Ecumenical Performance Analytics: A KPI Framework for Christian Unity and Institutional Dialogue

SeyyedAbdolHojjat  MoghadasNian,SeyedMehdi  AlizadehMousavi,SeyedMohammad  MahdiHosseinPoor,Akbar  Bagheri

ПРЕПРИНТ

Эта статья является препринтом и не была отрецензирована.
О результатах, изложенных в препринтах, не следует сообщать в СМИ как о проверенной информации.

Ecumenical Performance Analytics: A KPI Framework for Christian Unity and Institutional Dialogue

S. MoghadasNian,

S. AlizadehMousavi,

S. MahdiHosseinPoor,

A. Bagheri

2026-01-04

https://doi.org/10.24108/preprints-3114213

This study introduces the Ecumenical Christian KPI Framework (ECKF) as a strategic model for transforming theological aspirations of Christian unity into a measurable, performance-driven system. The research addresses the central challenge of operationalizing ecumenism by constructing a comprehensive framework comprising 12 strategic axes and 110 validated Key Performance Indicators (KPIs). Utilizing a mixed-methods approach, the study integrates expert Delphi analysis, document evaluation of institutional charters, and quantitative prioritization using Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Principal Component Analysis (PCA). Findings indicate a strong consensus around digital theology, institutional governance, and cross-denominational benchmarks as critical drivers of ecumenical success. The framework provides actionable metrics to guide policy, interchurch collaboration, and digital transformation initiatives across ecclesiastical structures. Theoretically, the ECKF contributes a novel KPI-based paradigm to the study of ecumenism, aligning theological ethics with performance science. Practically, it enables the development of real-time dashboards for measuring theological convergence, interfaith impact, and digital participation. The model is adaptable for application across diverse ecclesial traditions, supporting both strategic unity and institutional resilience. Recommendations are offered for policymakers, religious leaders, and digital theologians seeking to operationalize unity through performance governance. The study concludes by outlining future research directions involving AI integration, youth inclusion metrics, and digital ethics in virtual religious systems.

Ссылка для цитирования:

MoghadasNian S., AlizadehMousavi S., MahdiHosseinPoor S., Bagheri A. 2026. Ecumenical Performance Analytics: A KPI Framework for Christian Unity and Institutional Dialogue. PREPRINTS.RU. https://doi.org/10.24108/preprints-3114213

Список литературы

1. Avis, P. (2010). Reshaping ecumenical theology: The church made whole? T&T Clark. Bloomsbury Publishing

2. Bughin, J., LaBerge, L., & Mellbye, A. (2017, February). The case for digital reinvention. McKinsey & Company (McKinsey Quarterly, No. 1). McKinsey & Company

3. Conference of European Churches & Council of European Bishops’ Conferences. (2001, April). Charta Oecumenica: Guidelines for the growing cooperation among the Churches in Europe. CEC / CCEE. ceceurope.org

4. Campbell, H. A., & Tsuria, R. (Eds.). (2021). Digital religion: Understanding religious practice in digital media (2nd ed.). Routledge. Taylor & Francis

5. Dulles, A. (2002). Models of the church (Expanded ed.). Image Books. Digital Commons@DePaul

6. Dunaetz, D. R. (2023). Metrics and Measurements in Church-Based Research. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/879h4

7. Ford, D. F. (2007). Christian wisdom: Desiring God and learning in love. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge University Press & Assessment

8. Gill, M., & VanBoskirk, S. (2016, January 21). The digital maturity model 4.0: Measure your maturity and develop a digital transformation plan (Forrester Report RES 131801). Forrester Research. Forrester.

9. Helland, C. (2016). Digital religion. In D. Yamane (Ed.), Handbook of religion and society (pp. 177–196). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31395-5_10 Academia

10. Hogan, T. R. (2023). Artificial-intelligence-driven hermeneutics: Rethinking scriptural interpretation in the digital age. Journal of Digital Theology, 4(1), 15–30.

11. Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1992). The balanced scorecard—Measures that drive performance. Harvard Business Review, 70(1), 71–79. SCIRP

12. Matabosch, A. (2024). Aportación del ecumenismo a la unidad de la Iglesia y de la sociedad. Albertus Magnus, 14(1), 7–13. https://doi.org/10.15332/25005413.10395

13. Moghadasnian, S. (2025, a). Global Kalam Strategic Framework (GKSF): A fourteen-pillar KPI-based comparative model for Islamic unity and theological convergence. University of Religions and Denominations. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.16774.28489/1

14. 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

15. MoghadasNian, S. (2025c). Interfaith Doctrinal Dialogue Framework (IDDF): A KPI-Oriented Architecture for Abrahamic Unity. University of Religions and Denominations. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.13026.85443

16. MoghadasNian, S. (2025d). 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

17. Müller, S. (2023). »Dialog eröffnen, um Gemeinschaft zu bilden« – ein ökumenisches Analyseinstrument für kirchliche Normfindung aus katholisch-theologischer Perspektive (pp. 161–171). Evangelische Verlagsanstalt. https://doi.org/10.5771/9783374073764-161

18. Neely, A., Adams, C., & Kennerley, M. (2002). The performance prism: The scorecard for measuring and managing business success. Financial Times / Prentice Hall. SCIRP

19. Osmer, R. R. (2008). Practical theology: An introduction. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing. Google Books

20. Papakostas, C. (2024). Faith in Frames: Constructing a Digital Game‐Based Learning Framework for Religious Education. Teaching Theology and Religion. https://doi.org/10.1111/teth.12685

21. Schreiter, R. J. (1997). The new catholicity: Theology between the global and the local. Orbis Books. Amazon

22. Stackhouse, M. L. (2001). Public theology and political economy in a globalizing era. Studies in Christian Ethics, 14(2), 63–86. https://doi.org/10.1177/095394680101400206 SAGE Journals

23. Therivel, R., & Gonzalez, A. (2024). Developing key performance indicators for strategic environmental assessment effectiveness: a systematic framework. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal. https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2024.2355706

24. Thoha, A. F. K., & Ibrahim, M. S. S. (2023). Digital transformation of mosque da’wah: organizational learning and innovation in the digital age. https://doi.org/10.22515/albalagh.v8i2.7634

25. Van den Toren, B. (2023). Openness, Commitment, and Confidence in Interreligious Dialogue: A Cultural Analysis of a Western Debate. Religions, 14(4), 439. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel14040439

26. Vatican Council II. (1964, November 21). Unitatis redintegratio [Decree on Ecumenism]. Vatican Press.

27. Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity. (1993). Directory for the application of principles and norms on ecumenism. Libreria Editrice Vaticana. Christian Unity.

28. World Council of Churches. (1997). Towards a common understanding and vision of the World Council of Churches. WCC Publications.

ПРЕПРИНТ

ИНФОРМАЦИЯ

Использование куки-файлов