MalsysisalTristress Reform Engine

Acceptance Existential Stress Pride · antidote: Inclusion

SHACSAIPA

Existential Stress Dashboard

SHA, CSA and IPA activation, the Pride index and the Inclusion index for each sample entity. Choose an entity to see its profile and the reforms that would move it most.

Stress map

Existential Stress map: score 0–100 for each sample entity. For the three axes and Pride, lower is better; for Inclusion, higher is better.
EntitySHACSAIPAPrideInclusion
spiritual · Mid-Atlantic, US79.177.86976.328.1
cultural · Northeast, US46.761.243.550.947.7
educational · Southwest, US39.249.556.541.447.9
civic · Mountain West, US60.876.55864.629.3

Entity profile

Example Faith Community I · spiritual · Mid-Atlantic, US · medium · budget 22M USD · serves 9,500 people Fictional example

Pride index

76.3/100

Authority gained from hierarchy relative to investment in acceptance. Lower is better.

Inclusion index

28.1/100

Upstream acceptance delivered relative to downstream hierarchy management. Higher is better.

Axis activation

75.3/100

Mean of SHA, CSA and IPA. Lower is better.

Example Faith Community I: SHA 79.1, CSA 77.8, IPA 6950100SHA79.1CSA77.8IPA69
Existential Stress axes for Example Faith Community I (0–100, lower is better)
View data table
AxisExample Faith Community I
Spiritual Hierarchy Axis79.1
Cultural Supremacy Axis77.8
Ideological Purity Axis69

Inputs

MetricValueStress
Doctrinal gatekeeping index 0–1007474
Leadership concentration % of leadership from one group9287
Minority culture recognition index 0–1003169
Dissent tolerance index 0–1002872
Disability access parity index 0–1004060
Interfaith and intercultural engagement % of programs487

Stress is each input placed on a 0–100 scale, where 100 is the most stress.

Recommended reforms

Ranked by impact potential: the total score movement each reform would produce on Example Faith Community I by itself.

  1. 7. Pay for unity, not hierarchy

    Impact 41.9

    Realign Institutional Incentives: Pay for Unity, Not Hierarchy

    Pride −15.3 · Inclusion +8.6 · SHA −6.3 · CSA −6.2 · IPA −5.5

  2. 1. Pay to reduce pride

    Impact 41.8

    Core Principle: Institutions Must Be Paid to Reduce Pride, Not Monetize Hierarchy

    Pride −13.7 · Inclusion +10.1 · SHA −6.3 · CSA −6.2 · IPA −5.5

  3. 5. Acceptance-centered institutions

    Impact 40.6

    Redesign Identity Institutions Around Acceptance

    Pride −9.2 · Inclusion +8.6 · SHA −11.1 · CSA −6.2 · IPA −5.5

  4. 4. Early acceptance interventions

    Impact 37.6

    Integrate Cheap, Effective Acceptance Interventions Early

    Pride −9.2 · Inclusion +7.2 · SHA −7.9 · CSA −7.8 · IPA −5.5

  5. 3. Upstream acceptance parity

    Impact 35.7

    Reimburse Upstream Acceptance Interventions at Parity with Downstream Hierarchy Management

    Pride −7.6 · Inclusion +10.1 · SHA −6.3 · CSA −6.2 · IPA −5.5

Simulate the top three for Example Faith Community I