasNian SAH. Civilizational Algorithm Theory (CAT): A design-science method for sacred-text ontology structuring and theology-to-governance translation. Qom: University of Religions and Denominations; 2026. doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.17244.86400.
17. Teece DJ. Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal; 28(13):1319-1350, 2007. doi:10.1002/smj.640.
18. Krippendorff K. Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; 2018.
19. Linstone HA, Turoff M, editors. The Delphi method: Techniques and applications. Newark, NJ: New Jersey Institute of Technology; 2002.
20. Saaty TL. Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Services Sciences; 1(1):83-98, 2008. doi:10.1504/IJSSCI.2008.017590.
21. Weill P, Ross JW. IT governance: How top performers manage IT decision rights for superior results. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press; 2004.
22. MoghadasNian SAH, MahMoudy M. Airline logistics AI performance framework: A 360-degree, multi-layered KPI approach for safety, sustainability, efficiency, and innovation. 20th Iranian International Industrial Engineering Conference; 20 April 2025. doi:10.5281/zenodo.18251742.
23. MoghadasNian SAH, MahMoudy M. Stock control in airline logistics: AI-driven inventory optimization for spare parts. 3rd International Conference on Recent Advances in Engineering, Innovation and Technology; 10 March 2025. doi:10.5281/zenodo.18372296.
