Skip to main content

Hypha and Seeds Impact Metrics



As Hypha (the organization) and Seeds (the movement) are slowly expanding their scopes, we need to build a framework to assess the impact we have on a wide range of initiatives for pilots on the ground and around the planet. While each initiative will have a different impact given the local context, we want to apply a common framework to measure key impact metrics, namely STrAX, a Sustainable Transformation Index developed by Aissa Azzouzi, the Activation Matrix, developed by Joachim Stroh and a System Map for Thrivability developed by Dr. Anneloes Smitsman.  The result is a process (abstracted below) that can tell us how we are doing as our scopes are increasing from the individual-psychological (on the left) towards the organizational-cultural-communal, bioregional-governmental and - as an aggregate measure - the societal and the global (on the right).

It is important to note that we are working from both the individual (e.g. connecting to individuals starting to play the GPP game and become a resident) and the organizational (connecting with new alliance partners through the ambassador academy and network) as well as the bioregional-governmental (e.g. key players like Lisa and Franz working directly with government organizations in Costa Rica or Sweden). Having said that, the initiatives are very much focused on local "hot spots" (explained later) and pursue a complimentary strategy to rewarding broader audiences (e.g. all GPP holders) for participation in Seeds (e.g. via the Game of Seeds approach). 

The map below is abstracted and the actual implementation will look different (see Rieki's Bioregion and Ecovillage deck for examples of a potential UI/UX). 


Deployment Strategy

As Hypha is constantly developing new products for the global network and ecosystem, we need a solid deployment strategy to (1) ensure that the technology and blueprints can be adopted and adapted in a given local context and (2) to collect direct feedback from participants in the field to iterate and refine our solution sets. For this to happen, we introduce Accelerators and Incubators, a special kind of organization called "XOs" with a larger capacity, wider reach & access to pilot spaces on the ground. As part of the deployment strategy, these XOs must run assessments (surveys, interviews, etc) on a regular basis to check the pulse of the network (and as such level of coherence). Depicted below are both Hypha (Core Tech on the left), Accelerators and Incubators (using toolsets such as Org-in-a-Box, Marketplace-in-a-Box and Village-in-a-Box in the center) and the wider global network/ecosystem (on the right). Color coding can indicate the readiness on the ground across the different stakeholders, detailed in the Activation Matrix


Activation Matrix

The purpose of the Activation Matrix is to ensure the full participation of key stakeholders on the ground across four different areas:

  1. Bioregion & Municipality Activation (the goal is to protect & govern)
  2. Community Activation (the goal is to listen & learn)
  3. Knowledge Activation (the goal is to map & model)
  4. Alliance Activation (the goal is to build & sustain)

Each stakeholder will bring in unique perspectives, skills and expertise to provide for the "fertile soil" from which a potential solution can arise. Note that this approach is strictly "bottom-up", our task is to listen to and to amplify the signals that are already present on the ground. To tie the Activation Matrix to the Impact Metrics, note the "Hot Spots" depicted on the left side of the graphic. This is where the prioritization and the assessments are taking place, before, during and after the deployment of potential solutions on the ground. A color schema can assist in determining the current status of the activation (e.g. "all systems go" for the Community Activation below). To learn more about  Activation Matrix (also called Glocal Impact Matrix), please watch this short video.


Implementation Mechanics

Sustainable Transformation Index

The Sustainable Transformation Index (STrAX) was developed by Aissa Azzouzi and includes an assessment matrix the collects a composite score for Trust, Love and Care. 


  • Transformative Impact PURPOSE INTENTION Statement
  • Level of Organizational COMPETENCE to deliver the expected Impact
  • Level of Leadership VELOCITY in delivering & managing the expected Impact
  • Communication TRANSPARENCY I Impact Delivery ACOUNTABILITY 


  • CAPITAL & RESOURCES Intensity & Efficiency
  • Degree of EMPATHY I INCLUSION I INTEGRATION of Stakeholders
  • Level of COOPERATION with Impacted Stakeholders
  • Impact BENEFIT Identification & Distribution


  • Impact on PEOPLE
  • Impact on PLANET
  • Impact on PROFIT
  • RISK Management of NEGATIVE Impact

The assessment is applied (e.g. on a 5-star rating scale) across an array of key indicators (in this case the UN's 17 Sustainable Development Goals but it could be any other indicators, such as Kate Raworth's key indicators in the Doughnut Economics model or Seeds economic indicators, targets or objectives). The assessment and rating is done with both the probing organization and the impacted stakeholders and then compared to each other to see which if any discrepancies are becoming obvious. Larger mismatches indicate a higher degree of incoherence.  


When starting a new pilot, a Statement of Purpose is be jointly developed ex-ante to clearly formulate and express the project's intention and implied intrinsic values. During this phase of the project launch, the team is beginning to manifest the impact and to document the outcome by consistently measuring the state of harmony and coherence through the Trust, Love, and Care index.  The project is monitored ex-post with a Statement of Stakeholders Expectations that includes the expected derived values and the perceived transformation potential. 









Third iteration of the impact metrics

Meeting with Aissa, Anneloes and Joachim on Jul 9, 2021.

Video recording is here

Vilcabamba campaign proposal is here

  • We agreed to refine the questions to capture the "full picture" (including the intangible side) of the data and to answer "are we really measuring what we think we are measuring?"
  • Anneloes proposed to add questions that get us deeper into socio-psychological or human-developmental areas, a necessary component to capture deeper and more meaningful data
  • Joachim suggested to break questions into 3 categories (based on work from Aglietta and Orlean, 1982)
    1. Methodical Foundation (is the underlying framework, process and structure in place? are social objects clearly defined?)
    2. Hierarchical Trust (are the necessary relationships in place? are they transparent and not power-over?)
    3. Ethical Care (is the human developmental space covered? do you feel safe to speak up? do you sense any imbalances in the group?)
  • We agreed to keep the assessment matrix and evaluation schema that Aissa provided (see right side of the above table)
  • We agreed to simplify the questionnaire by moving "Love" as the underlying principle out of the question area and keep Trust and Care. 
  • We agreed to provide some more example for the "targets" in the columns (Aissa)
  • We explore a survey tool (ideally mobile) to ask the questions and capture the answers (Joachim)


Current questions:

Area Object Question

Purpose statement

Transformative Impact PURPOSE INTENTION Statement

Is there a purpose statement for each Targeted Impact. Is the statement clear? is the stated intention aligned with stakeholders expectations?


Competency assessment

Level of Organizational COMPETENCE to deliver the expected Impact

Does the project gather all the necessary competencies required for its success

Leadership intervention

Leadership VELOCITY in delivering & managing the expected Impact

In case of misalignment of Intentions and Competencies is the leadership addressing the issues with the right velocity

Communication strategy

Communication TRANSPARENCY I Impact Delivery ACOUNTABILITY

Does the project Team communicate to & interact regularly with the Stakeholders on achievements?

HR & resourcing strategy

CAPITAL & RESOURCES Intensity & Efficiency

Are the HR and Other Resources mobilized on the Project sufficient to deliver the intended purpose
HIERARCHICAL TRUST Open participation
Are the stated values manifested through the project delivery ?

Open cooperation

Level of COOPERATION with Impacted Stakeholders

Is Cooperation manifested through the project delivery ?

Open rewards

Impact BENEFIT Identification & Distribution

Are the project Benefits identified and measured and shared amongst the Stakeholders



Impact on PEOPLE Does the projected impact manifest thriving for the People ?



Impact on PLANET Does the projected impact manifest thriving for the Planet ?



Impact on PROFIT What Profits will the Project deliver ?



Impact on PROSPERITY-COMMUNITY Does the projected impact manifest thriving for the Community ?



RISK Management of NEGATIVE Impact In case the Project manifest negative externalities are they addressed / compensated?

New questions (these are not fully formulated, just a shell):

Category 1-3 Questions
  1. In agreement with statement of purpose?
  2. In agreement with methodology (program)?
  3. In agreement with sources of funding?
  1. In alignment with team roster & stakeholders?
  2. In alignment with project support? HR/Comms/Finance
  3. In alignment with role authority/accountability?
  1. Feeling safe and comfortable to participate?
  2. Having a voice to decide and raise concerns?
  3. Knowing where to go for help if tensions arise?
  1. Addressing any negative externalities?
  2. Maintaining the purpose, program, and progress? 
  3. Increasing quality of life, livelihood and liveliness? 



  1. Sensing a quantifiable impact on people?
  2. Sensing a quantifiable impact on place?
  3. Sensing a quantifiable impact on prosperity?



  1. It is changing my life for the better
  2. It is igniting my passion
  3. It is shifting my perspectives


The three levels of trust applied to Hypha (from an earlier work piece) - 


The survey tool:

  • Select the Stage (EX ANTE, MID TERM, EX POST)
  • Select the Targets (Clean the river, Set up solar system, Introduce circular currency)
  • Survey the stakeholders (Seeds members, local activists, indigenous tribes, municipality, alliance partners, community members)
    • Rate the level of Trust (Methodical, hierarchical and ethical trust)
    • Rate the level of Care (Methodical, empirical, ethical care)

Finca Sagrada/Vilcabamba:

(Quantifiable) Targets:

  1. establishing [N%] of bioregional leadership training program
  2. generating [N] values based impact driven ventures
  3. regenerating [N%] of the vital watershed, rural community and the environment
  4. encouraging sustainability among [N] people for both profitable ventures and the planet
  5. utilizing [N%] of an equitable regenerative currency to support this entire ecosystem
  6. incorporate Kogi's watershed wisdom they choose to share with the world

Fourth iteration of the impact metrics

Meeting with Aissa and Joachim on Jul 30, 2021.

Preview of Survey App is here

Survey Data spreadsheet is here

Action Plan:

Topic Action Who Status
Questions Review current categories (3) All Done
Questions Develop questions for survey (see previous work from Aissa and simplified sample questions above) Aissa Done
Questions Develop a "Sensing Survey" to be sent before the event starts Stephen Not started
Targets Develop set of quantifiable targets (see draft targets above) Stephen Done
Stages Decide when to run the survey and how often (see sample stages above) Stephen Done
Stakeholders Decide whom to survey (see sample groups above) Stephen In progress
Technology Decide on survey tool (called Glide Apps) Joachim Done
Technology Develop Glide app for Vilcabamba Joachim Done
Data Update the Google spreadsheet with all event data  All In progress

Survey Screens (DRAFT):

  • Questions - the survey with (a) stage (e.g. Welcome Survey), (b) Target (e.g. Clean the River, and (c) the question
  • Sessions - Simple calendar of events for each day
  • Location - Venue coordinates


DNS Settings

The following DNS settings have been added to our DNS hosting provider at Namecheap. 

Host Type Data
_glideauthid.survey TXT bMJzFtIyyqdIafZa0Qda
survey CNAME

Fifth Iteration of impact metrics

  • we delegate/proxy the data capturing to an "Assessment Team" that is active on the ground
  • team can use any kind of tool to capture data - workshop, calls, interviews, events, etc
  • requires  a new role and  DHO  to perform - (1) data capture, (2) Kanban PM and (3) the system mapping
  • also understanding & relationship building with target groups - beneficiaries & indirect participants (muni)
  • learning the DHOing, what Hypha can do to support this efforts
  • what Kogi can do to help us understand "mother earth" as a beneficiary

Sixth Iteration of impact metrics

  • not ready for deployment due to (1) Hypha's restructuring to Type-2 org (cannot create alliances yet), (2) missing definition and support of Seeds pilots, circularity and governance principles, (3) early stages of a maturity model (e.g. only beginning to grasp what this is about, majority of initiatives are about about KINS/trust building), (4) tensions between a grassroots approach and top-down invention (template-based approach)
  • follow up with Ira Kaufman in NYC to discuss this and his book "EmpowerUs!" and ESGs in the context of DHOs. 
  • TE/ST - KINS is focused on Trust and Empathy, this effort (as outlined on tis page) is about (measuring) Sustainability and Transparency

Seventh Iteration of impact metrics

  • value of impact metrics is on an aggregate  (institutional, bioregional, SDG/ESG/SII) level as well as a feedback mechanism on a cybernetic level (how are we doing?)
  • one the Seeds side we are missing a clear MVP/MVT/MVR (Min Viable Recipe or Toolbox) - the VP has been written about extensively
  • also missing is a clear direction/definition of launching pilots (like what we did in Vilcabamba)
  • Lastly, there's also a missing (more structured and aligned) marketing component that would drive adoption
  • we are after an "iPhone moment" changing the way people think about currencies, but trying to do this without a central figure (like Steve Jobs did)
  • compared to traditional canvas business models (Osterwalder), our customers are stakeholders and active participants
  • two possible ways forward from here: (1) align with Seeds and ensure that the MVR/MVT for impact metric is firmly embedded in the rollout/movement or (2) align with Hypha and develop a more universal approach to metrics that can be applied in any vertical/market independent from the economic models and currencies in use (like a plug-in module for the DHO)
  • personally (JS), I like to see the DHO as a "entrepreneurial vessel" that adds new (premium priced) modules to the platform that anyone can use and adapt for their own context (socio-ecological with Seeds, but also socio-economic, socio-psychological and socio-political)

Further discussions (via Anneloes)


System Map for Transformational Change and Thrivability 

The transformation potential can be further mapped onto a Complex Adaptive System (CAS) to distinguish sustainable, regenerative to thriveable processes. The System Maps that are presented here form part of a visual summary of the PhD research titled Into the Heart of Systems Change by Dr. Anneloes Smitsman, at ICIS, Maastricht University through EARTHwise Centre. The map provides a visual analysis of the systemic thrivability barriers and behaviors that emerge from (old world) mechanistic systems, compared to those from (new world) thrivability systems. For more information on the map, please see the Kumu chart