Details to follow. The workshop applies the theoretical foundations of the Incentive Primacy Framework and N-ought's Law to organisational behaviour, workforce dynamics, and institutional structure. Designed for teams that want to examine what their systems actually select for, rather than what they intend.
Target audience: HR leadership, people teams, senior management, board-level governance functions.
// Content in development — enquire for availability
Beyond the diagnostic engine, N-ought is available for broader structural consultancy engagements. This covers the application of incentive-based analysis to organisational design, process architecture, and governance reform — where the question is not only what is currently happening but what a different structure would produce.
// Scope and terms available on request
When a position goes unfilled, the organisation records a saving. The work continues. The remaining team absorbs it. The cost accumulates in the gap between what the accounting system tracks and what is actually happening to the people doing the work.
The calculator below quantifies that gap across three trajectories: the salary the organisation believes it is saving, the productivity loss without cascade, and the cascade scenario — the point at which one absence becomes two.
The model makes conservative assumptions throughout. Productivity decline is set at the user-specified value within the evidence range. Cascade probability is derived from Aiken et al. (JAMA 2002), RCN 2025, Workhuman UK 2023, and BMJ Open 2023, adjusted downward to reflect the gap between stated intent and observed exit rates. The cascade scenario assumes one additional absence following cascade onset; actual outcomes compound. Figures are directional, not actuarial.
The theoretical basis for each component of this model — the structural gap, presenteeism gap, liability mechanism, cascade sequence, and sick pay structure — is documented in full in the methodology paper.
Read the methodology →