Directional operational-burden estimate
Make work around the work visible.
Recurring coordination friction can create additional meetings, checking, rework, escalation, reopened decisions, and commitment repair. The Trust Tariff™ Calculator estimates the incremental labor effort behind those patterns, without presenting the result as the financial cost of low trust.
Transparent and private by design. Every input is an assumption you control. This estimate is not a validated financial measure, audited loss, causal diagnosis, benchmark, recoverable-savings estimate, or ROI forecast.
The method
Six places where effort accumulates
For each category you enter three transparent assumptions. The Calculator annualizes them, applies your excess-share assumption, and reports low, working, and high scenarios.
Additional coordination meetings
Meetings added to clarify, align, revisit, or recover work.
Verification and checking
Incremental reviews, approvals, follow-ups, and evidence requests.
Rework and duplication
Work repeated, corrected, rebuilt, or performed in parallel.
Escalation and management intervention
Leadership time added to resolve or unblock recurring issues.
Decision reopening
Time spent revisiting decisions without materially new evidence.
Handoff and commitment repair
Effort required to clarify ownership, dates, dependencies, or missed agreements.
Range, not false precision
Low, working, and high outputs are sensitivity scenarios, not statistical confidence intervals.
The formula hours = occurrences × people × incremental minutes / 60 × active months × excess share
Questions executives ask
Frequently asked questions
What does the Calculator estimate?
It estimates annual incremental labor hours and optional approximate labor exposure associated with user-entered recurring coordination activities.
Does it calculate the cost of low trust?
No. The result does not establish that trust caused the burden or that the estimate represents financial loss.
Why use an excess-share assumption?
Not all coordination is unnecessary. The excess-share assumption makes your judgment about potentially incremental effort explicit rather than hiding it inside the formula.
Why are there low, working, and high scenarios?
The range shows sensitivity to uncertain assumptions and discourages false precision. It is not a statistical confidence interval.
Why is delay not converted into money?
The financial consequences of delay depend on project economics, revenue timing, customer effects, risk, and other evidence the Calculator does not have.
Can the Friction Scan score be converted automatically?
No. Friction scores provide context. They do not determine hours, labor exposure, or financial value.
Is the result avoidable or recoverable?
Not necessarily. Leaders must determine which effort is legitimate, which may be reducible, and what intervention could change it.
Can we use our own labor rate?
Yes. Use an approximate loaded hourly cost or enter zero to produce an hours-only estimate.
Is the information private?
In prototype mode, entries remain in the browser session and are not transmitted to a backend.
Burden worksheet
Three assumptions per category
Enter what you observe for each recurring pattern. Leave a category blank, or mark it not applicable, if it does not occur in your reference period.
Operational delay Reported separately, never monetized
Enter at least one category with occurrences, people, and minutes.
Directional burden estimate
Incremental labor effort under the assumptions you entered
Interpretation boundary. The Trust Tariff™ Calculator is a research-informed decision-support prototype. It estimates operational burden exposure using user-entered assumptions. It is not a validated financial measure, audited loss calculation, causal diagnosis, benchmark, recoverable-savings estimate, or ROI forecast.
Estimated range
Annual incremental labor hours
Sensitivity scenarios, not confidence intervals.
Burden composition across categories
Assumptions review
| Category | Occurrences/mo | People | Min/person | Est. annual hrs |
|---|
Alternative explanations to examine
- Structure. Reporting lines, role boundaries, or decision rights that legitimately require coordination.
- Process. Workflows, approval chains, or controls that create necessary review steps.
- Capability. Skill or staffing gaps that increase checking and rework.
- Technology. Systems that do not share information cleanly across functions.
- Incentives. Metrics or rewards that pull functions toward different priorities.
- Workload. Capacity constraints that slow responses and reopen commitments.
- Legitimate risk and governance requirements. Controls that should remain even though they add effort.
- Trust-relevant evidence. Patterns that may warrant deeper inquiry, without assuming a trust problem.
Version 0.1. Estimates are directional outputs of your own assumptions, not audited figures.