By Jon Hansen | Procurement Insights | January 2026
Recently, I was asked to use the five models of RAM 2025 to build a hypothetical Level 1 Hansen Fit Score trajectory for a major telecommunications company’s 30-year transformation — from government monopoly (1995) through acquisition turbulence (1997-2006) to digital maturity (2025).
The graph was built entirely from public data. No insider access. No interviews. Just longitudinal pattern recognition across four technology eras.
Then I shared it with a practitioner who was inside the organization during the critical turnaround years (2008-2010).
His response:
“Yes, this is like the ramp I saw from 2008 and beyond. The biggest growth was from 2008 and beyond. We established the tool and process, and discipline drove the change.”
The trajectory matched. The inflection point matched. The mechanism matched.
What RAM 2025 surfaced from decades of public data, the practitioner validated from lived experience.
Why This Matters
The Implication
RAM 2025 doesn’t just validate content. It reconstructs transformation physics from longitudinal data — and when the reconstruction matches practitioner experience, it confirms the framework’s predictive validity.
This is what 27 years of pattern recognition enables: the ability to see transformation trajectories before — and after — they happen.
Technology readiness without practitioner readiness is negative leverage.
That lesson showed up in the data. And the practitioner confirmed it.
-30-
Procurement Insights
RAM 2025: When a 30-Year Hypothetical Matches Lived Experience
Posted on January 14, 2026
0
By Jon Hansen | Procurement Insights | January 2026
Recently, I was asked to use the five models of RAM 2025 to build a hypothetical Level 1 Hansen Fit Score trajectory for a major telecommunications company’s 30-year transformation — from government monopoly (1995) through acquisition turbulence (1997-2006) to digital maturity (2025).
The graph was built entirely from public data. No insider access. No interviews. Just longitudinal pattern recognition across four technology eras.
Then I shared it with a practitioner who was inside the organization during the critical turnaround years (2008-2010).
His response:
The trajectory matched. The inflection point matched. The mechanism matched.
What RAM 2025 surfaced from decades of public data, the practitioner validated from lived experience.
Why This Matters
The Implication
RAM 2025 doesn’t just validate content. It reconstructs transformation physics from longitudinal data — and when the reconstruction matches practitioner experience, it confirms the framework’s predictive validity.
This is what 27 years of pattern recognition enables: the ability to see transformation trajectories before — and after — they happen.
Technology readiness without practitioner readiness is negative leverage.
That lesson showed up in the data. And the practitioner confirmed it.
-30-
Share this:
Related