The ARC Framework
ARC is a digital-maturity diagnostic developed by Kingsbury Consulting that establishes where an organisation’s digital focus belongs right now, based on its current reality rather than its aspirations. It reads an organisation across three dimensions, Align, Run, and Change, and is deliberately non-linear: most organisations carry a mix of all three across different functions, so the task is to identify the dominant constraints and sequence the work accordingly. ARC is the diagnostic layer that feeds the CORE Framework, so that any roadmap responds to an evidenced picture rather than to guesswork.
The three dimensions
Align
Connect the estate
Whether data and workflows can move between systems without manual intervention. Weak Align shows as manual re-entry, disconnected reporting, and systems that do not talk to each other. Until Align is sound, most new initiatives should be treated as risk rather than opportunity.
Run
Use what you have well
Whether existing capability is actually being used: adoption, training, process consistency, and the absence of drift. Weak Run shows as tools that exist but are underused and work that depends on informal experts and heroics. Where Run is weak, any new tool returns poorly, because adoption and process capacity are the real constraint.
Change
Govern what is next
Readiness for what comes next: data governance in practice, clear decision rights, lifecycle and end-of-life planning, and the controls that let new capability, including AI, be adopted with evidence rather than panic. Weak Change shows as innovation pressure running ahead of governance and ownership.
Why it is non-linear, and why that matters
An organisation can have strong Run in one function and weak Align in another. Treating ARC as a ladder, or assuming maturity simply by who owns a system, is the mistake ARC is designed to catch. The value is in naming the dominant constraint and sequencing against it, not in awarding a single overall score.
How to tell which dimension dominates
-
Align. If the main pain is manual re-entry, disconnected reporting, or systems not talking to each other.
-
Run. If the tools exist but are underused, or processes are inconsistent and capability is the constraint.
-
Change. If the push is towards AI or new platforms but governance, ownership, or lifecycle planning is weak.
How ARC feeds CORE
ARC diagnoses; CORE sequences the response. Align and Run constraints generally map to CORE's Consolidate and Optimise phases; Change maps towards Reinforce and then Expand. Diagnosis before sequencing is the whole point, and it is why no roadmap is proposed before ARC has been run. Read about the CORE Framework.
Common questions
Is ARC linear?
No. ARC is deliberately non-linear. An organisation can have strong Run in one function and weak Align in another, so the task is to identify the dominant constraints and sequence against them rather than to climb a ladder or award a single overall score.
How is ARC different from the CORE Framework?
ARC diagnoses where an organisation’s focus belongs right now. CORE sequences the response. ARC is the diagnostic layer that feeds CORE, so that no roadmap is proposed before the current-state picture is established.
How do you know which ARC dimension applies?
If the pain is manual re-entry and systems not talking, it is Align. If tools exist but are underused and capability is the constraint, it is Run. If the push is towards new platforms or AI while governance and ownership are weak, it is Change.
ARC begins with an honest picture of where an organisation actually stands. The diagnostic is a free way to see which dimension needs attention first, with no obligation to go further.