adaptive learning for collective impact and applied systems thinking

AdaptiveLearningforCollectiveImpact

AdaptiveLearningforCollectiveImpactSeptember25,2016

AdaptiveLearningPivotalSkillsforCollectiveImpact

CraigWeberandChrisSoderquist

Communitiesaroundtheglobefaceanexpandingrangeoftough,interconnected,complexproblems:poverty,racism,violence,policeandcommunitytensions,environmentdegradation,accesstoeducation,obesity,mentalillness,climatechange,andhealthinequity,justtonameafew.Theseproblems—andmanyotherslikethem—arewhatwerefertoasadaptivechallenges.Whatdowemeanbythat?Here’sabriefdescription:

Allourdifficultiesfallsomewhereonaspectrum;atoneendofthisspectrumwefindroutineproblems,and,attheotherend,adaptivechallenges.Aroutineproblemisn’tconsideredroutinebecauseithappensregularly,butbecausewehavearoutinefordealingwithit—aprotocol,aprocess,orexpertonwhichwecandependforareliablefix.Aroutineproblemmaybeirksomeandexpensive,butatleastwe’reinfamiliarterritoryandknowwhattodoaboutit.

Whenwe’refacinganadaptivechallenge,ontheotherhand,we’reoffthefamiliartrailinunchartedterritorywheretherearenoprovenroutines,protocols,solutions,orexperts.Tosuccessfullynegotiateanadaptivechallengewemustworkandlearnwithotherstonavigatethealienterrain.Alltheproblemswefaceinlifefallsomewherebetweenthesetwodistinctpoles.

..it’smoreimportantthanevertorecognizethedistinctionbetweenroutineandadaptiveissuesbecausetheyeachrequireaprofoundlydifferent



problemsolvingapproach.Foraroutineproblemabiasforactionisappropriate.Wehavearoutine,weknowwhattodo,soasNikesuggests,weshould“justdoit.”Butforanadaptivechallenge—wherethereisnoclearroutine,noprovenprocess,andnoreadyexpertwhocansavetheday—abiasforlearningisessential.Why?Tonavigateourwayoverunfamiliargroundwemustrollupourcognitivesleevesandworkwithotherstofigureoutthebestwayforward.Wemustorchestrate,inotherwords,aprocessofadaptivelearning.1

Ifthey’retoeffectivelyresolveadaptivechallenges,communitiesmustdojustthat—orchestrateaprocessoflearning—andsuccesshingesonhowwelltheycanencourageadiversesetofinterestgroupstohonestlyshareandlearnfromtheircontrastingandsometimescompetingperspectives.Thisworkcangetmessy.CollectiveImpactisaprocessthathasbeendevelopedtohelpguidecommunitiesandnetworksthroughsuch“messy,”adaptivelearningprocesses.Intheirarticle,CollectiveImpact,KaniaandKramermakethispoint:“Reformingpubliceducation,restoringwetlandenvironments,andimprovingcommunityhealtharealladaptiveproblems.Inthesecases,reachinganeffectivesolutionrequireslearningbythestakeholdersinvolvedintheproblem,whomustthenchangetheirownbehaviorinordertocreateasolution.”2Ifimplementedeffectively,CollectiveImpacthasthepotentialtoproduceanagileprocessoflearning.Butinfartoomanycasesitfailstoliveuptothispotentialbecausetheprocessbogsdownandlosesmomentum.Manyofitsoncepassionateleadersbecomedisillusionedanddropoutoftheprocess.Thesearealmostuniversallysmart,passionate,committedpeople,sowhat’sgoingonhere.Whydoesthishappen?Ithappensbecausesimplyunderstandingthesechallengesisn’tenough.CollectiveImpactrequirespowerfulnewmindsetsandskillstobeeffective,oncethelaborioustaskofchoosingapathforwardhasbeenaccomplished.

Here’sawaytothinkabouttheneedforspecificskillsthatsupportastrategy.RunningaCollectiveImpactprocesscanbecomparedtorunningacomplexplayinbasketball.Ateammayhaveastrategyforhowtoexecuteaperfecttriangleoffense,forexample,buttheirstrategyisuselessiftheplayersdon’tknowhowtopass,dribble,andshoot.Theirstrategyisnothingmorethanapipedreamiftheylackthebasicskillsnecessaryforplayingthe

1http://www.weberconsultinggroup.net/leaning-into-difference-the-key-to-solving-tough-problems/2Kania,J.&Kramer,M.,CollectiveImpact,SocialInnovationReview(2011)

“Just as there are fundamental skills needed to run complex plays in basketball, there is a set of adaptive learning skills needed to run an effective Collective Impact process.”



game.WethinkthesamethingoftenhappensinCollectiveImpactefforts.Communitieshaveaprocessandastrategy,andtheyhavesmart,passionatepeople,butthey’relackingbasicskillstoputtheirsmarts,passion,andstrategyintousefulplay.Justastherearefundamentalskillsneededtoruncomplexplaysinbasketball,thereisasetofadaptivelearningskillsneededtorunaneffectiveCollectiveImpactprocess.Sowhataretheseskills?Wethinktherearethreeessentialandinterrelatedcompetenciesforadaptiveleadershipandlearning:systemsTHINKING,ConversationalCapacity,andImprovisationalLearning.Thesethreeenablingcompetencieshelpyoufindtheleverageneededforfundamentalimprovement,byacceleratingaprocessoflearninginwhichcommunitymembersengageinrigorousandbalancedconversationsabouthighlyemotionaltopics.Putdifferently,adaptivelearningskillshelppeopleandcommunitieslearnfaster,smarter,andtogether.

1. SystemsTHINKINGSystemsTHINKINGisessentialforidentifyinghighleverageplacestointervene.Withlimitedtimeandresources,ithelpscommunitiesidentifychangesthatprovokethemostprofoundandsustainableimprovements.Lowleverageoccurswhenyoufightthe“physics”ofthesystem,whenthemoreyoupushittochange,themoreitpushesback.Highleverageoccurswhenyouworkwiththelawsofphysics.Lowleveragealsooccurswhentoday’sproblemscomefromyesterday’ssolutionsbecauseyoufailedtopredictunintendedconsequences.Highleverageoccurswhenyouidentifythefulcrumofaproblemanddesignyourinterventionaroundit.Lowleverageactivities,ontheotherhandcanevenhinderyouwhenperformancehasbeenimproved—whenyourimprovementsarelimitedrelativetotheamountofeffortappliedtotheproblem.Identifyingandexploitingplacesofhighleveragefundamentallyimprovesthewaythesystembehaves,generatingtheoptimalbehavioryoudesire.ThishighleveragecompetencyisreferredtoassystemsTHINKING.Thinkingiscapitalizedbecausethistypeofsystemsthinkingemphasizeshowwethinkaboutsystemicissuesinsteadofadoptingtheoverlysimplistic(andmostlyunhelpful)perspectivethat“it’sallcomplexandconnected.”Atitscore,systemsTHINKINGisbasedonafoundationalprinciple:Behaviorisgeneratedbystructure.Howwe’ve“structured”ourresources,organizations,andcommunitiesisgeneratingthebehaviorswelikeandthosewedon’t.Ifwe’retocreatethefuturewe’veenvisioned,we’llneedtounderstandhowwe’ve



structuredthingsandhowwe’llhavetochangethatstructuretoproducethebehaviorswewant.ThemindsetrequiredforsystemsTHINKINGisanunwaveringcommitmenttounderstandingthewholesetofrelationships(structure)thatdriveimportant“realworld”behaviors.Weassumewe’vebeenusingboundariesthataretoonarrowtounderstandtheproblem,focusingonourlittlepartofthesystem—oursilo(e.g.education,health,publicsafety,etc.)—asifit’sthemostimportant.Italsoassumeswe’venotbeenthinkinghardenoughabouthowtheworld“reallyworks”,byoverlookingtimedelays,viciouscycles(andotherfeedbackloopbehavior),andunintendedconsequences.TheskillsofsystemsTHINKINGprovidearigorouswaytoframeissues,broadenanddeepenyourunderstanding,mapoutassumptionsaboutcauseandeffect,andfocusontheissuesthatreallymatter--makingsenseofthesystem,ineffect,soyoucanactuallyseeit.Thisiscritical.Ifyoucan’tseethesystemyou’retryingtoimprovethereisnowaytoidentifythebestwaystomakeconstructivechange.SystemsTHINKINGmakesyoustrongerandsmarter.Ittakesyoufromaplaceofbeingstuckasareactive,“woeisme,”victimofcircumstance,toaplacewhereyouhavethewisdomandconfidencetointerveneinwaysthatmakeaprofounddifference.3

3FormoreinformationaboutSystemsTHINKING,visithttp://findinghighleverage.com/Theresourcespageincludesalinktothefollowingvideo:https://vimeo.com/122034667



2. ConversationalCapacity4Inourworldofmountingcomplexityandchange,buildingorganizations,teams,andprojectsthatworkwellunderpressureismoreimportantthanever.Butwhileit’seasytoputtogetherateamthatworkswhenfacingsimpleproblems,buildingateamthatperformswhenthingsgettoughremainsanelusiveandfrustratingtask.Thereason,accordingtoCraigWeber,isthattraditionalteambuildingoverlooksthemostimportantpieceofthepuzzle.Thatmissingpieceisconversationalcapacity—ateam’sabilitytohaveopen,balanced,learning-focuseddialogueaboutdifficultsubjects,inchallengingcircumstances,andacrosstoughboundaries.Agroupwithhighconversationalcapacitycanperformwell,remainingontrackevenwhendealingwiththeirmosttroublesomeissues.Agrouplackingthatcapacity,bycontrast,canseetheirperformancederailoveraminordifferenceofopinion.Inthissense,conversationalcapacityisn’tjustanotheraspectofeffectiveteamwork—itdefinesit.Ateamthatcannottalkaboutitsmostpressingissuesisn’treallyateamatall—it’sjustagroupofpeoplethatcan’tworktogethereffectivelywhenitcounts.ThisisacriticalcompetenceforasuccessfulCollectiveImpactprocessthatrequirespeopletocommunicateandcollaborateabouttoughissuesandacrosschallengingboundaries.Soundssimple,right?Allateamhastodoisboostitsconversationalcapacityandallwillbewell.Unfortunately,it’snotthateasy.Inthequesttobuildcapacitywefaceaformidableobstacle:humannature.Itturnsoutthatreliablyeffectiveteamsarehardtobuildbecauseprimalaspectsofournature,rootedinthepowerfulfight-flightresponse,actuallyworkagainstteamwork.Fortunately,there’shope.There’saprovendiscipline—averitableconversationalmartialart—thatallowspeopleandtheirteamstoremainopen,balanced,andlearning-focusedastheytackletheirmosttroublesomeissues.Armedwiththisdiscipline,communities,organizations,andteamscanrespondtotoughchallengeswithgreateragilityandskill,performingbrilliantlyincircumstancesthatincapacitatelessdisciplinedteams.

4Weber,Craig.ConversationalCapacity,McGraw-Hill,2013



3. “YesToTheMess”Learning(akaAgileLearning)

Agilelearning—whichisoftenassociatedwithsoftwaredevelopment—canmosteasilybeunderstoodastheskillofimprovisation.TwokeyaspectsoftheimprovisationalmindsetareparticularlyusefulforCollectiveImpactwork:anaffirmativebias,anda“learnasyougo”approach.OurfriendandcolleagueFrankBarrett,authorofthewonderfulbookYesToTheMess,explainsthisbetterthananyone:Managersfrequentlyfindthemselvesinthemiddleofmessesnotoftheirownmaking,inovertheirheads,havingtotakeactioneventhoughthereisnoguaranteeofagoodoutcome,andrelyingonimperfectinformation.Jazzplayersfacethesameissues,butwhatmakesitpossibletoimprovise,toadjustandfalluponaworkingstrategyisanaffirmativemove,animplicit‘yes’thatallowsthemtomoveforwardeveninthemidstofuncertainty.Problemsolvingbyitselfwillnotgeneratenovelsolutions.What’sneededisanaffirmativebeliefthatasolutionexistsandthatsomethingpositivewillemerge.5

Theimprovisationalmindsetassumesthatnomatterhowmessy,howdifficult,orhowconfusingthecurrentpredicament,thereisalwaysacreativeandconstructivepathforward.Atitscore,theimprovisationalprocessstemsfromanaffirmativemindset.Butinadditiontoanaffirmativebias,otheressentialskillsofimprovisationarerapidexperimentationandembracingerrors.ThisapproachreflectstheobservationofKurtLewinwhonotedthatthebestwaytolearnaboutanysystemistotryandchangeit.Ratherthansittingbackandwaitingtointerveneuntilallthenecessaryinformationisavailable,yougettoworkwiththebestinformationavailableandthenlearnasyougo.

AnÜberCompetencyWithoutthesethreecompetenciesagroupwillalmostalwaysunderperform,especiallywhenit’sfacinganadaptivechallenge.Theycombinetoformanübercompetence—ameta-skill—thatturbochargestheeffectivenessofaperson,team,organization,orcommunity.SystemsTHINKINGcanhelpagroupidentifythehighleverageactionsthatwillsparkthemostconstructivechange,

5Barrett,Frank.YestotheMess:SurprisingLeadershipLessonsfromJazz,HarvardBusinessPressBooks,2012



ConversationalCapacityenablesagroupofsmartpeopletoworksmartbybalancingcandorandcourageandcuriosityandhumilityunderpressure,andAgileLearninghelpspeopleworkinmoreopen,flexible,experimentalwaysinsituationswhererapidlearningisthekeytoprogress.Togetherthesecompetenciesempowerpeopleandgroupstocometogethertotackletheirmostpressingissuesinamore

focusedandcogentway.

We’vecomparedthesecompetenciestotheskillsneededtoplaymusic,asport,orothersimilarendeavors.Butthey’remorethanthat.They’retheskillsneededtoexcelattheseactivities.WhatdistinguishedbasketballplayerslikeLarryBirdandMagicJohnsonfromtheirpeerswasn’tjusttheirskillsatdribbling,

passingandshooting—itwastheirüberabilitytoseethefullcourtandimaginehowthingswereplayingout,theirabilitytoselflesslypasstheballandtoworkwithallplayersontheteam,andtheirabilitytoturnabrokenplayintoabasket.Thesamethingistrueofjazz.“Themodelofjazzmusiciansimprovisingcollectivelyoffersaclearandpowerfulexampleofhowpeopleandteamscancoordinate,beproductive,andcreateamazinginnovationswithoutsomanyofthecontrolleversthatmanagersreliedonintheindustrialage,”saysBarrett.“Animprovisationmodeloforganizingcreatesakindofopenness,aninvitationtopossibility,ratherthanleaningtowardanarrownessofcontrol.”6ThisiswhytheinterrelatedskillsofSystemsTHINKING,ConversationalCapacity,andImprovisationalLearningaresoimportanttoCollectiveImpactendeavors.Ensuringtheprocessperformsatitspotentialrequiresbuildingandusingtheadaptive-learningskillswe’vejustdescribed.They’llnotonlyhelpyoumaketheconstructivechangesyou’reseeking,they’llalsohelpyoubuildanevenmoreconnected,resilient,andlearning-focusedcommunity.

6Barrett,Frank.YestotheMess:SurprisingLeadershipLessonsfromJazz,HarvardBusinessPressBooks,2012.Pgs.xiv-xv

“These competencies empower people and groups to come together to tackle their most pressing issues in a more focused and cogent way.”



CONTACTINFORMATION

ChrisSoderquistPontifexConsulting

[email protected]

CraigWeber

TheWeberConsultingGroupweberconsulting@earthlink.netweberconsultinggroup.net

Applied Systems THINKINGBehavior Over Time Graphs – Types and Tips

Behavior Over Time Graphs (aka Trend Graphs)

PurposeDeveloping Behavior Over Time Graphs (BOTGs) expands the field of vision being applied to an issue. The activity of expanding the field of vision facilitates the causal thinking (why is this behavior happening?) required to take a systems view. The systems view creates an opportunity to find leverage for improvement.

• A BOTG is a graph over time that captures the essence of a problem or issue of interest.

• BOTGs often contain a historical (“as is”) component as well as a projected (“to be”) component.

• In creating a BOTG, it is often helpful to normalize (e.g. average, %, outcome/patient) the variable.

• The unit of time (day, month, quarter, year, etc.) for the BOTG helps to set a temporal boundary for what to include in your analysis

� �1 © 2017 Pontifex Consulting

Graduation rates

months years

“As Is” “To Be”

Now% population requiring Medicaid

http://www.findinghighleverage.com


BOTGs – Historical Narrative Graphs

PurposeThe purpose of Historical Narrative Graphs is to communicate the history / story of issue(s) in visually, compelling and causally-based way. This can be used to help an audience shift from narrow temporal boundaries (event thinking) to broader temporal boundaries…and to shift from reactionary activities to proactive strategies. It facilitates the development of an operational (causal) mental model of the issue.

How to…• Select 1 (or more) variable(s) that captures the issue you wish to describe

• Normalize if possible (e.g. %s, averages, $/person, output/$)

• Draw the trend line(s)

• Highlight stories/events…✴ Times when something happened to cause the issue to get better✴ External events✴ Places where interventions were tried✴ Other


http://healthblog.ncpa.org/obamacares-effect-on-uninsured-is-trivial/





BOTGs – Stakeholder Interest Diagram

PurposeThe purpose of Stakeholder Interest Diagrams is to understand and communicate the landscape of issues / interests from – and across – a broad constituency.

How to…• Map the stakeholder landscape

• Determine 1-2 trend over time graphs that “speak to” each group

• Speaking to can be…✴ The pain if the issue continues✴ The benefit of implementing a proposed solution✴ Other


The Big Kahuna

Issue

Stakeholder

Group A

Stakeholder

Group B

Stakeholder

Group C

Stakeholder

Group D



BOTGs – Projecting Goals & Initiative Impacts Graph

PurposeThe purpose of Projecting Goals & Initiative Impacts Graphs is to visualize the different goals and trajectories propose for future interventions

How to…• Select 1 (or more) variable(s) that captures the issue you wish to describe


• Highlight stories/events…✴ Describe how the intervention is causing the hypothesized future curve✴ Seriously consider worse before better as one potential future! (or better

before worse!)


1.Persons A-C all believe the initiative can achieve about a 75% participation rate. However, they disagree dramatically on what will happen to get there. A thinks it will happen quickly and level off, B thinks it’s a steady increase, and C thinks there might be a “worse before better” dynamic

2.Person D thinks it’s impossible to achieve more than 50% and thinks it will happen after about 2 years and level off



BOTGs – Leading / Lagging Indicators Graph

PurposeThe purpose of Leading / Lagging Indicators Graphs is to visualize the trajectories of variables in a way to tell a more “causal story” and identify leading indicators

How to…• Select 2 (or more) variables that capture the issue you wish to describe


• See if you can identify variables that move first, that indicate they are “leading indicators”


An initial influx of grant funding (budget available) allows the stakeholders to get engaged, the main leading indicator. This then drives ability to attract local “sustaining” funding…the next leading indicator. And ultimately, system performance improves… the lagging indicator.


Applied Systems THINKINGThe Systems THINKING Questions

OverviewYou can apply the Systems THINKING Mindset to your most important issues. The Mindset improves any process (e.g. strategic planning, process improvement, lean/agile development, and collective impact). It’s not an add-on, something additional to do. It doesn’t require a 1

different process than one you’re following; it is an enabling competency to make your chosen process achieve better results. It is particularly helpful in dealing with wicked, complex problems – problems referred to as adaptive challenges.2

Adopting the Systems THINKING Mindset improves your ability (in any activity) to achieve higher leverage impact. Achieving high leverage means:

• Fundamentally improving system performance with the minimum investment of resources (time, money, effort)

• Avoiding negative unintended consequences• And where possible, simultaneously solving several issues

There are four goals (and inquiry behaviors) to the Systems THINKING Mindset• Expand Your Field of Vision• Focus on the Physics• Search for Leverage• Build a Shared, Useful Picture

Build a Shared, Useful PictureThis element means to move away from making rigid decisions in a vacuum and instead develop understanding through collaborative learning. And to understand that we’ll never have the full, complete truth – it is statistically, scientifically impossible – but will need to constantly adjust our thinking as we learn more about the world. The purpose is to build collective understanding, seeing the same thing. The fundamental question is: How can we learn together – and improve that learning – as rapidly as possible?

Expanding Your Field of VisionThis element of the ST Mindset moves the focus away from a short term, “what’s in front of us” perspective by recognizing that we’re not getting the full picture, that we may be missing something. Instead, we analyze over expanded ranges of

It seems since the beginning of time, organizations become enamored with the process du jour. We’ve seen TQM, 1

reengineering, lean engineering, six sigma, and Kotter’s leading change process. In the public sector we have collective impact and emergent strategy. The reason many of these fail to achieve desired improvement isn’t because the process / approach is ineffective, but that those implementing lack a systemic approach to following them. In our experience the missing ingredient is a set of enabling capacities for adaptive learning; one of these capacities includes a Systems THINKING mindset. This document focuses on the application of the Systems THINKING mindset.

Adaptive challenges were first described by Ron Heifetz as problems without a clear diagnosis (are messy, 2

complex), don’t have a routine or agreed-upon solution, and lack an obvious expert. Refer to Leadership without Easy Answers, Heifetz, R.

� �1 © 2017



time (longer temporal dimension), and space (broader spatial dimension…e.g. beyond our department, organization, or discipline). Doing so improves our ability to see how this issue relates to issues others may be experiencing. The fundamental question is: What am I missing?

Focusing on the PhysicsThis element moves the analysis away from correlational, complex, abstract thinking and toward developing a rigorous, comprehensive, causal theory about the issue. The fundamental question is: How does this work?

Search for LeverageOften there is a place in a system where with a little exertion or intervention, performance will begin to improve. Usually we are pulling the wrong levers while thinking they are high leverage. Sometimes we may be pulling the right ones but in the wrong way. Searching for leverage is an unreserved, determined 3

search for the place where there’s a chance to fundamentally improve performance. The fundamental question is: Where can I intervene to create maximum improvement?

The Mindset & Inquiry BehaviorsIn conclusion, the mindset results in a particular form of analysis – a specific type of inquiry – that manifests through four major areas of questioning.

Purpose Mindset Inquiry Behaviors

Learn Build a Shared, Useful Picture How can we learn together – and improve that learning – as rapidly as possible?

Frame the Issue Expand Your Field of Vision What am I missing?

Develop Insight Focus on the Physics How does this work?

Have Impact Search for Leverage Where can I intervene to create maximum improvement?

Frame the Issue Expand Your Field of Vision What am I missing?

A classic example is developing demand for a product or service. In business that might occur when using price for 3

business growth. Often organizations feeling a cash crunch will reduce price to increase demand. But if capacity is an issue, this can sometimes create so much demand that can’t be filled the organization will eventually frustrate customers by lower quality or longer fulfillment times. Raising price is counterintuitive! But raising price can increase revenue, while simultaneously slowing demand to a manageable pace. This gives time to increase capacity so that eventually lowering price could increase demand and sales…and the organization would have the capacity to meet the demand. This is a far more sustainable strategy. But it requires pulling the right lever in an unconventional way.

� �2 © 2017



The ST QuestionsThere are many tools to help apply the ST Mindset. These tools include simple and complex graphs, causal loop maps, stock and flow maps, and simulation models (including learning labs). Many of the tools require some training (e.g. graphs and maps). Some require years of 4

skill building (e.g. simulation models).

For many it seems daunting – or even a waste of time – trying to apply Systems THINKING because of an unfortunate high level of difficulty in learning and using the tools,. However, we have found anyone can immediately use a wide range of Systems THINKING questions (ST Questions) to leverage the power of the mindset…without the tools.

On the following pages are sets of questions you can use to better frame the issue you are trying to address, determine how to address, and to build a process of collaborative learning. You can quickly see there are too many questions to use all at once! However, based on your needs – your current context, including where you are in the process of analysis or strategy development – you can pick those that are most applicable. We recommend perusing all to choose the most useful.

Graphs can be simple trend graphs that include how one variable has changed (or will/should) 4

change over time). Sometimes they include multiple variables to describe how the variables relate. Causal maps will show cause and effects between variables, providing a visual description of the relationships in the system., or they may include several variables.

� �3 © 2017



To better learn…

Build a Useful, Shared Picture: How can we learn together – and improve that learning – as rapidly as possible?

Strategic planning processes (most processes actually) are usually thought of as short term, build the strategy with the executive team, create the 5 section binder, and go implement it. It’s assumed that execution will happen and the strategy will lead to the promised land. Few teams reach that land. Why? Because the real world and strategy isn’t a static, easy to understand place. There are dynamics unfolding. Things change. And our strategies are usually incomplete and inaccurate. So, rather than rigidly hold to the strategy or any process, what’s needed is a strategy as learning process. How can we develop understanding of the world in a way that brings together diverse perspectives in a useful way? How can we test that understanding before and during implementation? And how can we modify the strategy when it needs to be…before it’s too late? These are a few of the questions to address when employing this element of the Systems THINKING Mindset.

How do we get on the same page?• What can we do to build same page understanding, to create a shared picture of the issue

and potential solutions?• Is our understanding clear and unambiguous? What’s needed to make it more so?• Is it rigorous? Does it contain essential elements of reality? What’s needed to make it more

rigorous/realistic?

How do we build confidence in understanding/insight and strategy?• How do we build confidence in our theory of how it (the business, the community, the

system) works?• Are we able to mentally simulate how it works? Can we create a credible story of how

different actions will trace out through the system…and into the future?• If there appears to be important feedback loops (e.g. vicious cycles or system “push back”),

would we learn more by developing causal loop maps? • Would we understand more by developing stock and flow maps?• Should we build a computer simulation model…and would that add enough value to

warrant the effort?

How do we make insight useful?• How do we keep the shared picture (mental model/explanatory theory) as simple as

possible, but no simpler?• If we believe we need multiple measures to track, what would be the most important

handful?• Are there elements of the theory that are part of the reality, but not necessarily a major

factor in explaining the issue or potential solutions? Are there unnecessary complexities in the theory or strategy that you can remove?

� �4 © 2017



How do we learn as we go?• How do we develop a plan to evaluate the effectiveness of the strategy?• What are some leading indicators that will help us evaluate the strategy (changes we would

see soon that indicate longer term improvement will occur…that the strategy is on track)?• How can we create measures that can be updated regularly? How regularly (in most cases

there’s benefit to greater frequency)?• How do we determine if the strategy is off track?• How do we evaluate the reasons for being off track?• Where is our shared picture inaccurate or incomplete in ways that limit effectiveness?• How do we adjust our thinking about the issue/strategy? How do we improve it?

� �5 © 2017



To better frame the issue…

Expand the Field of Vision: What are we missing?

It’s important to make sure we choose the right issues and skillfully frame the problem of inquiry before following the typical tendency of knee-jerk problem solving and/or reacting. The following questions will help make sure you choose the right issues, not overlook places you should focus, and include all the perspectives needed to build understanding and generate insight. If this step is skipped over, or even done ineffectively, your efforts will suffer later by failing to improve performance or creating more (worse?) problems.

Where are we? Where have we been? (Current Reality)• What are the most significant/troublesome trends (patterns of important system

performance measures)? They can be tangible or intangible, quantitative or qualitative.• What’s been the trend for each over the past several years?• How broad a time horizon is useful in order to really understand each? (1 year, 5 years, 10

years, decades?)• Where are the trends going (especially if left unaddressed)?• What will be the future price paid if left to continue as expected?

Where do we want to go? (Vision)• How do we want the future to play out? What’s our desired future trend – dynamic vision?• What is the long-term goal or outcome change of interest? What system performance do

we want to see?• If we were to pick one measure to improve in the future, what would it be? And what would

the improvement look like?• How far into the future do we need to look to see the change we want?• If we were gathering in the future (5 years? 10 years?) to celebrate achieving “beyond our

wildest dreams” success, what we see that indicates we’ve succeeded?• What are the more routine aspects of the issue and our vision? More importantly, what are

the more adaptive elements?

How do we see further, expand our view of the issue?• What other perspectives/stakeholders are concerned about this issue or something related

to it?• What other trends or system behaviors would these others see as related – perhaps even

more important – to the issue?• How does this impact more than just our area of interest?• Think about expanding the area of focus. If we make a change to the issue as we wish,

where else will there be an impact?• Would this (these) be a positive or negative unintended consequence(s)/impact(s)?

� �6 © 2017



To better develop insight…

Focus on the Physics: How does this work?Often we employ correlational thinking, comparison thinking or factors thinking to building understanding and taking action. What are the major factors associated with this issue? What seems to correlate with the trends we are seeing? How does our situation compare to another situation?

Those adopting the Systems THINKING Mindset will instead focus on understanding how something works. If all the causal connections were drawn, can I understand how this systems fits together to create the behavior I wish to improve. When modifying or tuning a car to run more efficiently, it is important to shift focus from the dashboard and look at how the different sub-systems (engine, drive train, cooling system, etc…) work together. It’s only when you see where the most leverage in that system of system lies that you are then able to optimize performance.

How do we create a broad perspective on metrics?• If we could stop time right now and look at the system – counting or measuring something

– what would we focus on to assess system health? • What are the important metrics of performance? (think broadly…economic, physical,

social)

How do we identify important conditions and rates of change?• What’s accumulating? What are the key conditions?• In what direction are the important accumulations going? Increasing? Decreasing? How

fast?• Do there appear to be any time delays in the system (places where something happens a

long time after what seems to be a significant cause)?

How do we identify important Reinforcing Loops?• Is there an obvious virtuous cycle (where things continue to get better and better)?• Is there a vicious cycle (where things continue to get worse and worse…maybe

accelerating!)?

How do we identify important Balancing Loops?• Is there a “push back” in the system? How has resistance occurred in the face of attempts

to improve?• Does the system appear to be trying to stay in equilibrium? Why do you think it does?

� �7 © 2017



To better achieve impact…

Search for Leverage: Where can we intervene to create maximum improvement?

In searching for leverage, we are looking for ways to maximize impact. We aren’t looking to tweak performance marginally in a better direction. We want to fundamentally improve it. Leverage is a big deal, and yet we rarely talk about it. We get lost in 5 point plans, and 7 step processes. But the goal should be finding leverage when dealing with big, hairy, adaptive issues. Here are some questions that help take our understanding of the physics and convert that into high leverage interventions.

How do we identify previous ineffective interventions?• Where have there been efforts to improve performance (the system)? • Often past efforts were applied to the easiest place(s) to influence…or easiest to see…not

necessarily the highest leverage. How do any of the past efforts appear to fit the “easy to do” or “easy to see” definition?

How do we identify potential high leverage interventions?• Based on understanding the physics better, where might there be places of leverage you

should consider?• Can you influence feedback loops to achieve leverage? • If there is already a major influencing factor contributing, do you need to support it to

improve likelihood of success, dismantle it (having a negative influence), or modify it?• Previous efforts may have focused on building up a condition or asset (e.g. customers,

supplies, morale), while ignoring what causes losses (e.g. churn, spoilage, morale loss). What interventions might be effective by focusing on the loss/erosion of a condition/asset?

• Previous efforts may have focused on stemming the loss/erosion of a condition or asset (e.g. expenses, morbidity/deaths, quitting/attrition), while ignoring what causes build up (e.g. revenue from developing a superior product, developing chronic disease/incidence, relative attractiveness of the organization). What interventions might be effective by focusing on building a condition/asset?

How do we predict how interventions will work?• It often takes a long time – perhaps years – before the metric you want to influence starts

to improve. What other metrics might you see change in the near term (i.e. leading indicators)? In the intermediate term (i.e. secondary leading indicators)?

• Have you thought through the various time delays in the system? Which ones are longer and may require earlier phasing?

� �8 © 2017



• How might the transformation from lower performing to higher performing have different phases? Which parts of the strategy should you emphasize initially? Later?5

Often strategies only focus on key success factors, assuming they can be implemented with equal emphasis and all 5

at once. Instead, strategies are often more effective when timed: Emphasize parts of the strategy now, and different parts later. It is helpful to evolve the strategy as it unfolds! This is called systemic orchestration. And systemic orchestration is another important systems competency that is rarely discussed or achieved.

� �9 © 2017

Chris SoderquistPontifex Consulting

PO Box 64Hanover, NH 03755

(603) 276-0203

[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

http://findinghighleverage.com


mailto:[email protected]

http://findinghighleverage.com

adaptive learning for collective impact and applied systems thinking

Presentations & Public Speaking