Part 2: Scotland’s Christie Commission — A Systems Thinking Approach
At the heart of Christie is a need for systems change — where relationships between different aspects of the system have to change towards new outcomes and goals. It is driven by transformational, not incremental change.
So what are the conditions we need for systems change? What do we need to do to create the culture for a successful transformation?
One of our favourite approaches is “The Water of Systems Change” (Kania, Kramer, Senge). Here they set out the Six Conditions for System Change — operating at three levels.
Structural Change
Social sector actors have long worked at the first level of the inverted triangle to inform government policy, promote more effective practices, and direct human and financial resources toward their chosen goals. Changing these structural conditions can have powerful effects. The results are readily observable and can often be assessed through traditional evaluation and measurement techniques.
Policies: Government, institutional and organisational rules, regulations, and priorities.
Practices: Espoused activities of institutions, coalitions, networks, and other entities targeted to progress.
Resource Flows: How money, people, knowledge, information, and other assets such as infrastructure are allocated and distributed.
Relational Change
Transforming a system is really about transforming the relationships between the people who make up the system. Too often, organisations, groups, and individuals working on the exact same social problems work in isolation from each other. Simply bringing people into relationships can create a huge impact.
Historically, those who are in power have shaped the mental models of their constituents. Therefore, changing mental models often means challenging power structures that have defined, influenced, and shaped those mental models historically and in the present. Because the powers that be are often advantaged in defining the public narrative (i.e. history is written by the winners), their power and the status quo are reinforced.
Relationships & Connections: Quality of connections and communication occurring among actors in the system, especially among those with differing histories and viewpoints.
Power Dynamics: The distribution of decision-making power, authority, and both formal and informal influence among individuals and organisations.
Transformative Change
When it comes to seeing and talking about systems change, the third level (mental models) poses the greatest challenge. Most systems theorists agree that mental models are foundational drivers of activity in any system. Unless all players can learn to work at this third level, changes in the other two levels will, at best, be temporary or incomplete.
Mental Models: Habits of thought — deeply held beliefs and assumptions and taken-for-granted ways of operating that influence how we think, what we do, and how we talk.
An Example of Systems Change in Scotland: Anna and How She Transformed Cancer Care
Over the past couple of years, I’ve had the joy of interviewing some Scottish Changemakers as part of developing our thinking for Community Lab.
20 odd years ago, pre-Christie, cancer care in Scotland was a cottage industry. Lots of unconnected projects working in silos. It was a place where the care you got depended on where you lived or who you knew. Everyone knew it was wrong but despite lots of reports, action plans and government/NHS initiatives, nothing changed.
So, someone decided to change that. Dr Anna Gregor was a cancer clinician working in SE Scotland. This is her story of how she transformed cancer care in Scotland. It is a story of purpose, how to change culture, break silos, and create impact. It is also a reminder that we need to work hard for sustainable and lasting change.
Here is an excerpt from that interview where Anna explains how she created transformation. And here are her reflections on why it wasn’t sustained.
Let’s use this approach to look at Christie and what has happened through the Community Empowerment Act since then to identify which conditions are being met and those which might be stalling transformative change.
Applying Systems Change Interpretation to Christie
Let’s now look at how the approach taken to implement Christie has fared from a systems perspective.
Structural Change
As we explained earlier, most of the Christie recommendations have been adopted into law. There is still universal support for Christie, its ambition and its approach. It is hard to find voices asking for new or tweaks to legislation. Everyone is still talking the talk. Websites, social media, the language in reports, Local Outcomes Improvement Plans (LOIPs) — they all reflect the spirit of Christie’s vision.
However, the flow of resources has yet to happen. This currently manifests itself as small grants to community projects or occasionally exercising asset acquisitions. Where is the shared knowledge and lessons, the unlocked social and human capital, the co-investment from other sources, and the use or sharing of under-utilised community assets?
As Jimmy Reid once put it:
“The untapped resources of the North Sea are as nothing compared to the untapped resources of our people.”
Relational Change
Here are the big holes in Christie implementation.
Everywhere we look, power is a barrier to the culture that Christie needs to work — we mentioned it above. Those on the wrong side of power mistrust intention, they feel controlled or coerced. They won’t commit, they zone out, and they find it easy to lay blame at the door of others.
And, unless we address this, there is the danger we lose our biggest asset of all — community leaders and changemakers. Having worked in a youth work project for almost thirty years, I know the danger of raising the hopes of people and then not following through with action. Sadly, I’ve too often seen the excitement of those who felt they were to be empowered and then that slow deflation as nothing happens. That cycle leads to deep disenfranchisement.
Many of those leaders, whose excitement you see in the early days, are now disillusioned and possibly lost. All that energy, vision and passion for change that we may never attract back.
Of course, there are exceptions, but we don’t see the multi-dimensional engagement, the feeling of empowerment, and places for authority to listen (and reflect).
Transformative Change
Core to any transformation is a change of mindset among all the actors. Look back at how #BlackLivesMatter and #MeToo have tipped thinking. This transformation needs a narrative we can all rally around. That doesn’t exist currently for Christie, or at least, it doesn’t exist where it needs to — grassroots community projects and changemakers.
The DNA embedded in government and their agents that make them revert to power, control and become protective under pressure is great. We need many strong stories to change it.
Summary: 5 Steps to Rebooting Christie
So, how might we relight the fire that Christie started? Maybe we should build from the place that he wanted to benefit and empower communities directly — rather than the top-down, centralised model we have tried and seen fail for a decade. What would that look like?
1. Create an informed grassroots movement that seeks to use all the tools and agents under law that empower and lead to action.
2. Build an inclusive digital and physical network that allows communities and partners to share learning and invite others from outside to contribute, support and implement ideas.
3. Create processes that simplify access to resources, participation requests and ongoing management of community projects.
4. Deepen our understanding of resources, what they are, where they lie and how we can unlock them.
5. Foster the culture that creates the conditions for the above.
