Эта статья является препринтом и не была отрецензирована.
О результатах, изложенных в препринтах, не следует сообщать в СМИ как о проверенной информации.
Islamic Hiwar Framework (IHF) A KPI-Based Strategic Architecture for Intra-Faith Dialogue, Institutional Governance, and Civilizational Unity
This study introduces the Islamic Ḥiwār Framework (IHF), a multi-layered, KPI-based architecture developed to operationalize intra-faith dialogue within Islamic contexts by translating theological, ethical, and institutional principles into measurable performance indicators. Drawing from Islamic epistemology, dialogical ethics, and governance structures, the IHF addresses the need for a strategic, accountable, and scalable model for religious rapprochement. A mixed-methods approach was employed, combining expert-based Delphi analysis, AHP-weighted indicator validation, and qualitative document review of intra-Islamic unity initiatives. The research identified 14 strategic domains and 280 KPIs distributed across educational, institutional, digital, jurisprudential, ethical, and governance axes. Key findings highlight the role of dialogical trust, ethical literacy, governance transparency, and AI-enabled feedback systems in sustaining meaningful rapprochement. The study recommends the adoption of IHF metrics by religious councils, seminaries, and ministries to support transparent, performance-oriented dialogue governance. Theoretically, the model bridges classical ijtihād with contemporary strategic frameworks such as Balanced Scorecard and digital maturity indices. Practically, it enables real-time monitoring, stakeholder engagement, and strategic planning aligned with maqāṣid-based institutional objectives. This research offers an original KPI-based contribution to Islamic studies, religious diplomacy, and civilizational strategy.
1. Abdoh, M. M., & Obeid, A. H. (2022). الأحاديث العقدية الواردة في الحوار بعد البعثة والهجرة النبوية جمعاً وتخريجاً ودراسةً. Ma`alim Al-Qur`an Wa al-Sunnah, 18(1), 210–231. https://doi.org/10.33102/jmqs.v18i1.358
2. Afsaruddin, A. (2021). Valorizing Religious Dialogue and Pluralism Within the Islamic Tradition (pp. 35–45). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-66089-5_2
3. ALKHUBRA, MOCH. R., Chotimah, C., & Sulistyorini, S. (2025). Integrasi nilai keislaman dalam manajemen strategik untuk membangun keunggulan kompetitif lembaga pendidikan islam di era globalisasi digital. CENDEKIA, 5(1), 185–192. https://doi.org/10.51878/cendekia.v5i1.4153
4. Argon, K. (2009). Strategies for Interreligious and Inter-Muslim Dialogue: A Proposed Methodology. Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs, 29(3), 355–367. https://doi.org/10.1080/13602000903166622
5. Ciocan, T.-C. (2024). Interfaith Dialogue as a Tool for Combating Discrimination: Theological Insights and Practical Applications. Dialogo, 11(1), 518–548. https://doi.org/10.51917/dialogo.2024.11.1.34
6. Elius, M. (2023). Interfaith Dialogue: An Islamic Framework. Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bangladesh. Humanities. https://doi.org/10.3329/jasbh.v68i2.70363
7. Elius, M., Khan, I., & Mohd Nor, M. R. (2019). Interreligious Dialogue: An Islamic Approach. 15(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.22452/KATHA.VOL15NO1.1
8. Elmahjub, E. (2023). Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Islamic Ethics: Towards Pluralist Ethical Benchmarking for AI. Philosophy & Technology, 36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-023-00668-x
9. Ghazal, R., & Zulkhibri, M. (2016). Islamic Inclusive Growth Index for the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) Member Countries. Journal of Economic Cooperation and Development, 37(2), 51.
10. Gilani, M. H., Ali, S., & Mohyiddeen, G. (2024). Reimagining islamic discourse: towards a global ethical framework for contemporary leadership. Deleted Journal, 103–120. https://doi.org/10.31436/shajarah.vi.1931
11. Ishak, M. N., & Mohamed, A. (2023). Harmonization of Islamic Economics with Artificial Intelligence: Towards an Ethical and Innovative Economic Paradigm. https://doi.org/10.24256/kharaj.v5i4.4387
12. Kayaoglu, T. (2011). Constructing the Dialogue of Civilizations: A Case of Islamic Norm-Making in International Society. Social Science Research Network. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1900309
13. Majid, A. Ab. (2022). Inter-Religious Dialogue: Detrimental to Aqidah or Medium of Da’wah? International Journal of Academic Research in Business & Social Sciences, 12(10). https://doi.org/10.6007/ijarbss/v12-i10/15533
14. Marlina, M., & Ulya, Y. A. (2024). Communication Strategies in Islamic Da’wah Opportunities and Challenges in the Era of Artificial Intelligence. Deleted Journal, 1(2), 121–130. https://doi.org/10.62569/fijc.v1i2.35
15. Maté, A., Trujillo, J., & Mylopoulos, J. (2016). Key Performance Indicator Elicitation and Selection Through Conceptual Modelling (pp. 73–80). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-46397-1_6
16. McCallum, R. (2022). Evaluating Interreligious Peacebuilding and Dialogue: Methods and Frameworks ed. by Mohammed Abu-Nimer and Renáta Katalin Nelson (review). CrossCurrents, 72(3), 297–300. https://doi.org/10.1353/cro.2022.0026
17. MoghadasNian, S. (2025a). Islamic Ḥiwār Framework (IHF): A KPI-Based Architecture for Intra-Faith Dialogue and Civilizational Unity. University of Religions and Denominations. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.34234.30403
18. MoghadasNian, S. (2025b). Ecumenical Christian KPI Framework (ECKF): A KPI-Based Strategic Architecture for Christian Unity and Institutional Dialogue. University of Religions and Denominations. https://doi.org/ 10.13140/RG.2.2.31969.21609
19. Rahmawati, D., Yusuf, M., & Mubarok, M. (2024). Kerjasama antar ummat beragama dalam bidang pendidikan untuk mewujudkan generasi rahmatan lil alamin. https://doi.org/10.51878/learning.v4i2.2828
20. Shalhoob, H. (2025). The role of AI in enhancing shariah compliance: Efficiency and transparency in Islamic finance. Journal of Infrastructure, Policy and Development, 9(1), 11239. https://doi.org/10.24294/jipd11239
21. Zarqa, M. (2019). Islamic and Conventional Economics – Dialogue and Ethics. Journal of King Abdulaziz University-Islamic Economics, 32(2), 125–135. https://doi.org/10.4197/ISLEC.32-2.10
