Value Identification Standard (VIS)

Architecture Ecosystem: Structured Reality Standards™
Architecture Family: VFM® — Value Flow Mechanisms Architecture
Parent Standard: Value Identification Standard (VIS)
Operational Layer: Value Identification Governance Layer
Category: Governance & Enforcement
Subcategory: Value Lifecycle Governance
Type: Parent Standard
Governed Space: Value Identification
Origin ID: VFM-VIS-001
Version: 1.0
Status: Canonical · Open Standard
Effective Date: 23 August 2026
Compatibility: OOF® Methodology OS™ · GOA™ · ORA™ · AGA™ · INTEGROS® · CLA™ · ADIT® · VALIDOS® · SIMULOS® · OBIDENITY®
AI-Readable: Yes
Authority: OOF®
Protection: MIP® — Methodology Intellectual Property Protection
Canonical Language: English

Canonical Definition

Value Identification Standard (VIS) is the first Parent Standard within VFM® — Value Flow Mechanisms Architecture and governs the methodological conditions under which a potential or existing manifestation of value can be identified, distinguished, bounded, described, and established as a governable Value Object within the value lifecycle.

VIS establishes the first governance point of VFM®.

Before value can be traced to an origin, recognized as having emerged, assigned a state, observed for change, developed, degraded, nullified, restored, or determined to have reached extinction, the subject whose value is being governed must first be identifiable.

VIS therefore establishes the governed relationship between:

Potential Value Phenomenon → Value Candidate → Value Identification → Value Object

The Standard does not determine how much something is worth.

It does not determine whether a market recognizes it, whether it is legally owned, whether it is taxable, whether it has been validated, or whether its integrity has been established.

Its task is more fundamental:

to determine what value is being referred to and whether that value can be sufficiently identified to enter a governed value lifecycle.

Core Question

What value is being governed, and how can it be sufficiently identified and bounded before its origin, existence, state, and lifecycle are determined?

Architectural Position

Value Identification is the first governed space of VFM®.

It precedes:

Value Origin Standard

and therefore establishes the object required for all subsequent value governance.

The architectural sequence begins:

Value Identification → Value Origin → Value Emergence → Value Recognition → Value State → Value Change → Value Development → Value Degradation → Value Nullification → Value Restoration → Value Extinction

VIS asks:

What value are we talking about?

Only after that question has been sufficiently answered can the architecture ask:

Where does that value originate?

This distinction is foundational.

Identification ≠ Origin.

Something may be identified as a candidate for value governance before its actual value origin has been established.

Governance Flow Position

Potential Value Phenomenon → Value Candidate Identification → Value Object Definition → Value Boundary Determination → Value Context Identification → Value Distinction → Value Identification State → Governed Value Object → Value Origin Governance

Operational Space

VIS governs the methodological space between:

an observed, proposed, inferred, expected, claimed, or potentially relevant manifestation of value

and:

an explicitly identified Value Object capable of entering the VFM® lifecycle.

This space includes:

Value Candidate identification; Value Object identification; value-reference definition; value boundary determination; value context; value distinction; value manifestation; value subject; value relationship; value dependency awareness; value aggregation awareness; value decomposition; value identification state; identification uncertainty; identification documentation; identification reassessment.

Value Candidate

A Value Candidate is an object, capability, condition, relationship, activity, outcome, resource, right, information object, process, state, opportunity, or other phenomenon proposed for examination within the VFM® value lifecycle.

Identification as a Value Candidate does not establish that value exists.

Therefore:

Value Candidate ≠ Existing Value

The purpose of the concept is to permit governance to begin before value existence has been determined.

This prevents a circular methodological problem in which something must already be accepted as valuable before its value can be investigated.

Value Object

A Value Object is the explicitly identified and bounded subject whose value lifecycle is governed through VFM®.

A Value Object may relate to:

a physical asset; a digital asset; intellectual property; information; data; a capability; infrastructure; technology; a service; a process; an activity; an opportunity; access; capacity; a relationship; a contractual position; a productive resource; a natural resource; an economic resource; an organizational capability; a computational capability; an energy resource; a future capability;

another sufficiently identifiable value-bearing or potentially value-bearing phenomenon.

VFM® does not require the Value Object to be a legally recognized asset.

It requires the object of value governance to be methodologically identifiable.

Value Object ≠ Asset Identity

VIS must not be confused with identity governance.

A Value Object may reference an asset, entity, resource, or capability whose identity is governed elsewhere.

VIS asks:

What is the subject of value governance?

OBIDENITY® may ask:

What is the governed identity and origin-bound identity relationship of the relevant entity or asset?

These questions may interact.

They are not the same governance space.

Value Identification ≠ Value Recognition

This distinction is critical to VFM®.

Value Identification establishes:

what value or potential value is being examined.

Value Recognition establishes:

whether existing value may be recognized within the governed value lifecycle.

Something can therefore be:

identified

without yet being:

recognized as existing value.

This allows VFM® to examine dormant, uncertain, emerging, disputed, unrealized, inaccessible, latent, degraded, or potentially recoverable value without assuming the conclusion in advance.

Value Identification ≠ Valuation

VIS does not determine monetary worth.

It does not assign:

price; market value; fair value; accounting value; taxable value; liquidation value; replacement value; investment value; economic value.

Those determinations may be performed by external methodologies.

VIS establishes the object to which such determinations may later relate.

Therefore:

Identification of Value ≠ Measurement of Value.

Value Identification ≠ Value Existence

Identification does not prove that value exists.

A Value Candidate may enter VFM® and subsequently be determined not to have reached Value Emergence.

This distinction enables VFM® to govern:

potential value

without automatically declaring:

existent value.

Value Boundary

Every Value Object requires a sufficiently explicit Value Boundary.

The Value Boundary determines what is included in the Value Object being governed and what remains outside it.

A boundary may be:

physical; functional; temporal; relational; informational; operational; economic; contextual; capability-based; resource-based; outcome-based; composite.

Without a boundary, changes in value cannot be reliably attributed to the same governed Value Object.

Boundary Stability

A Value Boundary need not remain permanently unchanged.

However, material boundary change must remain visible.

Examples include:

assets being combined; assets being divided; capabilities being added; rights being removed; operational scope changing; data being incorporated; infrastructure being separated; relationships being terminated; previously separate value objects becoming interdependent.

A materially changed Value Object may require re-identification.

Value Context

Value does not necessarily exist independently of context.

VIS therefore permits the identification of a relevant Value Context.

Context may include:

intended use; user; beneficiary; operational environment; time; location; availability; scarcity; dependency; technological environment; economic environment; organizational environment; physical conditions.

VIS does not determine whether those contextual factors create value.

It preserves them so that subsequent VFM® standards can determine their relevance.

Value Distinction

VIS requires distinguishable Value Objects where different value lifecycles exist.

For example, one physical object may contain:

material value; functional value; information value; intellectual-property value; productive value; strategic value; recovery value.

These must not automatically be treated as one indivisible value phenomenon.

Where materially different value lifecycles exist, they may require separate Value Objects or explicitly defined value dimensions.

Composite Value Objects

VFM® may govern composite Value Objects.

A composite Value Object consists of multiple components whose combined configuration produces a relevant value relationship.

VIS requires the composite basis to remain identifiable.

This allows VFM® to distinguish:

component value

from:

value arising from combination.

Latent Value

A Value Candidate may contain conditions capable of producing future value even where value has not yet emerged.

VIS allows this to be identified without prematurely declaring value existence.

This creates an important pathway:

Value Candidate → Identified Potential → Value Origin → Value Emergence

Latent value is therefore not automatically an existing Value Asset.

Value Identification State

VIS establishes governed identification states.

A minimum state model may include:

1. Unidentified

A potential value phenomenon is observable or suspected but has not been sufficiently defined for governance.

2. Candidate Identified

A Value Candidate has been identified but its Value Object boundary or context remains insufficiently established.

3. Conditionally Identified

The Value Object can be identified only under explicit conditions, assumptions, boundaries, or unresolved dependencies.

4. Identified

The Value Object is sufficiently defined, bounded, distinguished, and contextualized to enter Value Origin governance.

5. Identification Suspended

A material change or unresolved inconsistency prevents continued reliance upon the current identification.

6. Re-identification Required

The Value Object has changed sufficiently that the existing identification can no longer support the subsequent lifecycle without reassessment.

These states govern identification only.

They do not establish value existence or worth.

Identification Uncertainty

VIS requires material uncertainty concerning Value Object identity or boundary to remain visible.

Uncertainty may concern:

what is included; what is excluded; whether multiple value objects exist; whether value is separable; whether a relationship is material; whether a capability exists independently; whether the relevant object has changed; whether context fundamentally changes the object being governed.

Uncertainty does not always prevent identification.

It may require conditional identification.

No Presumed Value Principle

VFM® must not assume value merely because something has been presented as valuable.

VIS therefore establishes:

Identification for Value Governance ≠ Confirmation of Value

A claimed valuable asset may be admitted as a Value Candidate.

Subsequent VFM® governance may determine that value:

has not emerged; existed previously but has degraded; has reached zero; remains recoverable; has become extinct.

This preserves methodological neutrality.

Value Granularity

Identification must occur at a granularity appropriate to the governance question.

An organization may be examined as:

one Value Object

for one purpose,

while its:

intellectual property; machinery; datasets; production capability; contracts; customer relationships; technological capabilities

may each become separate Value Objects for another purpose.

VFM® therefore does not impose one universal level of value granularity.

Temporal Identity of Value

The identity of a Value Object may persist while its value state changes.

For example:

Positive Value → Degradation → Zero Value → Restoration

may occur without the underlying Value Object ceasing to be identifiable.

This distinction is essential for ZVA™ — Zero Value Asset™.

A Value Object can remain identifiable even when its admissible value reaches zero.

Therefore:

Loss of Value ≠ Loss of Value Object Identity.

Relationship to Origin Asset™

Origin Asset™ belongs primarily to the subsequent Value Origin governed space.

VIS identifies the Value Object.

Value Origin governance then determines the source, basis, capability, condition, relationship, or other origin from which its value may emerge.

Therefore:

Value Object Identification → Value Origin Determination → Origin Asset™ relationship where applicable.

VIS must not presume an Origin Asset™ before the origin relationship has been established.

Relationship to Value Asset™

A Value Object does not automatically become a Value Asset™.

Value Asset™ represents a value-bearing state where the relevant conditions have been established through subsequent VFM® governance.

Therefore:

Value Object ≠ Value Asset™

A Value Object is the governed subject.

Value Asset™ describes an applicable value-bearing state.

Relationship to ZVA™ — Zero Value Asset™

VIS also preserves the identity required for zero-value governance.

A ZVA™ — Zero Value Asset™ cannot be meaningfully governed unless the underlying Value Object remains identifiable.

Therefore, when value reaches zero:

Value State may change while Value Object identity persists.

This enables the later sequence:

Value Asset™ → DeMonet™ → ZVA™ — Zero Value Asset™ → ReMonet™ → restored Value State

without losing continuity of the governed Value Object.

Cross-Architecture Boundaries

VIS ↔ OBIDENITY®

OBIDENITY® governs origin-bound identity, ownership, authority, permission, responsibility, provenance, transfer, continuity, and auditability.

VIS governs identification of the subject of value governance.

Identity Governance ≠ Value Identification.

VIS ↔ CLA™

CLA™ governs how classifications are formally established and maintained.

VIS may later consume a governed classification where useful.

It does not become a general classification architecture.

VIS ↔ VALIDOS®

VALIDOS® governs whether validation claims can legitimately be established and relied upon.

VIS does not validate value.

It identifies the Value Object to which subsequent value governance applies.

Value Identification ≠ Value Validation.

VIS ↔ INTEGROS®

INTEGROS® governs integrity.

VIS may require sufficient structural coherence to identify a Value Object but does not determine its general integrity.

VIS ↔ ADIT®

ADIT® governs audit and evidence.

VIS may generate identification records that become auditable evidence.

It does not govern auditability itself.

VIS ↔ GOA™

GOA™ governs governance authority, boundaries, scope, delegation, accountability, validation, integrity, transparency, continuity, and interoperability.

VIS governs the Value Object.

It does not establish governance authority over that object.

VIS ↔ ORA™

ORA™ governs actual Operational Reality.

Operational conditions may help establish the context in which a Value Object exists.

VIS does not govern Operational Reality itself.

Parent Standard Modules

1. VCIM — Value Candidate Identification Module

Governs identification of a potential value phenomenon as a Value Candidate without presuming that value already exists.

Core Question: What phenomenon should enter the value lifecycle for governed examination?

2. VOIM — Value Object Identification Module

Governs establishment of the specific Value Object whose value lifecycle will be governed.

Core Question: What precisely is the subject of value governance?

3. VOBM — Value Object Boundary Module

Governs the inclusion, exclusion, extent, granularity, and boundary of the Value Object.

Core Question: Where does the governed Value Object begin and end?

4. VCXM — Value Context Module

Governs identification of the material context within which the Value Object is being examined.

Core Question: Within what context is the identified Value Object entering value governance?

5. VISM — Value Identification State Module

Governs assignment, maintenance, suspension, and reassessment of the Value Identification State.

Core Question: Has the Value Object been sufficiently identified to proceed into Value Origin governance?

Internal Module Flow

Potential Value Phenomenon → VCIM — Value Candidate Identification Module → VOIM — Value Object Identification Module → VOBM — Value Object Boundary Module → VCXM — Value Context Module → VISM — Value Identification State Module → Governed Value Object → Value Origin Standard

The internal logic is:

What may contain or represent value → what precisely is being governed → where its boundary lies → within what context it is examined → whether identification is sufficient to continue.

Minimum Implementation Framework

A minimum VIS implementation should establish:

1. Value Candidate

Identify the phenomenon proposed for value governance.

2. Value Object

Define the precise subject whose value lifecycle will be governed.

3. Value Boundary

Determine what is included and excluded.

4. Value Granularity

Determine the appropriate level at which the Value Object is governed.

5. Value Context

Identify materially relevant contextual conditions.

6. Value Distinction

Separate materially different Value Objects or value dimensions where required.

7. Dependency Awareness

Identify dependencies capable of affecting the interpretation of the Value Object.

8. Identification Uncertainty

Record unresolved uncertainty affecting identification or boundaries.

9. Identification State

Assign a governed Value Identification State.

10. Identification Record

Create a reconstructable record of the basis on which the Value Object was identified.

Governance Outputs

VIS may produce:

Value Candidate Record Value Object Record Value Object Definition Value Boundary Statement Value Inclusion Record Value Exclusion Record Value Granularity Record Value Context Record Value Distinction Record Value Dependency Record Value Identification Uncertainty Record Value Identification State Value Re-identification Trigger Governed Value Object

These outputs provide the governed input for the Value Origin Standard.

Enterprise Application

VIS enables organizations to answer a deceptively difficult question:

What exactly are we calling value?

This matters because organizations frequently aggregate fundamentally different phenomena under one financial or operational label.

A company may say:

“This asset is worth CHF 10 million.”

But that apparent single value may depend upon:

physical property; productive capacity; intellectual property; access rights; customer relationships; contractual rights; data; technology; scarcity; expected future capability.

VIS allows those value phenomena to be identified and bounded before their origins, emergence, states, changes, degradation, nullification, or restoration are governed.

The same method can be applied to:

public assets; infrastructure; corporate assets; intellectual property; digital assets; technology; data; energy resources; natural resources; productive capability; government programs; investment projects; abandoned assets; dormant assets; impaired assets; future technologies; AI-created capabilities.

This makes VIS relevant not only to conventional accounting contexts but also to value phenomena that conventional accounting systems may not yet represent effectively.

Why This Matters for Future Value Systems

A value-based accounting, economic, public-finance, or taxation methodology cannot begin reliably with:

How much is it worth?

It must first establish:

What exactly is the Value Object?

Then:

Where does its value originate?

Then:

Has value actually emerged?

Then:

What state is that value in?

Only afterward can external accounting, measurement, economic, or taxation systems determine how that governed value should be treated.

VFM® therefore creates a methodological value layer that can potentially operate beneath multiple downstream systems without becoming those systems itself.

Foundational Principles

Value cannot be governed until the subject of value governance is identifiable.

Value identification does not presume value existence.

Value identification is not valuation.

Value identification is not value recognition.

Value Object identity is distinct from asset identity.

A Value Candidate may exist before value emerges.

A Value Object may remain identifiable after its value reaches zero.

Loss of value does not necessarily mean loss of the Value Object.

Different value phenomena within one asset may require different governed Value Objects.

The boundary of the Value Object determines the boundary of the value lifecycle being governed.

Before asking how value changes, VFM® must first establish what value is being governed.

Canonical Closing Statement

Value Identification Standard establishes the first governed space of VFM® — Value Flow Mechanisms Architecture by creating the methodological conditions under which potential or existing manifestations of value can be identified, distinguished, bounded, contextualized, and established as governed Value Objects without presuming value existence, recognition, validity, price, ownership, legality, or economic treatment. Through governance of Value Candidates, Value Objects, boundaries, granularity, context, distinctions, dependencies, uncertainty, identification states, and re-identification, VIS creates the stable reference object required for the complete downstream value lifecycle. By separating value identification from asset identity, classification, validation, valuation, recognition, and value state, VIS preserves the architectural boundaries of VFM® and complementary OOF® architectures while establishing the foundation required for Value Origin governance. Before value can emerge, change, develop, degrade, reach zero, be restored, or become extinct, the value being governed must first be identifiable.

Nahlad

Value Identification Standard (VIS)

Architecture: VFM® — Value Flow Mechanisms Architecture · Category: Governance & Enforcement · Subcategory: Value Lifecycle Governance Canonical Definition: Value Identification Standard governs how potential or existing manifestations of value are identified, distinguished, bounded, contextualized, and established as governable Value Objects before their origin, existence, state, change, or lifecycle can be determined. Governed Space: Value Identification Value cannot be governed until the subject of value governance is sufficiently identified. → View Standard

About standard