Official Archive T1, the collapse that closes it), and the mode that occupies it Survival Functioning: holding up what must be held even when resources have run short, by drawing ever harder on their reserves. It proposes an entry marker (recovery no longer restores) and an exploratory criterion for locating the crossing. Several mechanisms account for the failure to see, each enough on its own; their convergence is not required. A compensatory loop sets in and sustains itself, drawing down resources all the way to collapse. Illegibility is treated as a configurational property, still to be tested: it comes from how the background, the demanding context, and the mode are arranged, not from any trait of the person or the organization. The method is an abductive inquiry (Haig, 2005): it starts with the observable collapse and works backward to what led to it. It is written up as a theory synthesis paper (Jaakkola, 2020). The cases it draws on were all selected because they ended in collapse, so burnout serves here as an anchoring case, not the only way the gray zone can end. The shape of the trajectory is offered as transferable. That, too, has to be tested. Two testable propositions are put forward for empirical work. The first is whether practitioners trained on the map can spot the gray zone better than they do today; the second is whether that recognition holds up from one judge to another. Other lines of research go with them: turning the marker into a short, repeatable measure; and tracking, over time, whether more time in Survival Functioning brings a heavier toll after the collapse. This last one is a prediction you can test on its own, apart from the definition. Official Archive & DOI: This white paper is officially archived on Zenodo. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20646691
Aphy Mputu (Thu,) studied this question.