Systemic Strategy

Theory of Systemic Change and Action

Last updated Mar 7, 2023 | Originally published Mar 7, 2023

Theories of Change are one of the fundamental tools of changemakers and program evaluation (Mackinnon, 2006). However, when addressing wicked problems (Rittel & Webber, 1973), theories of change are too reductive and linear to properly account for the systemic phenomena, structures, and dynamics that perpetuate the issues we’re trying to address (Murphy & Jones, 2020).

Theories of Systemic Change and Action (ToSCA) are a systemic design tool that combine theories of change with systemic understanding. The result is a theory of change that is useful for understanding, communicating, and evaluating systemic change projects.

Here’s a rough guide to develop a ToSCA:

Model the system (e.g., with causal loop diagrams; Kim, 1992).
Develop systemic strategies from the model.
Reorganize the modelled phenomena. From left to right:
1. Capability building and resource mobilization for the initiative (Inputs)
2. Inteventional activities the initiative will take on (Activities)
3. Immediate outputs of those activities (Outputs)
4. Results of those outputs on the overall system (Outcomes)
5. Downstream effects of those outcomes on higher-system structures (Impacts)
Reiterate on step 3 as necessary.

The resulting diagram will look somewhat like an iceberg model (Stroh, 2015, p. 46] on its side: visible events and behaviour are on the left, while the actual patterns and structures in the system fall to the right.

The ToSCA can then be simplified as necessary to suit different needs. For instance, if presenting the model briefly to a potential funder, you may want to collapse major feedback loops into one element on the model with a “loop” icon. This way you can still show inputs and outputs on that loop while obscuring the complexity within it for the purposes of the presentation.

Systemic Evaluation

Last updated Mar 7, 2023 | Originally published Mar 7, 2023

Systemic evaluation is the developmental evaluation (Guijt et al., 2012) of systemic change.

Techniques for systemic evaluation combine conventional principles and tools of developmental evaluation with concepts from systemic design. These techniques provide changemakers with the ability to assess the accuracy and completeness of their theories of systemic change and action (Murphy & Jones, 2020). They also allow evaluators to examine the progress of systemic strategies (Murphy et al., 2021).

𖠫 Design management for wicked problems- Towards systemic theories of change through systemic design - Murphy, Jones - 2020

Last updated Mar 3, 2023 | Originally published May 26, 2022

Find the full text of the article here.

Using leverage analysis for systemic strategy

Last updated Mar 7, 2023 | Originally published Jun 21, 2020

The map represents your current mental model of how this system works.

Leverage analysis examines the patterns of connection between phenomena (using algorithms adapted from social network analysis and graph theory) in order to present relative rankings of the phenomena of the system.

These rankings are entirely dependent on the structure of the map. All phenomena are equal, and all connections are equal. It is theoretically possible to encode the degrees to which one phenomena influences another in strict mathematical terms and formulae. In turn, we could represent the map as a systems dynamics model and use it to simulate the behaviour of the system. However, this is usually impractical, especially with imprecisely-understood or hard-to-quantify concepts (e.g., what exactly is the rate of change in wildlife due to climate change, or how exactly does culture influence conspicuous consumption?)

For this reason, using leverage analysis is a fuzzy procedure. It depends on your intuition. Fortunately, the goal of leverage analysis is not to inductively estimate how the system will change, nor deductively falsify hypotheses about the system. Instead, using leverage analysis for strategic planning involves abductive logic: the generation of creative, useful conclusions from a set of observations.

The goal here is to look at the model as it is rendered and to think creatively about strategic opportunities. Broadly, this means asking several questions:

“What is missing?”
- If some major gap in the logic of the model is missing, it means that the associated phenomena haven’t been adequately discussed in this process. Why is that? What might it mean for strategic planning?
“What must be true?”
- If this is how the system currently works, what must be true about how it should work?
“Where do we work?”
- Based on your organization’s strategic capabilities and advantages, what phenomena do you hold influence over? How do the effects you have on the system relate to these phenomena?
“What do we aim to influence?”
- In other words, what phenomena do you really want to change? In what way should they change?

These questions can be answered via the following process.

# Developing Systemic Theories of Change

The systems map represents a kind of high-complexity theory of change: it describes how all of these phenomena interlock and respond to one another. We can therefore use leverage analysis to weave systemic theories of action:

Identify the goal phenomena. What do we want to influence? What’s the ultimate impact we aim to have?
Identify the opportunities within our control. What phenomena are we already influencing? What could we be influencing without developing a lot of new capacity?
“Walk” the paths on the map between your chosen opportunities, any possible high-leverage phenomena, and your goals. As you do:
1. Identify any key strategic options along the path. What kinds of activities or programs could you engage in to influence these phenomena in the right way?
2. Identify any feedback loops. How do these paths grow, shrink, or maintain balance over time?

The chains of phenomena (and any loops they connect with) that result from the three steps above are the seeds of systemic strategy. Use them to identify key intervention points for programming (e.g., how might you take advantage of high-leverage phenomena? how might you address bottlenecks?), signals for monitoring and evaluation, and to communicate your theory of change/theory of action to others.