Decision score zones: critical, fragile and work
The essentials in 30 seconds
- A decision score zone tells you the state of a system: critical, fragile or work.
- The EQOS Asia case studies place the critical threshold at 0.3 and the STOP and OK cut at 0.618 (as of October 2026).
- 7 case studies label scores from 0.300 to 0.370 as fragile, and the AI case study labels 0.401 as work.
- Zones apply to each of the 9 dimensions as well as to the total.
- Singapore pre-diagnostics place your own decision in a zone.
A zone turns a number into a state that a committee can name. The EQOS Asia case studies use three labels, critical, fragile and work, next to the STOP and OK cut. This guide explains what each label means with published examples, and it extends the reading guide on how to read a decision score with a closer look at zones, as of October 2026.
On this page
Compare the EQOS Asia offers and request a 30-minute pre-diagnostic.
What are the zones of a decision score?
A zone is a band of the score with a name and a recommended reaction. The EQOS Asia method page fixes one line at 0.618, with the STOP zone below and the OK zone above (EQOS Asia method page, as of October 2026). The case studies add finer labels: a critical threshold at 0.3, a fragile zone, and a work zone.
The labels answer a practical need. A committee reads a verdict faster when it has a word for the state, and a word suggests a reaction. Critical suggests repair first, fragile suggests protection against shocks, and work suggests that a base exists to build on. The figure shows the scale from 0 to 1 with the 0.618 cut.
What should a team do with a critical decision score?
Below 0.3, the case studies speak of a critical zone and give one instruction: realign before acting. They add that all investment is blocked automatically while a system sits there (EQOS Asia WeWork and 2008 crisis case studies, as of October 2026). The aim is to repair the fundamentals first, because scaling a misaligned system amplifies its weakness.
Three retrospectives land in this zone. The Theranos page reports φ(S) = 0.085 with 8 of 9 dimensions critical, the WeWork page 0.189 with 7 of 9, and the 2008 page 0.234 with 6 of 9 (EQOS Asia back-test pages, as of October 2026). Each page states that the data was public at the time of the analysis.
What does the fragile zone say about a system that can tip?
The AI case study describes the fragile zone in one line: the system functions, but a shock can tip everything (EQOS Asia AI case study, as of October 2026). Its φ(S) is 0.337. Six other pages carry the fragile label for scores of 0.300, 0.309, 0.333, 0.338, 0.340 and 0.370, on climate, real estate, startups, work, crypto and the dollar (EQOS Asia case study pages, as of October 2026).
A fragile reading calls for protection. List the shocks that could push a dimension below 0.3, such as a regulation, an incident or a recession, and prepare an answer for each. The AI page names Communication at 0.305 as its most fragile dimension, only 0.005 above the critical threshold, so a small shock moves it across.
What does a decision score in the work zone allow?
The work zone describes a system that has left the critical band and has a base to build on. The AI case study shows the move: φ(S) rises from 0.337, fragile, to 0.401, work, and the predicted failure rate drops from 94% to 82% (EQOS Asia AI case study, as of October 2026). The page adds that this is not excellence yet, and that the difference is a large share of recoverable value.
The startups page sets a working rule in the same spirit: if φ is below 0.4, fix the fundamentals first, in governance, unit economics and culture (EQOS Asia startups case study, as of October 2026). The WeWork counterfactual describes investment as conditional in the work zone, with quarterly monitoring of integrity, communication and stability.
How do decision score zones apply to single dimensions?
Zones apply to each of the 9 dimensions as well as to the total. The AI case study reports that no dimension sits in the critical zone, below 0.3, while all the others are in the fragile zone (EQOS Asia AI case study, as of October 2026). The total and its parts tell different stories, and a reader should check both.
The retrospectives show the opposite pattern. The WeWork page reports 7 of 9 dimensions in the critical zone and notes that only resonance at 0.42 and energy at 0.72 sit above it (EQOS Asia WeWork case study, as of October 2026). A count of dimensions per zone gives a committee a quick profile of where the weakness is concentrated.
How do the zones relate to the 0.618 line and to the Λ scale?
The 0.618 cut separates STOP from OK on the φ(S) scale, and the zone labels sit beneath it. A fragile or work reading therefore falls on the STOP side of the cut, with different reactions: protect in one case, build in the other. The scale and the labels complement each other, and a report shows both.
The Λ simulator uses a wider axis with marks at 0, 0.618, 1.000, 1.618, 2.618 and 4+, and the method page states that Λ at 1.0 or above marks a viable system (EQOS Asia simulator and method pages, as of October 2026). Keep the two scales apart: φ(S) measures alignment, and Λ consolidates all the lenses.
How can you place your own decision in a score zone?
Open the public Λ simulator, rate the 9 dimensions from 0 to 100, and read the structural value, the figure the page calls the reference value to decide (EQOS Asia simulator page, as of October 2026). Compare each dimension with the 0.3 line and the total with the 0.618 cut. The demo gives a first orientation in about 2 minutes (EQOS Asia home page, as of October 2026).
For the exact edges between fragile and work, and for a sourced reading, a 30-minute pre-diagnostic by video, scheduled in Singapore time (SGT), applies the equation to your case at no commitment (EQOS Asia contact page, as of October 2026). The pricing page lists the tiers for a fuller study, starting with a Reading at US$358.
See also in this guide
Frequently asked questions
What are the decision score zones?
The EQOS Asia case studies use three labels: critical for scores below 0.3, fragile for systems that function but can tip under a shock, and work for systems that have a base to build on. The method page adds a STOP and OK cut at 0.618 (EQOS Asia method and case study pages, as of October 2026).
What score is the critical threshold?
The case studies set the critical threshold at 0.3. Below it, the guidance is to realign before acting, and the pages describe all investment as blocked while the system stays there (EQOS Asia case study pages, as of October 2026).
Can one dimension be critical when the total is not?
Yes. Zones apply to each of the 9 dimensions as well as to the total. A dimension can fall below 0.3 while the total sits higher, and the weighted geometric product means the weak dimension still pulls the total down. Reading both shows where to act first.
Where do the exact edges between fragile and work sit?
The case study pages give labels with example scores and do not state one common edge. The pre-diagnostic is the place to ask: a 30-minute video session scheduled in SGT applies the equation to your case at no commitment (EQOS Asia contact page, as of October 2026).
Test your knowledge
1. Below which score do the case studies speak of a critical zone?
- 0.618
- 0.3
- 0.4
Show the answer
0.3.
2. Which score does the AI case study label as work?
- 0.401
- 0.337
- 0.189
Show the answer
0.401.
3. How many dimensions does the WeWork page report in the critical zone?
- 6 of 9
- 8 of 9
- 7 of 9
Show the answer
7 of 9.
4. Where does the STOP and OK cut sit on the φ(S) scale?
- 0.618
- 1.0
- 0.3
Show the answer
0.618.
5. Which reaction goes with a fragile reading?
- Block all investment
- Protect against shocks
- Ignore the score
Show the answer
Protect against shocks.
About the author
Stéphane Jambu
President, EQOS Forecast Asia
Stéphane Jambu leads EQOS Forecast Asia and works as a consultant in e-commerce, search visibility, and AI. LinkedIn profile
Sources: EQOS Asia method page (eqos-asia.com/method.html), simulator page (eqos-asia.com/simulator.html), home page (eqos-asia.com/index.html), contact page (eqos-asia.com/contact.html), pricing page (eqos-asia.com/pricing.html), AI case study (eqos-asia.com/case-studies/ia-2026.html), startups case study (eqos-asia.com/case-studies/startups-2026.html), WeWork case study (eqos-asia.com/case-studies/wework.html), Theranos case study (eqos-asia.com/case-studies/theranos.html), 2008 crisis case study (eqos-asia.com/case-studies/crise-2008.html), consulted on 22 October 2026. Page updated on 22 October 2026.