That's not an applicative, that's a causative.
An applicative is a voice that moves a syntactic oblique into object position, without changing its semantic role (indeed, it often marks the role on the verb). What you have here, where the subject is demoted to the object and the oblique is promoted to subject*, isn't blurring the lines, it's just plain not an applicative.
*the structure of the change is: I-subj run because-of-him-OBL > he-subj makes-run me-ACC. The fact that you can have a 'from him' oblique for the intransitive is irrelevent, because it's a different argument from the one you're promoting in the transitive.
Remember, a voice doesn't change the core semantics of the verb, it just rearranges the syntax. "He eats me" and "I am eaten by him" have the same basic semantics, just different role assignments; likewise, "He eats because of me" and "I make him eat", or "I fly over it" and "I overfly it". If you have some process that turns "I run away from him" into "I force him to run", you're completely changing the semantics, and that's not a new voice, that's just a totally unrelated sentence.
Of course, you could use applicatives to form causatives. I-nom run-ACT because of him > I-nom run-CAU him-ACC. That is, "I run because of him" is turned by an applicative into "I for-run him" (which doesn't quite work in English because we don't have morphological causative applicatives; we maybe have some suppletive ones, like "I act because of her" > "I obey her" (though that doesn't quite work either, because it's a specific form of causation only)).