2019 ─ CYFI Brokering Collaborative Systems Change by Child & Youth Finance International

Brokering Collaborative Systems Change

This is made possible by

ÂŠ Child & Youth Finance International (CYFI) 2019 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, or otherwise without the prior permission of Child & Youth Finance International.

Table of Contents Executive Summary

Introduction

Selective Literature Review

Collaborative Systems Change

The Five Tactics

Measuring Collaborative Systems Change

On “Letting Go”

CYFI’s Final Chapter

Challenges & Opportunities

Conclusions

Appendices

Endnotes

Executive Summary In this document, we lay out the concept of collaborative systems change—what it takes to mobilize diverse, disparate actors to imagine and create long-term, sustainable, positive change. The concept of collaborative systems change is derived from the experience of Child & Youth Finance International (CYFI), an organization working globally to ensure full economic citizenship for children and youth. Since 2011, CYFI has mobilized a network of 63,000 organizations across 175 countries to empower 40.2 million children and youth. The aim of sharing this experience is to encourage and stimulate the adoption of collaborative systems change methods in social change efforts across sectors and geographies. In the document, we first review selected academic literature— surveying the scholarly views on systems theory, social movements and institutional entrepreneurship—to give a grounding in why and how a collaborative systems change approach can work. We then outline what we believe are the guiding principles that “honest brokers” of collaborative systems change efforts should assume, drawn from CYFI’s own experience. Thirdly, we discuss a set of key tactics that CYFI has used in their own work, mapped to a case study of CYFI as an illustration of a collaborative systems change effort. Finally, we review a recent diagnostic of CYFI’s results using a new methodology to measure the progress of systems change. Within the discussion of this experience, we will also identify challenges inherent in collaborative systems change, and how CYFI has addressed and overcome these challenges.

This report is developed for social change practitioners who are seeking to understand collaborative systems change, and considering it as an approach for their work. It is also written for funders who are considering funding systems change approaches, and would like to understand the concept to guide their funding decisions. This document is also written to provide a contribution specifically around collaboration to the more general conversation about systems change. As the concept of systems change increases in popularity, we believe that it is critically important to be clear what we mean by the term—and ensure that we are not just rehashing old concepts with new language. We would like to avoid the proliferation of systems change approaches that use the same top-down, hierarchical approaches that have stymied social change efforts in the past. Systems change is not a new approach, but it is gaining momentum. We believe that examples of collaborative approaches to systems change are not only important, but also underrepresented. As Charmian Love and Rachel Sinha wrote in Harvard Business Review, “This group [of systems change practitioners] is so busy running their projects that they rarely have a chance to write down what they’re learning, but we need to capture and share their best practices.” This document attempts to do just that.

Introduction Many of our society’s most pressing problems seem intractable. Complex issues such as poverty, public health, education and climate change, involve numerous people, organizations and institutions— and vary widely by context and root causes. Solutions to these problems, while providing glimmers of hope, are difficult, if not impossible, to take to scale through replication. While recent calls for “systems change” have created promise for a new concept to social change, we believe that this concept requires a brand new way of approaching how change is imagined and who is involved in creating that change. Child & Youth Finance International (CYFI) is an organization borne out of a strong desire to create social change in a new and inclusive way. Although the organization has focused its efforts on financial empowerment for children and youth, its broader vision is to provide an example of what systems change can look like when it is conceived and implemented in a truly collaborative way. When Jeroo Billimoria founded CYFI with her small team in 2010, she drew upon their history of building Aflatoun, a global social enterprise that works through local and community-based organizations to deliver groundbreaking social and financial curricula for children and youth. As Aflatoun grew to achieve its goal of serving one million children, it became clear that there were fundamental, systemic issues that were preventing the spread of the curricula, despite the committed efforts of their wide network of nonprofit organizations working across the world. To address these issues, Aflatoun took the difficult but strategic decision to spin off its working group that was committed to systemic change. The result was a new organization wholly committed to systems change.i CYFI faced the daunting task of envisioning and mobilizing systemic change of the regulatory financial and education sectors

across the world to include children and youth as economic citizens.ii Their starting point was taken directly from the work that they supported: inclusion. The CYFI team’s strong belief was that social change is traditionally conceived in a top-down, hierarchical fashion, with change being driven by powerful actors operating in isolation at the top. CYFI had a different vision: it conceived its role as an “honest broker,” a term that they borrowed from the field of political science which they felt had significant relevance for social entrepreneurs seeking to create systemic change. As an honest broker, CYFI began to conceptualize how to convene a disparate group of actors—both large and small—with the intention of enabling financial and education systems that work for children and youth. In this document, we will lay out the concept of collaborative systems change—what it takes to mobilize diverse, disparate actors to imagine and create long-term, sustainable change. We will also review the academic literature—surveying the scholarly views on systems theory, social movements and institutional entrepreneurship—to understand why and how a collaborative systems change approach can work. We will then outline what we believe are a set of “guiding principles” for those organizations considering a collaborative systems change approach, and finally, present five “key tactics” that brokers of collaborative systems change efforts can use, as drawn from CYFI’s own experience. The key tactics are mapped to the case study of CYFI as an illustration of collaborative systems change. At the end of the document, we review a recent diagnostic of CYFI’s results using a new methodology to measure the progress of systems change. Within the discussion of this experience, we also identify challenges inherent in collaborative systems change, and how CYFI has addressed and overcome these challenges.

This document draws out the key lessons and tactics that CYFI has learned about collaborative systems change, with the aim of assisting and guiding organizations in many sectors and geographies seeking to become systems change brokers.

i The full story of this journey from Aflatoun to Child & Youth Finance International can be read in the teaching case “Social Entrepreneurship & Systems Change: Child & Youth Finance International,” published by the World Economic Forum in May 2017. http://www3.weforum. org/docs/WEF_SF17_Case_Studies_04_CYFI_.pdf ii CYFI’s theory of change defines ‘economic citizenship’ as having three pillars: Financial Inclusion, Financial Education and Social & Livelihoods Education. Financial inclusion is access to safe, appropriate, and affordable financial services. Financial education includes instruction and/or materials designed to increase financial knowledge and skills. Social education is the provision of knowledge and skills that improve an individual’s understanding and awareness of their rights and the rights of others. Livelihoods education builds one’s ability to secure a sustainable livelihood through skills assessment and a balance between developing entrepreneurial and employability skills.

What is Collaborative Systems Change? Collaborative systems change is an approach to transparently mobilize a diverse set of actors in order to collectively imagine and create positive, systemic change. This change can occur in existing systems, or it can be used to create new, more inclusive systems where they do not exist otherwise. Drawing upon the rich legacies of systems theory, social movements, and institutional entrepreneurship, collaborative systems change seeks to counteract the dominant paradigm for development, which focuses on top-down solutions implemented through hierarchical institutions. Rather, collaborative systems change recognizes that there is no one big answer to complex problems, but instead a plethora of smaller efforts working in harmony that culminate in widespread adoption of new ways of thinking and doing. Collaborative systems change can be big or small, or somewhere in between. It works at different system scales, from the community level to the national, international and inter-sectoral. What we hope to provide in this document is a set of principles and tactics for organizations using collaborative systems change --“honest brokers” who build networks of invested players that, with integrity, move forward a common agenda to tackle persistent, large-scale social problems. We reviewed CYFI’s eight years of experience in brokering collaborative systems change in the financial and education sectors, across 175 countries, and with a fast network of partners. We also delved into the academic literature to understand the evidence for how systems change works, and mapped this to the CYFI experience. The output of this research is five tactics that we believe collaborative systems brokers should undertake in order to affect change:

Convene The first task of brokering collaborative systems change is to democratize the playing field and convene the actors who are invested

in the outcome in a process of co-creation. Collaborative systems change brokers seek to bring in all voices, regardless of power or size, and provide shared spaces for understanding and collaboration.

Connect The collaborative systems change broker has a bird’s eye view of the system and can connect the right people and organizations who are working in complementary ways. Brokers also act as central repositories of knowledge, providing materials and resources that guide and inspire actors toward the ultimate goal.

Co-Create The collaborative systems change broker helps to co-create an overall strategy toward a “North Star” goal, a seemingly unattainable goal that motivates a group of diverse actors to work together. The broker also co-creates programming at national and local levels, always emphasizing that partners’ and stakeholders’ ownership over their own change efforts.

Celebrate Traditional change efforts save celebration to the end of the process; collaborative systems change brokers use this powerful social tool to not only celebrate milestones, but the process itself. Brokers of collaborative social change create ongoing celebratory activities—such as award ceremonies and customary events—that move the process forward and keep participants motivated and involved.

Calibrate Collaborative systems change involves many different change efforts, adapted to various contexts, happening concurrently. Collaborative systems change brokers therefore play a vital role in supporting efforts to research and measure the impact of change efforts so that local adaptations can maximize their impact and learn from one another.

Five Tactics for Collaborative Systems Change Brokers

Convene Co-Create

Connect

Celebrate

Calibrate

Measuring the Progress of Collaborative Systems Change One of the difficulties of collaborative systems change is understanding if the process is working. Often, organizationsâ&#x20AC;&#x201D; particularly fundersâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;are concerned about supporting systems change efforts because they seem nebulous and vague. For collaborative systems change, it is particularly difficult to discern progress, since the method consists of multiple change processes occurring at different paces, often in multiple geographies. In an effort to address this important issue in its own work, CYFI developed an internal diagnostic tool that it has used to measure its change efforts across all countries where it has worked. This diagnostic tool charts ten key stages that countries generally move through in their journey toward full economic citizenship for children and youth. Each of these stages includes key actions taken by policymakers in a country to address financial inclusion for children and youth. With pro bono assistance from two prominent global management consultancies, CYFI performed an analysis which assessed the relationship between the number of activities undertaken by CYFI in the country, and the progress that the country had made in progressing along the diagnostic stages.

The analysis also investigated the link between the change in macroeconomic variables in countries to the progress that the country had made in achieving full economic citizenship for children and youth. The analysis found a positive correlation between the number of CYFI activities and the progress that a country made in achieving full economic citizenship for children and youth, as well as a positive correlation between this progress and the macroeconomic variables in the country. While this approach is new and not without its flaws, it is introduced here as an illustration of how systems change can be measured and evaluated over time. Conceptually, it is anticipated that this measurement tool can be adapted and used for collaborative systems change efforts in other sectors and fields.

Selective Literature Review

When the CYFI team embarked on their journey of collaborative systems change, they were acting both intentionally and intuitively. Through Billimoriaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s multi-disciplinary educational and professional background as a social worker, entrepreneur and nonprofit manager, the organization was exposed to many theories and frameworks to understand the systemic issues that they were facing. There is a vast literature that explores how society evolves and changes, and, in particular, the role of individuals and organizations in initiating and sustaining these changes. While we cannot attempt to survey the entire literature in this short report, we provide here the highlights that have been the most useful to CYFI as they have built and refined their methodology of collaborative systems change. We have divided the literature that applies to collaborative systems change into three dominant fields: systems theory, social movements, and institutional entrepreneurship. Below, we outline these theories at a very high level, and then highlight the key lessons that CYFI has used from these areas of literature in their method of collaborative systems change.

Systems Theory Systems theory has been applied to multiple disciplines since the early twentieth century. Systems theory is less of a single theory than an approach to explain various phenomena as a set of interrelated parts—focusing on the connections and relationships between elements, rather than the elements themselves.

Systems Theory

Systems theory as applied in the social sciences explains society as a series of nested systems. Systems are made up of elements that are interconnected and constantly changing. While earlier social systems theories explain social systems as tending toward equilibrium�, newer theories focus on complexity and adaptation.� CYFI has drawn heavily from systems theory applied specifically to the field of social work. According to one framework used in social work practice�, systems change is created by working across four different areas: the client (the community in which the change is taking place), the target (the people who are influenced in order to create the change), the change agent (the environment that is created to host the change); and the action (the activities that are undertaken to create change). Together, these four areas provide a process for creating change. By fully understanding the client, the change agent can select or devise an action to influence the target, thereby creating systems change. In CYFI’s method of collaborative systems change, the client is the financial and education sectors, the target is the set of global and national governments that they are influencing, the change agent is the multistakeholder network that they have brought together to facilitate change, and the action is the set of activities that CYFI undertakes to influence and thereby create systemic change. It is important to acknowledge that this is just one framework among many that use systems theory to explain and influence social change. Nearly every field of study has a body of literature applying systems theory, and practitioners of collaborative systems change can identify those that suit their needs best, as CYFI was able to do.

Institutional Entrepreneurship

Social Movements

Client

Target

The community in which change is taking place

The people who are influenced to create change

Social Work Framework for Systems Change Change Agent The environment that is created to host the change

Action The activities that are undertaken to create change

Lessons from Systems Theory • Society is a comprised of nested systems made up of interconnected elements. • Social systems are “more than the sum of their parts,” and therefore changes also occur in the relationships between the elements, rather than just the individual elements themselves. • Social systems are complex and adaptive, meaning that changes to one element of the system will create changes to the entire system. Social interventions therefore immediately create changes that cause the entire understanding of the problem to shift. • Systems change can be viewed as four separate elements: understanding the client, influencing the target, creating a change agent and stimulating action.

Social Movements When the CYFI team drafted their first strategic plan in 2010, they explored and applied theories of social movements to develop the focus and activities that they would pursue as an organization mobilizing change. Theories of social movements seek to explain how and why groups form to shape new realities, and the strategies and conditions that are commonly used or created to support these movements. While early theorists believed that social movements were driven by emotion and irrationality� � �, more recent scholarship has taken the opposite view: that social movements are often rational and coordinated, with organizations purposely built to attract resources and people to their cause.� A significant branch of social movements focuses on resource mobilization, or how organizations acquire and mobilize resources to further their aims and goals.� Resources are more than just financial capital��, and may include public opinion, social networks, human capital, and cultural know-how, among others. Organizations that seek to create social movements should cultivate and deploy strategies to mobilize resources toward their desired change. When CYFI decided to focus on shifting financial and educations systems toward financial inclusion for children and youth, this was a strategic move to ensure that resources could be attracted and deployed specifically to this cause.

Other theorists focus on timing and opportunity, and in particular how the political environment creates unique moments where change is possible.�� These moments are often triggered by a change in powerful elites, caused by instability or a decline in capacity. These moments can also be created when access to political decision-making is granted through new allies. CYFI experienced a significant political opportunity during the financial crisis of 2008, which created an opening in the global dialogue about changes in the financial system at a broad scale. CYFI’s approach to collaborative systems change also intentionally includes the recruitment of “accelerators”—powerful influencers in the financial and education sectors—to open doors and create political opportunities for change. Finally, another aspect of social movements relates to the way movement builders use framing to create a new version of reality for various audiences.�� Framing allows social movement builders to create and articulate social issues in novel ways, while building shared momentum behind this new reality. Social movement organizers stimulate the adoption of these new frames through multiple audiences—such as the media, volunteers, and decisionmakers. CYFI has done significant work in framing the concept of “economic citizenship” for children and youth, essentially creating a new concept that brings children and youth into the global conversation about financial inclusion.

Lessons from Social Movements

• Social movements require organizations to attract, acquire and deploy resources—broadly defined, to include financial, human, organizational and political resources--toward change. • Organizers should be aware of opportunities created by timing and political change, which can either accelerate or decelerate change. • Framing is the process by which social movement builders create a new, shared understanding of a social issue and momentum behind the envisioned change.

Institutional Entrepreneurship As a subfield of organizational studies, institutional theory seeks to understand how organizations operate within the broader constraints that society imposes through cognitive, normative and regulative structures (“institutions”, in the literature).�� Studies of institutional change explain how rules, norms and routines guide social behavior, and how these elements of social systems change over time. Importantly, the field has long debated the dominance of structure (how institutions predetermine certain behaviors) and agency (how individuals and organizations can influence institutions).�� The tension between these two viewpoints is a contribution to our understanding of how society changes—or stays the same--over time. Since the 1980s, there has been a growing interest in the concept of institutional entrepreneurship—or how individuals and organizations contribute to institutional change, despite their tendency to maintain the status quo.�� This field of research has emphasized the enabling roles of “field level conditions” (for example, the degree of dominance of the political environment, and whether alternatives to the established regime exist) as well as the social position of

the change agent (how the organization or entrepreneur is able to navigate the environment to initiate and implement change).�� More recently, a scholarly interest in how multiple, disparate individuals and organizations work together to affect change has emerged. Some scholars have referred to this set of activities as “collective institutional entrepreneurship.” This area of research emphasizes how entrepreneurs bring collective resources to an issue, and motivate participants in change processes. One study developed a set of “internal factors” to explain how collective institutional entrepreneurs galvanize change, including: manipulating power, creating common ground, mobilizing “bandwagons,” creating incentive structures, appealing to ethical considerations, and providing support for implementation.�� CYFI has employed many of these strategies, particularly those related to building a network of players—both powerful and grassroots—and keeping these participants motivated to create and see through change in financial and education systems.

Lessons from Institutional Entrepreneurship • Aspiring institutional entrepreneurs should consider the “field level conditions” of the environments in which they are working, as well as their own social positioning in relation to that environment. • Power differences can be a hindrance to collaboration and should be configured appropriately to ensure that less dominant players have the opportunity to participate in the change process. • Institutional entrepreneurs should also create activities that pave the way for collaboration and sustain interest and motivation. These can be “bandwagons”, large numbers of actors who are working together on the problem, as well as positive incentives, such as knowledge sharing and trust building.

Collaborative Systems Change As described above, collaborative systems change is an approach to transparently mobilize a diverse set of actors in order to collectively imagine and create positive, systemic change. Collaborative systems change is an approach which attempts to tackle complex social problems. Importantly, collaborative systems change recognizes that there is no one big answer to complex problems: solutions are, by their very nature, contextual, and therefore, what works in one environment or community will be very different from what works in another.

Complexity and Social Change Social issues are distinguished by their complexity.iii Our understanding of them is limited, and it is usually very difficult to come to agreement on even the nature of the problem, much less the solution. Furthermore, once change is initiated, the nature and our understanding of problems by necessity changes too. Since change is constant, this means that we are always in learning mode, and the process of solving social problems is never-ending. Finally, understanding social problems requires seeing the big picture as well as the individual parts—and no single person, organization, or even government has the ability to see this entire picture. If this sounds frustrating—it is! Our twentieth century models were not built for complexity. Most of us have been educated in a Newtonian, mechanistic worldview where we find solutions by isolating parts of a system, optimizing the individual parts, and putting them back together to improve the functioning of the system. This way of thinking has served us very well: it provided the platform for modern science, inspired the industrial revolution, and is used in nearly every domain, from economics to politics to biology. Whether we know it or not, our approaches to social change are grounded in the faith that we can identify causes and effects, and use these understandings to program healthier and more inclusive societies. The dilemma is that cause and effect does not always apply to social problems. Recipes and formulas have limited application in complex problems. There are often no “standard operating procedures” or “programs in a box” that can fully address these types of issues. Often, we solve issues in one context, and then find ourselves completely flummoxed when the very same tried-and-true models fail to work in other, seemingly similar contexts. Every social problem is uniquely its own and the outcome of an intervention, even perfectly implemented, is wholly unknowable.

The defining feature of approaching complex problems is that we have to do it together. Expertise is important, but it will not solve the problem—it is the way we relate to one another that helps to guide positive change. Change in these contexts cannot be designed at the top and then trickled down to “the field”. It must be approached as a process of continual experimentation, where we learn as we go, and where we share our learnings as transparently as possible. Collaborative systems change is a way of approaching complex social problems, creating relationships where they did not exist before, and inspiring continued experimentation to tackle large-scale social issues. It is a method of engaging multiple groups and actors to harness the plethora of smaller efforts that are always in play. And finally, it is a way of learning from each other as the process of change is undertaken, so that local, emergent ways of tackling issues can culminate in contextualized adoption of new ways of thinking and doing.

Who is the Honest Broker? Early in their inception, CYFI adopted the term “honest broker”— borrowed from the field of political science—for the role that they would assume in pursuing collaborative systems change. Here, we use the term “broker” to connote the intermediary function of the role: this organization must be careful not to promote their own agenda, but rather to mediate between all of the various players to move change forward. We use the term “honest” because the role must be played with significant integrity, ensuring that individual actors are not privileged, but rather that all actors have a substantive contribution. While collaborative systems change is a group effort, we acknowledge that work and effort requires both coordination and leadership. Throughout the document, we will refer to the collaborative systems change broker, which is our term for the organization or individual who takes on the role of initiating and sustaining collaborative systems change. For this role, we strongly subscribe to Margaret Wheatley and Deborah Frieze’s definition of leadership: “If  we want to be able to get these complex systems to work better, we need to abandon our reliance on the leader‐as‐hero and invite in the leader‐as‐host… These leaders‐as‐ hosts are candid enough to admit that they don’t know what to do; they realize that it’s sheer foolishness to rely only on them for answers. But they also know they can trust in other people’s creativity and commitment to get the work done.”��

iii The description of complexity that follows is drawn from multiple sources, with special credit to Westley, F., Zimmerman, B., & Patton, M. (2009). Getting to maybe: How the world is changed. Vintage Canada.

A “North Star” goal can rally the entire group, even if it seems unachievable at the outset. All actors in the system should be engaged, not just those who are powerful or resourced. Working in systems requires seeing and understanding them. Flexibility is key. No single “model” should be held up as the gold standard. Continuous learning is both the process and the goal.

Working in systems requires seeing and understanding them. While it seems obvious, the importance of research cannot be overemphasized. Collaborative systems change brokers should spend ample time researching the systems in which they work, understanding the current state and how changes can be incorporated. Brokers must also research the different players in the systems to understand their roles and prospective activities. Finally, brokers should research the activities and policies currently in place in order to identify gaps and requirements. Moreover, collaborative systems change brokers acknowledge that knowledge, understanding and ideas come from all corners of the system. It is important that all actors be put on a “level playing field”, such that ideas and knowledge are gathered from all actors and the very best ideas can emerge and be shared.

Flexibility is key. No single “model” should be held up as the gold standard. Since our social problems are all contextual, there are no silver bullets or even best practices. There are only “experiments,” ideas that get tested and observed. This is a difficult concept to accept, since most of our organizational expectations are built upon the premise of program models and test-and-scale funding trajectories. While proven program models have enormous value, they should be offered simply as possibilities to local actors who can contextualize based on their own intimate knowledge of their context.

Guiding Principles for Collaborative Systems Change

Continuous learning is both the process and the goal.

To approach complex social problems, we have to shift many of the assumptions about how social change works. To this end, we have developed a set of guiding principles of collaborative systems change. Some of these are common practices, while others may be counter to our typical way of approaching social change.

As described above, change in complex systems is non-linear and frustratingly difficult to predict. Social problems are often described as “wicked” in that they have no stopping point—any change in the system may reveal new and even more perplexing issues.�� Because of the very nature of systemic change, collaborative systems change brokers must be committed to continuous learning, and be able to be flexible, identifying critical moments when change is possible— and not possible.

A “North Star” goal can rally the entire group, even if it seems unachievable at the outset. Collaborative systems change brokers should work to set an audacious goal (a “North Star”) that rallies the group of actors that they are bringing together. Although this goal may seem initially unachievable, the act of setting the goal sets intention and motivation. Systems change is non-linear, and often unfolds iteratively with periods of slow, methodical change, periods of acceleration, and even periods of circling or backtracking. Collaborative systems change brokers can use a “North Star” goal to guide actors in a common direction, even when the course itself needs to be altered, bringing along those who may be invested in the old and charting a way forward so that they can adopt the new.

All actors in the system should be engaged, not just those who are powerful or resourced. Power is an important aspect of systems change, and can be essential when it comes to accelerating systems change. However, power can also be a hindrance to fostering systems change collaboratively. A perceptive collaborative systems change broker will take time to analyze and harness these power dynamics in purpose of the collaborative effort. An effective broker who is truly objective will not have a vested interest in the nature of the outcome, but will rather work tirelessly to ensure that resources and power are mobilized with integrity – to keep the process moving and growing in momentum, but with all voices included.

Change may be initiated by a crisis which allows abrupt alterations of the status quo. Change can also derive from a slow accumulation of “walk outs”�� which culminate in a change movement. Change processes can stop, or leap, when significant events happen that alter the field fundamentally. Whether this process is fast or slow, linear or not, brokers are able to identify trends and build upon them when the time appears ripe for transformational change. It is worthwhile to note that iterating is contradictory to our general perception of how change happens. Most of our stories and narratives prefer to show perseverance and commitment as the most important qualities of change agents. Our most enduring historical accounts are those in which a person (usually an individual) refuses to take “no” for an answer, and persists at all odds to create a new reality for society. These stories—for example, of Florence Nightingale, Mahatma Gandhi, and Nelson Mandela— hold real cultural value, but in many ways they are myths. What these narratives usually obscure is the underlying process of metamorphosis which happens in a person or an organization while they are involved in creating change. These stories can be told in heroic linear fashion because they are recounted retrospectively; in reality, the process is far less straight-forward. For collaborative systems change brokers, it should be helpful to know—and to communicate--that iterating, learning and changing course are not signs of failure, but often necessary and fruitful paths toward enduring change.

The Five Tactics This section provides tactics for organizations who would like to use a collaborative systems change approach in their work. Importantly, the tactics are not presented here in a sequential manner; they can be picked up and used whenever they are effective. Equally, the tactics are not mutually exclusive, although they do reinforce each other. Therefore, they can be used selectively, depending on the systems change that is undertaken. Throughout the section, we will also briefly recount the CYFI story to illustrate how collaborative systems change can unfold in a real-life scenario. As the broker of a collaborative systems change effort for financial inclusion for children and youth, CYFI is the main “protagonist” of the story. However, the story owes far more to the thousands of organizations who have come together to create greater financial inclusion for children and youth at the national and community levels of 175 countries—they are the heroes of this story. CYFI is an organization dedicated to mobilizing the world’s financial and education systems toward greater financial inclusion for children and youth. CYFI envisions a world in which every child

is an “economic citizen,” meaning that they are prepared to learn, save and earn with the prospect of a bright financial future. Prior to 2010, the state of social and financial education for children and youth was relatively nascent. Despite research showing that children who participate in social and financial education are more likely to save and earniv, education and financial systems had not yet embraced children and youth as full economic actors. CYFI’s mission was to change these systemic issues. At the outset, CYFI believed that change needed to be broad-based and inclusive—therefore, it needed to be initiated and designed by those actors and institutions who made up the systems themselves. Rather than take a traditional advocacy approach of mobilizing public opinion or tackling individual countrylevel policies from the beginning, CYFI decided to act as a collaborative systems change broker--bringing all of the actors in the system together to affect inclusive, sustainable change.

iv https://assets.aspeninstitute.org/content/uploads/files/content/docs/pubs/Two%20Cheers.pdf

Tactic 1: Convene The first tactic of brokering collaborative systems change is to democratize the playing field and convene the actors who are invested in the outcome of systems change. The point of this exercise is to invite all actors who have a stake in the process— both individuals and organizations—to join in a network which will embark on a journey of continual sharing and learning. Collaborative systems change brokers seek to bring in all voices, regardless of power or size, and provide a space for shared understanding and collaboration. While this sounds straightforward, in fact it is not. When building a network, conveners will often start with the question “Who do we want to invite?” This often includes the usual suspects, and, often, the most powerful players. By asking the question in this way, conveners unwittingly forget or discard the actors and stakeholders who are most impacted by the envisioned change. Even when smaller, less powerful actors are engaged, they are often given “token” roles to play in the process. The better question to ask is, “How do we represent all voices in this system?,” which will ensure that all actors are given voice in envisioning change. To include all voices, the process of engagement may need to be modified or re-imagined in order to ensure that all actors can be actively active in the process. It might require new ways of convening and speaking to one another, so that “tokenism” does not inadvertently happen. Collaborative systems brokers are active curators of the spaces in which they convene. While virtual spaces can help to share knowledge and conversations, it is important that these spaces include opportunities to physically convene as well. Often an initial physical convening—a conference, gathering or celebration—is successfully used to launch a network, while virtual communication can keep the dialogue going. It is also important to create a

consistent focus on the client by ensuring that they are part of the dialogue. For example, if your focus is children-centered, then children should be present at every opportunity to convene. It is also important to consider how convenings can be staged and sequenced. Convenings should take advantage of diversity, but can also build upon shared identities. For example, regional convenings can create momentum that leads to a global convening—or vice versa, depending on the nature of the sector and the actors. Convenings can also be organized on thematic levels, bringing together actors that work across geographic boundaries but in similar sectors or roles. When working with all players in the system, it is inevitable that tensions will arise. However, this tension is often derived from the expectation that there is a singular outcome. Adam Kahane describes this beautifully when he writes��: “Our conventional understanding of collaboration is that it requires us all to be on the same team and headed in the same direction, to agree on what has to happen and make sure this happens, and to get people to do what needs to be done. In other words, we assume that collaboration can and must be under control…But this conventional assumption is wrong. When we are working in complex situations with diverse others, collaboration cannot and need not be controlled.” Rather than scripting the process and identifying a singular outcome, the objective of a collaborative systems change broker is to bring the actors together and keep them engaged in communicating with one another, despite the tensions that will inevitably arise. Since complexity requires multiple approaches that will work contextually, the aim is not to prescribe outcomes, but rather to create spaces where all actors can continue to learn from each another throughout the process.

CYFI’s Story: Convening the players CYFI’s first step, while still under the auspices of Aflatoun, was to survey their extensive network of organizations to gauge the interest and feedback from those who were already involved in the space of social and financial education for children and youth. This survey, entitled “Word on the Street,” gave the team more substantive insights into the limited access to both education and savings opportunities within the formal education and financial sectors. Together with pro-bono support from a global consultancy firm, the CYFI team hosted a conference for 120 stakeholders and experts from over 40 countries across the financial and education sectors. This meeting had three objectives: (1) to gather all key stakeholders together so that everyone was included in the effort; (2) to build momentum for child and youth financial inclusion; and (3) to hear ideas from multiple sectors and geographies and include these in a strategy going forward. This inaugural meeting involved nearly 50 iterations of the agenda and more than 60 speakers on the podium. Following multiple breakout sessions with all participants contributing, the CYFI and consultancy teams worked late into the night to craft a final strategy. At the closing session for the meeting, the attendees pushed for an ambitious goal of reaching 100 million children with financial and social education by 2015.

As an outcome of this initial meeting, CYFI organized a series of working groups by inviting participants to sign up to participate. These working groups were dedicated to five separate areas: education standards, banking standards, financial regulation, academic research and communications. CYFI mobilized funding from Citi Foundation, MasterCard Foundation and the Skoll Foundation to support the time and travel costs for these working groups, so that they could meet regularly and keep the momentum building. The working groups laid the groundwork for the strategy. The education standards team, led by UNICEF and the OECD, which included key members from PLAN, World Vision, the International Labor Organization among others, decided to build upon already-existing frameworks for children’s financial literacy, including frameworks developed by UNICEF, UNESCO and OECD. The financial regulation working group, comprised of representatives from 25 central banks, commissioned a mapping of the child-friendly banking regulations globally. The academic working group met regularly to review existing research and develop a series of further research studies which culminated in a theory of change for the concept of economic citizenship for children and youth. Finally, the communications working group, represented by experts in public relations and media, developed a set of ideas to “bind” the network together globally.

Tactic 2: Connect The second tactic of collaborative systems change brokers is to connect the players in the system through identifying common interests and sharing relevant knowledge. Convening and connecting together convert a system into a network; to illustrate, it helps to imagine a system map made of nodes and ties. Through convening, the broker actively brings many different stakeholders (“nodes”) together into the same space, while through connecting, the broker ensures that the stakeholders are brought into relationships (“ties”). The collaborative systems change broker has a bird’s eye view of the system and can connect people and organizations who are working in complementary ways. While connecting is often viewed as a “one-off” event, connecting is, in fact, a process. Although network members may often have a vested interest in maintaining a relationship, everyday matters often prevent the commitment of time and energy to relationship building. Ongoing dedication to initiating and maintaining relationships on the part of the broker can often make the difference in whether “ties” between network members remain weak or grow strong. Information and knowledge are carried along the ties between nodes. Collaborative systems change brokers can identify and help knowledge to flow through the network, providing materials and

resources that guide and inspire actors toward the ultimate goal. These materials and resources include case studies, newsletters, bulletins, manuals, progress documents and even anecdotal stories. Ultimately, the aim is to ensure that network members feel empowered and inspired by the actions of others in the system, using stories of success (and constructive failure) to embolden others to take action. Connecting also happens through formal and informal exchanges, such as peer visits and field studies. It is easy to underestimate the value of spending time with other who are working in a similar field or on a common issue. Visits to other countries or sites where similar challenges are being addressed can create powerful relationships that unlock ideas and motivation. Ultimately, connecting is one of the practices of the collaborative systems change broker. Relationships change over time, and the broker plays a critical role in ensuring that connections are continuously renewed and reinforced as needs and interests change. While an initial convening can create an immediate sense of solidarity in a group, it is the long-term work of making oneon-one connections between individuals, teams and organizations that results in a solid network.

CYFI’s Story: Connecting the changemakers Once CYFI had convened the initial conference, their next step was to draft up a dream list of people, organizations and institutions who could initiate the change process, a group that CYFI called the “accelerators”. The list of accelerators included national ministries of education, central banks, financial services providers and academics focused on child and youth financial education. To mobilize these accelerators, CYFI decided to host an initial Summit, which would create a sense of excitement around the issue of financial inclusion for children and youth. To encourage the accelerators’ participation, CYFI enlisted the help of its long-time ally, De Nederlandsche Bank (the Dutch Central Bank), to distribute the invitation to these potential influencers. The response was overwhelmingly positive, and CYFI began the process of developing an initial meeting where these influencers could come together to chart a way forward. The first Summit was held in 2012 in Amsterdam as the first conference to focus on financial issues specifically for children and youth. It welcomed 346 participants from 80 countries, as well as 70 youth participants from 40 countries. Then UN Secretary

General Ban Ki-moon sent a letter of support for the Summit. The Summit also included awards for countries exhibiting outstanding achievements in financial inclusion and education. Since 2012, CYFI has hosted five Summits in Istanbul, New York, London, Bucharest and Johannesburg. They have also hosted numerous regional meetings. The purpose of these Summits is multifold: participants have a chance to showcase their accomplishments, creating a sense of “positive peer pressure” that spills into further activities when they return back to their countries. Billimoria humorously refers to this approach as the “Indian wedding” strategy of inviting everyone to the party. Furthermore, these Summits provide a global platform to share cross-cutting knowledge, such as case studies, standards, and research. Prior to each Summit, CYFI publish reports that coalesce the existing research and findings from the period preceding the event. These reports are designed to showcase important themes arising from country-level and regional-level activities, and share best practices, case studies and learnings from the network.

Tactic 3: Co-Create Although the term “co-creation” threatens to become a buzzword, it has particular salience for collaborative systems change. Popularized by business thinkers (among them, CK Prahalad, author of The Fortune at the Bottom of the Pyramid��), the concept originated as a term to describe firms who collaborated with their customers to create more useful products and services.

and sub-national levels, always emphasizing that partners’ and stakeholders’ ownership over their own change efforts. The broker acts as an advisor in this process, bringing practices from other jurisdictions for consideration and inspiration. The broker can also act as a sounding board and subject matter expert, when these roles are useful in local context.

For the collaborative systems change broker, the term is less about collaborating with customers, and more about collaborating across the spectrum with systems players who have a stake in the outcome of systems change. This co-creation can happen at multiple levels, including strategy, policy and programming, innovation, and monitoring & evaluation.

The collaborative systems change broker can also act as a co-creator of innovations in the system. This can occur when new activities and approaches emerge in one geography or sector, and can be applied to other areas. Innovations can also derive from a need that that the broker identifies across various actors in the network, and can be cocreated by bringing together stakeholders who have knowledge and know-how to contribute to a solution.

At the strategic level, the collaborative systems change broker helps to co-create with network members an overall strategy toward a “North Star” goal, a seemingly unattainable goal that motivates a group of diverse actors to work together. Importantly, this goal is defined widely enough to incorporate a wide swath of players, and does not prescribe a path to the goal, merely an aspirational achievement for which to strive. For policy and programming, the collaborative systems change broker aims to assist local developers in their programming at national

Importantly, collaborative systems change brokers are able to distinguish between their co-creation activities and their roles as convener and connector. Co-creation is often the work where brokers need to be most fully engaged in the contextual needs of actors. However, it is important that brokers remain invested in the process rather than the outcome, since brokers will never have the intimate knowledge of context that actors will bring to the table. Co-creation is less about compromise, and more about engaged, iterative work that responds to adaptive needs experienced in context.

CYFI’s Story: Co-Creating for systems change CYFI’s co-creation activities are largely at the national level, acting as advisors to national committees once they become dedicated to furthering financial inclusion in their countries. Upon expressing interest in Global Money Week or participating in one of the Summits or regional meetings, national teams and their representatives become initiated into the CYFI network. This initial participation allows CYFI regional representatives to get to know the national players and become acquainted with the country context for financial economic citizenship for children and youth. As countries become exposed to the network and its activities, they typically become interested in pursuing further policies and programming for financial education and inclusion at the national level. Countries vary widely in their “baseline” when they enter into the CYFI network. Some countries already have initiatives for financial literacy for children, or partial policies and plans that have yet to be implemented. Other countries are “starting from scratch” and need assistance in laying the groundwork for financial education in the national curricula. CYFI provides country representatives with a “cookbook” that gives an idea of how they can map their country context, conduct initial programming, and ultimately build a national strategy for economic citizenship for children and youth.

Regulations for child banking also vary widely. In many cases, regulation puts up unnecessary barriers for children to open bank accounts, and CYFI assists countries to find ways to communicate with banks about ways to make child-friendly banking possible. In other cases, regulation does not have any child-friendly standards, and these standards need to be created so that banks have a framework for child-friendly products. Finally, in countries where banking regulations cannot be modified to be child-friendly, CYFI recommends projects for which they have created standards, such as SchoolBank, that allow children and youth to have the experience of saving within a safer environment. Importantly, each country context is different and activities must be initiated at the national level. CYFI does not see itself as a program implementer or even a technical assistance provider. Rather, CYFI acts as a trusted advisor to the process that a country is undertaking. In this way, as countries progress their initiatives for financial education and inclusion, they are able to access expertise and support. However, with the exception of limited demonstration projects, CYFI does not provide funding or drive the process on behalf of countries. In this way, systems change is fully driven by countries and “home grown” within country contexts.

2019 2018 2017

Brokers of collaborative social change also create ongoing celebration to allow new members to become involved. Ongoing celebrations can act as an “entry mechanism,” allowing new members to become easily involved. They provide a way to invite new actors to become part of the process, and give them a taste of success when they become part of the celebration process.

2016

A large part of being a collaborative systems change broker is learning to bring new narratives, or realities, to life—a technique that the social movements and organizational theory literature calls “framing”��. While a broker does not script these narratives, they identify and recognize them when they begin to emerge from a collaborative network. When these new realities begin to emerge, it is important to provide a place where they can be showcased. Celebrations are a way to bring new narratives to life and give them a stage where they can be accessible to all.

7.8 million children & youth 24,000 organizations 73,000 activities 137 countries 7 million children & youth 14,000 organizations 33,000 activities 132 countries

2015

Collaborative systems change brokers use celebration to keep the process of change going, rather than just to mark achievements. Celebration allows groups and networks to keep momentum when more pressing priorities threaten to distract members from pressing onward. Furthermore, they give an opportunity for “positive peer pressure” where actors are motivated by others’ progress to ramp up their own efforts.

7.4 million children & youth 13,400 organizations 199,000 activities 151 countries

5.6 million children & youth 962 organizations 3,000+ activities 124 countries

2014

Celebrations are universal: they are how we communicate social values and create meaning and purpose in communities. Celebrations also allow us to ”mark time” and create a sense of social cohesion among diverse groups. Despite the power of this social tool, many change efforts save celebration to the end of the process, when it is actually less useful to the efforts of systems change.

8.4 million children & youth 10,000 organizations 155,000 activities 152 countries

3 million children & youth 490 organizations 2,000+ activities 118 countries

2013

Tactic 4: Celebrate

1 million children & youth 400 organizations 80 countries

2012

GMW GROWTH

33,000 children & youth 21 countries (Child Finance Day/Week)

CYFI’s Story: Celebrating the process CYFI was crucially aware of the importance to maintain the momentum that had been built during the initial meeting and the subsequent inaugural Summit. They also realized that they needed to extend and grow the network within countries, so that there would be champions for financial and educational sector change at the national level. As a youth organization borne out of Aflatoun, CYFI was accustomed to taking a vibrant and uplifting approach to creating “bandwagons”. Therefore, the communications working group developed the concept of Global Money Week, a worldwide celebration for children and youth to learn about savings and the financial system. They also conceived of a series of Awards Ceremonies, often in tandem with the Summits, to celebrate the countries and organizations making significant progress in financial inclusion for youth. Global Money Week was conceived as an annual celebration and learning event for all national partners to be held every March. The event gives children and youth a chance to take part in fun and educational activities related to education, finance and savings. Each participating country signs up to take part in the celebration and creates a national working group to guide the celebration activities. Activities include inviting children to ring the bells at national stock exchanges, hosting events at money museums, creating money boxes and piggy banks, and participating in global Skype calls with other children and youth around the world. While Global Money Week is fun for children and youth, it is also an important entry mechanism for CYFI to enroll countries

into the financial inclusion effort. CYFI makes it very easy for countries to participate in the week, assisting with the planning efforts and providing toolkits and hands-on support throughout. The event is also beneficial for political purposes, as the activities generate significant press interest and goodwill. Since participating in the week is a “low barrier to entry” and highreward activity, it is a perfect entry point for countries to become part of the CYFI network. Country participation in Global Money Week has grown significantly since 2012. CYFI has also found that the national working groups created for this celebration later become the primary vehicle for further efforts on financial inclusion in countries. CYFI also hosts the annual Global Inclusion Awards (GIA) Ceremony, a chance to celebrate the efforts and successes of government authorities, financial institutions and civil society organizations who have worked to achieve greater financial inclusion and education for children and youth. Well-respected figures in the financial and education sectors are invited to sit on the selection panel for the awards, in order to eliminate bias as well as inspire involvement. CYFI has handed out different awards including the Child & Youth Friendly Banking Award, the Civil Society Achievement Award, the CYFI Country Award, the CYFI “Global Money Week” Award, the Global Youth Entrepreneurship Award, and the Outstanding Youth Economic Citizenship Award. The award ceremonies are a muchanticipated event on the calendar of the CYFI network, eliciting excitement and a sense of accomplishment among those who are dedicated to the cause.

Tactic 5: Calibrate Collaborative systems change involves many different change efforts, adapted to various contexts, happening concurrently. Therefore, the final tactic is about calibration – the constant monitoring of the needs of the network, as well as the overall systemic approach. Collaborative systems change brokers need to be actively aware of local efforts and understand these various approaches, developing and articulating themes that are unfolding at the larger network level. They also need to be able to support efforts to research and measure the impact of change so that these results can be used to motivate and progress other local initiatives. Collaborative systems change brokers should seek to sustain engaged and progressive collaboration, articulating the bigger picture change that is happening as a result of local, contextual efforts. For example, if a collaborative systems change broker is sustaining a global change effort, their role would be to keep closely in contact with the network, understanding national and regional activities and milestones so that they can be communicated as part of a larger, international story of change. Collaborative systems change brokers, sitting at the center of the network, hold an important position in that they can see across the various change efforts and identify beneficial connections between these efforts. Therefore, sustaining can also involve connecting local efforts with specialized support and expertise, when useful and requested. Collaborative systems change brokers also play a vital role in supporting efforts to research and measure the impact of

change efforts so that local adaptations can maximize their impact and learn from one another. They are also responsible for understanding how research and evaluation of local change processes and programs can be extrapolated to a broader audience, to support both national and global efforts. They should remain flexible in these approaches, ensuring that they do not inhibit the local efforts and their context-specific needs. Calibrating is iterative and can be a struggle internally, as the broker maintains the agility needed by the network and the systems change effort. Collaborative systems change brokers should consider the resourcing needs as the effort evolves, since some staff members may find certain stages of the effort more stimulating and suited to their talents than other stages. Brokers should be cognizant of this in hiring and capacity development decisions, since the skills and temperament of staff will determine the responsiveness of their organization through the duration of the systems change effort. Calibrating can feel like the “grunt work” of collaborative systems change. It involves the day-to-day check-ins and offers of support and expertise to network members, in addition to tenacity and persistence when some local changemakers go “off the radar.” Calibration is strongly intertwined with celebration and iteration, since these two tactics are largely informed by an active and connected network base.

CYFI’s Story: Calibrating and iterating CYFI’s experience has shown that while systems change can encounter similar milestones in national contexts, the change trajectory is neither linear nor predictable. While some countries start with national strategies for financial inclusion and move on toward programming in schools, other countries start with national curricula and then tackle banking regulation. CYFI flexes its advisory role to the needs and priorities of each country, supporting the initiatives that are “quick wins” and then using experiences such as Global Money Week, the Summits and Awards Ceremonies to introduce further activities that can move them towards full economic citizenship. Timing and political events have played an important role in CYFI’s journey of systems change. The financial crisis of 2008 paved the way for CYFI to put financial literacy and inclusion on both global and national agendas. However, as the urgency of the crisis has passed, CYFI has sought other ways to keep the momentum going for economic citizenship for children and youth. In particular, the recent global push for livelihoods and entrepreneurship education has provided a window of opportunity for CYFI. In 2015, CYFI launched the Ye! Network which aims to connect young entrepreneurs in an online community, pair them with professionals for one-on-one support, and advocate for legislative frameworks that facilitate opportunities for youth-led enterprises. Political change has also created opportunities and challenges at the country level. In some countries, a transition to new political leadership has prompted interest and momentum for financial education and inclusion for children and youth.

These political events generally signal a chance for these issues to move up the policy agenda, and therefore still require commitment from civil servants with an interest in the issue to put forward briefs and strategies that will be taken up during the political cycle. In other cases, however, political failure— and in particular, corruption—have caused efforts for economic citizenship for children and youth to slow down or fail. In these cases, CYFI has been forced to wait or even exit their supportive efforts as the change process slows. In 2014, CYFI organized its Summit at the United Nations in New York in collaboration with UNCDF. Attended by 340 youth and high-level stakeholders, the meeting was geared towards influencing the post 2015 development agenda (what became the SDGs). Again, timing was crucial as this allowed the network to develop and make recommendations directly to Ms. Amina Mohammed, the then Secretary General’s Special Advisor on Post-2015 Development Planning. Ultimately, CYFI’s goal is to see all countries achieve full economic citizenship for children and youth. However, they are cognizant that achieving this goal will look different for each country. As a systems change broker, CYFI sees its role squarely as supporting the change that is defined by the context in which the change will be sustained. By connecting a vast network of participants, celebrating the process, identifying accelerators, supporting the journey and iterating and evolving, CYFI’s collaborative systems change approach allows each country to achieve full economic citizenship for children and youth, on their own terms.

Measuring Collaborative Systems Change As we noted in the introduction, one of the difficulties of collaborative systems change is understanding if the process is working and measuring progress as it unfolds. Understanding how systems change happens requires following multiple processes occurring at different paces across different geographies. It is also notoriously difficult to attribute systems change to the activities of collaborative systems change brokers, since they are not directly involved in programmatic activities. As collaborative systems change is difficult to measure, it also makes it difficult to support and to fund. In an effort to respond to these issues, CYFI began an internal initiative two years ago to develop an internal diagnostic tool that could document change efforts across all countries

in their network. The organization chose the time period of 2012-2016 to measure their progress and worked with a global consultancy firm to conduct the analysis. The study aimed to assess the potential relationship between the progress made by a countryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s policy makers to achieving economic citizenship for children and youth and the number of recorded engagement activities that CYFI had conducted with the country. The progress made would be assessed by scoring the country on the CYFI diagnostic tool outlined below. Subsequently, assessed the potential relationship between the progress made by the countryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s policy makers on economic citizenship and the improvement along macro-economic indicators of economic citizenship in that country.

CYFI Diagnostic Tool

health of the entrepreneurship ecosystems in a country per 2017 (this index covers entrepreneurship activities in general, not specifically for youth).

The CYFI diagnostic tool was developed by charting ten key stages of actions that policy makers in countries generally take in their journey towards ensuring economic citizenship for children and youth. In the diagnostic stages, stage 0 starts with documenting interest and stage 10 ends at a steady state (see the full diagnostic stages in Appendix 1).

Results

Against each of these stages, a set of 4-5 indicators was created. These indicators were developed by CYFI’s experienced regional managers, who have spent considerable time with country-level stakeholders over a number of years. The organization determined that if a country had accomplished two of the indicators for a specific milestone, then this milestone could be considered to have been achieved.

•

Following the development of the diagnostic tool, CYFI staff extensively reviewed their correspondence and documentation with each of the countries where they had worked. Salesforce was used to document engagement with countries, and therefore, the achievement of each indicator and milestone with recorded evidence was substantiated. CYFI was also able to document the number and nature of activities (engagements) that they had performed with each country over the recorded period of time.

Analysis The analysis was a two-step process. First, the analysis assessed the relationship between the recorded CYFI activities with a country and the country’s progress along the CYFI diagnostic score. The increase in the country diagnostic score was calculated as the difference between the diagnostic score in 2016 and that of 2012 (data was not available to do a time series analysis). The number of CYFI activities was measured as only those activities that were performed against the stages that they had progressed through, based on the categories of activities. Finally, countries were excluded that already had a diagnostic score of ‘8’ or higher in 2012, as potential progress that could be made would be limited in these countries and bias the analysis. Furthermore, countries were excluded that did not have a diagnostic score in either 2012 or 2016. As a second step, the potential relationship was researched between the CYFI diagnostic score and a selection of macroeconomic indicators that represent full economic citizenship of children and youth at a national level: financial inclusion, financial education and entrepreneurship. Three macroeconomic indicators available from publicly available sources were chosen: the percentage of youth (aged 18-25) that have an account at a formal financial institution (as measured by World Bank Findex 2017), the percentage of youth enrolled in lower-secondary school (as measured by UNICEF, update 2016), and a score of the Global Entrepreneurship Index measuring

When investigating the link between CYFI activities and the stage of a country on the CYFI diagnostic it was found that: Countries that saw a greater progression in diagnostic stages had also received more CYFI activities on average. Over the 2012-2016 period, countries that progressed 5-6 stages received 40 CYFI activities on average, whereas countries that progressed 0-2 stages only received 7 activities on average;

When investigating the potential relationship between a country’s CYFI diagnostic stage and the identified macro-economic indicators, it was found that: •

A higher score on the CYFI country diagnostic tool relates to higher levels of macro-economic indicators. On average, if a country scores one stage higher on the CYFI diagnostic tool this relates to: 4% more children & youth with an account at a financial institution (as measured by the Worldbank Findex); 2% higher lower secondary-school participation rates (as measured by UNICEF); and 3% higher scores on the global entrepreneurship index (as measured by the Global Entrepreneurship Database).

Discussion While this study is only able to measure correlation, and not causation or attribution, the results are indicative. The relationship between country diagnostic scores and the number of activities taken by CYFI in countries could indicate that CYFI is successful at helping policy makers in countries to progress along the stages when preparing for full economic citizenship of children and youth. The relationship between county diagnostic scores and macroeconomic variables that were measured in the study could indicate that the collaborative systems change efforts are having an impact on country performance. The diagnostic analysis allows network members to have a greater level of comfort about the progress that countries are making in their work toward economic citizenship for children and youth. It also allows funders and stakeholders of CYFI, as a collaborative systems change broker, to understand how this change unfolds and the contribution that CYFI makes to this change process. While this approach is not without its flaws, it is introduced here as an illustration of how systems change can be measured and evaluated over time. We are interested to see if similar measurement tools can be adapted and used for collaborative systems change efforts in other sectors and fields.

On “Letting Go” An important—yet surprisingly difficult--issue that CYFI has begun to deal with is stepping out of its role as an “honest broker.” Now that the collaborative systems change effort for economic citizenship for children is significantly underway, CYFI and its leadership have begun to ask a rather extraordinary question for a respected and resourced nonprofit organization: is it time to close their doors? Over the last two years, CYFI has grown to realize that its role is reaping “diminishing returns” for the issue that it set out to address. This is due in large part to the success of their efforts. For example, Global Money Week is carried out annually in more than 175 countries where standing committees exist to facilitate the activity and coordination is largely in the hands of local organizers. Even more tellingly, 70 countries have adopted policies which mandate financial inclusion and education for children in national strategic plans. And finally, international bodies such as UNICEF, OECD and G-20 have adopted guidelines that include financial education as global standards, inspiring a new industry of implementing partners who carry out technical assistance in countries to roll out these standards. These accomplishments indicate that CYFI has done what it set out to do: “worked itself out of its job” by persuading countries and international leadership that the issue of children’s economic citizenship is important and relevant. In its brokering role, CYFI purposefully did not undertake technical assistance or service delivery contracts in countries, with the exception of small demonstration projects. CYFI did not want to be seen as a competitor with its stakeholders--this was important to the integrity of the organization and the economic citizenship movement that it was building. CYFI was founded as a mobilizer, embodying the collaborative systems change tactics described in this report. Importantly, resources have been channeled to fieldbuilding activities rather than traditional functions such as human resources, finance and fundraising. This allowed CYFI to operate with a comparatively lean structure and avoid competition with other organizations while mobilizing on a sector-wide basis. While this lean structure is ideal for catalyzing, it is not designed for organizational longevity. Yet, the idea of “letting go” and closing its doors has been a difficult one for some staff, partners, board members and funders to embrace. Many believe that there is still work to be done since there are still countries where policies have not been fully implemented, and therefore children who have not yet reaped the benefits of economic citizenship. There are those who think that CYFI could continue to have a significant impact by migrating to a new role, supporting the rollout of economic citizenship policies in countries where they have built important relationships. CYFI entertained the option of pursuing a more traditional route, transitioning into a technical assistance or implementing provider role to support the rollout of country policies and international guidelines. However, this transition felt very uncomfortable for CYFI’s leadership. Not only would this move require significant shifts in capacity, training and staffing, it would fundamentally go against the “DNA” of the organization. Ultimately, CYFI believes that the momentum of the movement will be best maintained by passing the responsibility of implementation to those organizations who are ready to take on this role, particularly to larger organizations such as the OECD who can institutionalize these efforts.

“Our key role is to be an honest broker and our approach is collaborative systems change. We believe that this role—as mobilizer rather than service provider--has allowed the shift toward economic citizenship for children and youth to happen faster. However, if we now shifted into a service provider or technical assistance role, we would break the integrity upon which the movement was formed—that is not why CYFI was built.” – Jeroo Billimoria

Since “finite lifespan” organizations are not the norm, CYFI has discovered that it is important to articulate this strategy in clear terms. CYFI’s management has responded to these concerns by highlighting the community of organizations that has emerged while they have been mobilizing the sector. The exciting thing for the leadership of the organization is that a significant number of organizations have now begun to carry on the work of implementation and service delivery of financial education and inclusion for children and youth. They view this as inspiring and a sign that their work is now coming to an end. Co-director Lubna Shaban confirms this sentiment: “The fact that there is a long list [of organizations] is a sign of success, that we have phased ourselves out.” CYFI believes that collaborative systems change organizations should consider a finite lifespan as part of a central strategy for their change efforts. By communicating this at the outset, “honest brokers” can align their activities with partners and funders, ensuring that all stakeholders are fully engaged in the systems change effort rather than keeping a single organization in existence in perpetuity. As Co-director Bram van Eijk describes, “We hope that this can become a legitimate and respected trajectory for nonprofit organizations: to get the ball rolling and then close down when the role of catalyst is no longer necessary. We think that organizations, funders and partners will behave differently if their mindset is geared toward a finite lifespan—we hope that this will be a refreshing idea for the sector.”

CYFI’s Final Chapter “Letting go” is not an activity that CYFI has undertaken lightly. CYFI’s leadership found very few examples of organizations who had intentionally closed their doors at a time when the organizations were still going strong. So, they knew they would need to build their strategy from scratch. In order to responsibly wind down operations, CYFI laid the groundwork for a possible exit strategy for several years. First, the organization’s leadership needed to test their “gut feeling” that the sector had reached a tipping point, ensuring that a brokering role was no longer needed to keep momentum going. CYFI hired a consultant to interview key stakeholders across the network and gauge the state of the field for economic citizenship for children. They also analyzed the data from the diagnostic to see the shifting patterns in the sector and the progress of countries in shaping their economic citizenship policies for children and youth. The message returned by the study and the results from the diagnostic analysis were clear: country-level activities had reached a point where “pushing the issue” was no longer needed. CYFI then explored the opportunity to transition into a technical assistance role rather than close its doors entirely. While this role ran contrary to the organizational ethos, they wanted to explore all options before making a final decision. Through the stakeholder interviews, CYFI discovered that although partners required technical assistance, these services

were readily available from other organizations which had emerged in recent years as a result of growing interest in the field, brought on by their movement-building work. CYFI did not want to reconfigure their organization, nor compete with these players, which were integral to the movement, and which were already well-positioned to serve the need for assistance. CYFI then considered shifting its strategic focus away from economic citizenship to focus purely on forming an entirely new “honest broker” role around youth entrepreneurship through its flagship program Ye!. Ye! had significant traction and a growing community dedicated to youth entrepreneurs in 160 countries. CYFI explored the opportunity to grow the momentum in a similar way to the movement they created around economic citizenship, and wanted to tested the appetite in the sector for this program. It soon became clear however that the space for youth entrepreneurship was already crowded by many players. Rather than an “honest broker,” this sector needed an institutional player to hone the organizational field rather than inspire new entrants. Ultimately, based on the study and exploration of alternative roles and issue areas, CYFI were satisfied that its role and function as an organization had come to an end. The management and board took the important decision to close its operations by December 31st 2019.

New Opportunities The decision to close doors opened up an entirely new set of opportunities. At the outset, CYFI had a vision to transition its major program activities to institutional partners who could sustain them going forward. CYFI had strategically and purposely built relationships with a number of key players over the years in preparation for this step, players who could ultimately take on the different initiatives when the time was right. The transitions that CYFI embarked upon included:

SchoolBank & Aflatoun with the World Savings and Retail Banking Institute (WSBI) Global Money Week (GMW) & The OECD International Network on Financial Education (OECD/INFE) The first transition involved Global Money Week, CYFI’s longest running program. The natural partner for this transition was the OECD/INFE, a policy network with membership of public authorities from OECD and non-OECD countries who are committed to increasing financial literacy. The OECD/INFE has long-standing projects devoted to financial literacy assessment and education for youth. The OECD has been a pivotal strategic partner for CYFI, with whom CYFI has signed an MOU in previous years. The OECD served on CYFI’s board and co-chaired one of its key working groups. Global Money Week is now fully transitioned to the OECD/INFE, which has incorporated the program into its annual activities.

CYFI also transitioned the SchoolBank project to the organization from which CYFI was founded, Aflatoun, in partnership with the World Savings and Retail Banking Institute. Since spinning off CYFI, Aflatoun has grown to become the world’s largest financial education network. WSBI represents 6000 savings and retail banks around the world. Together, the two networks create an ideal platform upon which to grow the SchoolBank model further.

Ye! and the International Trade Centre (ITC)

Global Inclusion Awards (GIA) & Alliance for Financial Inclusion (AFI) Another key transition involved the Global Inclusion Awards, CYFI’s annual initiative to recognize partners, stakeholders and active youth in the movement. AFI is a membership network comprised of central banks and other financial regulatory institutions from more than 80 emerging and developing countries. Over the years, CYFI and AFI have had regular contact through members in common, as well as sectoral working groups. Since AFI already hosts its own awards program, it was a natural fit for AFI to assume the Global Inclusion Awards. AFI has also agreed to assume the diagnostic tool which will carry forward the measurement of change in the economic citizenship sector.

Finally, CYFI’s flagship entrepreneurship program, Ye!, transitioned to ITC, a multilateral partnership between the World Trade Organization and the United Nations. With its strong commitment to youth entrepreneurship in the context of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), ITC is a natural fit to assume the Ye! program. ITC had been involved with Ye! since its inception and had supported the program unequivocally through its early stages, the two organizations having signed an MOU in the early stages of Ye!’s formation. CYFI is looking forward to seeing Ye! grow into its potential, within the auspices of a broader institution.

Handover Criteria

Steps to a Successful Handover

CYFI established a set of minimum criteria for its handover to transition partners. These criteria included:

CYFI and its transition partners worked hard to enable a seamless transition for its initiatives. These steps included:

•

A strong working relationship with CYFI, ideally a partner with whom an MOU had already been signed;

1. Initial transition note, from CYFI to the transition partner;

•

Good international standing, known and respected in their fields of influence;

•

Willing to engage in a formal partnership, such as a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) or other type of agreement;

•

Strong governance support, with a board that recognizes youth engagement as a part of their strategy;

•

Open to having a structured handover, with formal steps and documentation;

•

Ideally willing to assume CYFI staff, to ensure the transition of institutional knowledge and a smooth transition.

2. Joint statement and letter of intent, negotiated between the two parties; 3. Action plan, with roles and timelines of CYFI and the transition partner; 4. Official announcement and signing ceremony, to provide full closure and celebration of the occasion.

Practical Considerations Donors One of the primary struggles with the transition was explaining the exit strategy to committed donors. CYFI found that many donors defined success as growth and an upward trajectory, while closing down was seen as a failure. CYFI worked hard to explain the strategy in the context of a collaborative systems change initiative, explaining the transition to be a sign of accomplishment. Additionally, CYFI ensured that donors were kept very close to the handover process, since this allowed donors to see the tangible impact that their funds had achieved.

Employees Transitioning employees, both contractually and institutionally, was an important aspect of the process. In retrospect, CYFI believes that systems change organizations should engage and onboard employees with the anticipation of a limited employment term. By ensuring that employees, funders and partners are aware of the anticipated timeframe, all parties can work together to create career paths for those with great dedication and drive. In practice, this is a process that requires managing a delicate balance. While being an operational activity, it is one which affects the very individuals who had long been part of building the movement for economic citizenship. It is a matter which should be approached with sensitivity. As the strategy for closure came together, CYFI brought in external advisors to mediate the process. They also worked to ensure that legally compliant and fair transition packages, which were in line with sectoral standards were awarded to employees. Where possible, CYFI paved the way for employees to take positions with transition partners.

Transition Process CYFI and its transition partners felt that it was crucial for the transition process to be systematic and well-documented. In each case, CYFI prepared an initial transition note which was shared with the partner. This note included the background, roles, expected support from CYFI and the anticipated resources that the receiving organization could expect to require to fully assume the initiative. This transition note was then approved by the board and management of the receiving institution with a formal letter of approval. Following this, a joint statement and letter of intent was negotiated and reviewed by legal representatives of both organizations. An action plan was drawn up, including roles and timelines. Finally, an official announcement and a public signing ceremony concluded the process. CYFI also encouraged transition partners to consider employing or contracting with CYFI exiting employees to ensure a seamless transition and transfer of institutional knowledge. In many cases, this suggestion was taken up and CYFI employees were able to continue with their efforts toward economic citizenship under the auspices of larger, more established institutions.

Contracts and Assets CYFI also spent considerable time and effort wrapping up the legal and logistical considerations of the organization. The transition required that CYFI review all contracts, including rental, phones, internet and insurance. CYFI also had to strike a balance between ensuring that the organization had the physical assets to continue its work through the transition, while not overspending on temporary measures.

Legal Fees and Statues Lastly, CYFI had to navigate the legal costs and statutory requirements of closing an entity. Acknowledging that this can be costly, CYFI sought out pro bono assistance where possible. In the absence of pro bono support, CYFI ensured clarity of fees and expectations at the outset. In hindsight, CYFI realizes that organizations are generally formed with longevity rather than closure in mind. Boiler plate templates often do not give full consideration to the aspects of shutting down. For organizations operating with a finite lifespan, these considerations at the outset can make the process easier. Finally, ending an organization differs by jurisdiction, so developing a timeline and checklist for closure of all legal entities needs to be part of the process.

Reflections As CYFI’s leadership prepares to close its doors, they have had the opportunity to reflect on the journey and the process of shutting down. Co-director Bram van Eijk is quick to explain that the process has been a learning journey: “Has the process been completely smooth? Not entirely. No matter what you say and do, people will disagree with your decision--many will agree with you, but still others will say that the process is not complete until the system is completely changed.” Co-director Lubna Shaban continues: “Internally it was difficult: here is an amazing team, who gets along very well and does great work together—to actively disband has been quite emotional and taken a lot of adjustment. It’s so rare to hear of an organization shutting itself down that most people were quick to think we had run out of money or that this was a failure. We worked very hard to explain that the reality was the complete opposite: this was a success.”

While the decision to close down was “scary”, Jeroo Bilimoria believes that the process itself confirmed that the decision was the correct one to follow. She explains: “While there were very few precedents to follow, the process has ultimately been one of happiness since we have received so much support through all the ups and downs.” In the end, the organization has realized that taking the difficult route will likely make it easier for others who follow suit. Jeroo adds: “Perhaps because it was so difficult, and we still did it, we feel quite proud. Ultimately it was an ethical and ideological thing to do--to stop when the time was right, rather than continue for the sake of continuing. We really hope that it sets the stage for other system change leaders to learn from our experiences. We know that although CYFI has reached its final chapter, we hope to have contributed to the writing of a new chapter for collaborative systems change.”

Challenges & Opportunities Collaborative systems change is not without its challenges. While the tactics described in this report have been used by CYFI to successfully move the needle on full economic citizenship for children and youth, there have been stumbling blocks along the way. There are also challenges that exist within all systems change efforts, and which need to be acknowledged and assessed by brokers as they embark on their work. With each of these challenges, of course, comes significant opportunities that can be taken up by collaborative systems change brokers and their supporters on their systems change journey.

Knowing when to keep going & when to stop One of the critical questions for any collaborative systems change broker is when to keep going and when to stop. Since social issues, by their very nature, have no stopping point, it is difficult to know when systems change has been “achieved.” Indeed, no such point exists. Therefore, it is often contingent on the broker to determine when an inflection point has been achieved, and when their involvement is no longer critical or useful.

Levels of systems change Social systems are open and nested, meaning that however we define a system, it continues to exist within and be influenced by other, larger systems. Therefore, no matter what boundary we draw around a system—geographic, demographic, or some other definition—there will always be broader change happening outside of a broker’s area of influence. One of the difficult challenges of a collaborative systems change broker is to define the level at which they will operate, and to justify this level to their constituents. For example, some collaborative systems change brokers may choose to work at a local level, aggregating micro- and community-level efforts, and focusing on individual behavior change. Others may operate at a population level, focusing heavily on organizational practices or institutional factors, such as norms and attitudes. Still others, such as CYFI, will choose to work at a global and national level, focusing primarily on policy-level change.

The choice of how and where to intervene in a system is critical to setting expectations and measuring progress. For example, those change efforts focused on behavioral change will have far different progress indicators than those focused on policy change. An exciting opportunity is to understand how collaborative systems change efforts can join together across levels, connecting the dots between policy and practice.

Funding collaborative systems change Finally, it would be remiss to not acknowledge the elephant in the room: how do we fund collaborative systems change? The efforts of collaborative systems change brokers are often in the background, unacknowledged and perhaps even underappreciated by those who channel resources to social change. Can those organizations working quietly in the background obtain the funding and support necessary to sustain their efforts through the ups and downs of change? While there is a growing popularity for systems change generally, much of the conversation has seemed to center around funders acting as systems change brokers. This report aims to position honest and objective brokers as drivers for collaborative systems change. We believe that this objectivity is important to the inclusion of all players in a system, and the rectification of power dynamics that can prevent truly collaborative processes. Rather, we would like to encourage funders to identify those who are already acting as collaborative systems change brokers, and inspire more organizations to operate in this way. To fund collaborative systems change brokers, donors will likely need to change their expectations about aspects of their grant-making processes. Since brokers are not engaged in program implementation or technical assistance, it is difficult to measure their efforts against the program output indicators that typically comprise donor reporting. Rather, funders should work closely with brokers to understand the indicators that are unique to their change effort, and consider ways that these indicators can become part of the reporting process. With the backing of enlightened and flexible funders, collaborative systems change could rapidly become the norm rather than the exception for social change efforts.

Conclusions

In this document, we have introduced the concept of collaborative systems change— an approach to transparently mobilize a diverse set of actors in order to collectively imagine and create positive, systemic change. Collaborative systems change specifically seeks to address issues that are “grand challenges”: large problems that are complex and unresolved, requiring collective effort to make progress. While many of society’s most pressing problems seem intractable, collaborative systems change offers a concrete approach to collectively imagine and create positive shifts in the way that systems work for people and planet. While many academic disciplines offer instructive theories related to social change, here we have drawn upon the fields of systems theory, social movements, and institutional entrepreneurship to provide support for collaborative

systems change. Ultimately, these theories provide a basis for understanding how networks of actors can come together and engage in contextualized efforts that culminate in widespread, systemic change. We have also drawn upon the case study of CYFI to demonstrate how this has worked in relation to a particularly entrenched issue: financial inclusion for children and youth. The aim of writing this report and sharing it widely is to encourage other social change practitioners—including nonprofit service providers, social entrepreneurs, advocacy organizations, social movement activists, funders and policymakers—to consider collaborative systems change methods in their efforts across sectors and geographies. Given the nature of the work, we also hope to inspire the creation of new, independent organizations that can act as “honest brokers” and convene networks for collaborative

systems change around specific challenges, using the principles and tactics outlined in this report. Jeroo Billimoria, founder of CYFI, has often been quoted as saying that systems change requires “a major mindset shift” for social change. We are excited that this mindset shift is well underway. Broadly, this report is an effort to contribute to the conceptualization of systems change, a term that is gaining significant traction among practitioners and funders. We hope that systems change approaches will prove a departure from top-down, hierarchical approaches that fail to include the less powerful and voiceless in their design and decisions. Ultimately, we believe that systems change efforts—including collaborative systems change— provide promise for truly inclusive and transformative approaches to social change.

Appendix 1: CYFI Diagnostic Stages Country diagnostic tool Stages of country diagnostic

Demonstrate interest

1. 2. 3.

Express national target Brainstorm avenues of collaboration Determine CYFI role

Demonstrate participation

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Participation of country in any summit or regional meeting Secure funding Establish governmental working groups Civil society led local initiatives and/or participation in GMW Participation of stakeholders from public and private sectors

Create platform

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Organize youth consultation on national platform Identify objectives Establish a national platform Organize nationally-led awareness activities and/or Government-led GMW Institutionalize national platfom (Incl. resources)

Analyze and Map In-depth

1. 2. 3.

Assess available mapping/resources Organize youth consultation on products, services, policies, and programs 3rd party or giv. Mapping of products, services, policies, and programs

Inital programming

1. 2. 3. 4.

A small-scale, initial effort that precedes a full-on pilot Nationally-led initiatives Monitor and evaluate Organize youth consultation on initial programming

Create national strategy

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Consult broad selection of stakeholders (Inc. Youth) on national strategy Design national strategy Develop implementation plan (roadmap, roles and responsibilities, M&E) Secure resources for implementation Launch national strategy

Implement national survey

1. 2. 3. 4.

Organize youth consultation on implementation of national strategy Develop/adjust educational curricula Develop financial products for children & youth Adjust or promote child-specific/friendly regulations

National pilot

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Prepare pilot Organize youth consultation on national pilot Initiate pilot Monitor impact of pilot Evaluate and adjust according to lessons learned

Scale-up

1. 2. 3. 4.

Secure funding for implementation Implement on a national scale Monitor and evaluate Organize youth consultation on scale-up

Steady state

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Organize nationally-led awareness activities and/or Government-led GMW Monitor results consistently, including long term impact Institutionalize periodic youth consultation on products, policies, and programs Reevaluate and adjust periodically Publish report on strategy, success, failures, etc. SOURCE: CYFI Country Awards 2016 Brief

• CYFI has developed a country diagnostic to assess the level of progress of a country towards achieving Full Economic Citizenship (FEC). Using this diagnostic CYFI has been scoring 148 countries as far back as 2012 • The tool outlines 10 stages that policy makers in a country can take to achieve the desired system change ultimately leading to Full Economic Citizenship • A stage is completed when 2 or more activities corresponding to that stage have been performed. The final state is the “Steady State” (stage 10), indicating that a country has the right policies in place to improve FEC

Appendix 2: Results of Diagnostic Analysis The goal of the diagnostic analysis was to understand if there is a positive correlation between CYFI activities and the FEC of a country

Efforts CYFI Activities (engagements) CYFI with countries over period

Actions policy makers

Full Economic Citizenship (FEC)

Change in country diagnostic score over period

Change in macro-economic variables measuring FEC over period Example:

Establish contact and introduce the idea of ECE and FI for children and youth

Initiator

Arrange calls/webinars to ensure national involvement of GMW participation

Advocate

Knowledge hub

Invite stakeholders to national, regional and international CYFI events

Technical Advisor

Provide a county with technical expertise either through an expert from the network or by CYFI staff

Documentor

Write case studies and best practices from the country's projects/programs

Create platform

Provide CYFI documents for National Strategy Support

Connector

Findings

Demonstrate interest

Inital programming

Implement national survey

Scale-up

There is a positive correlation between the number of activities of CYFI in a country and the country’s improvement along the stages of the country diagnostic over the 2012-2016 period

% of youth that…

Demonstrate participation

Financial inclusion (FI)

Have access to an account at a financial institution (as measured by Worldbank Findex)

Financial education (FE)

Are enrolled in lowersecondary school (as measured by Unicef)

Entrepreneurship

Have opportunities to engage in entrepreneurial activity (as measured by Global Entrepreneurship index)

Analyze and Map In-depth

Create national strategy

National pilot

Steady state

There is a statistically significant relationship between a high country diagnostic score and a country’s financial inclusion. Due to limited data availability, no time series analysis was possible

CYFI activities have helped countries increase their country diagnostic score Average CYFI activities provided to country2, # of CYFI activities 2012-2016�

0-2 stages

3-4 stages Increase in CYFI diagnostic stages�

5-6 stages

Number of countries�

Little support 7 activities on average

Moderate support 17 activities on average

Extensive support 40 activities on average

20 12

Example: Mongolia increased it’s country diagnostic stage from 2 to 8 between 2012-2016, as CYFI performed 103 activities in the country

On average, countries were CYFI performed a greater number of activities had a greater progression in diagnostic stages

� Increase in country diagnostic score is calculated through the difference between the diagnostic score 2016 and diagnostic score 2012 of a country � CYFI activities is the sum of the CYFI activities performed in the stages the country progressed through � Excluding countries that did not have a diagnostic score in 2012 or 2016, had a diagnostic score of ’10’ in 2015 or 2016, and located in Western Europe or Northern America

A higher score on the CYFI country diagnostic tool relates to a greater level of full economic citizenship in a country

Relationship between country diagnostic score and measures of full economic citizenship in a country Correlations significant at the 99% confidence level

On average, if a country scores one stage higher on the CYFI diagnostic tool this relates to:

Financial inclusion

… 4% more children & youth with an account at a financial institution (as measured by the Worldbank Findex)

Financial education

… 2% higher lower secondary-school participation rates (as measured by Unicef)

Entrepreneurship

… 3% higher scores on the global entrepreneurship index (as measured by GEDI.org)

Due to limited data availability, no time series analysis was possible SOURCE: Worldbank Findex (2016), Unicef (2017), GEDI.org (2017)

Endnotes � Love, C. & Sinha, R (2015). Bringing an Entrepreneurial Mindset to the World’s Failing Systems. Harvard Business Review. � See Parsons, T. (1991). The social system. Psychology Press. and Merton, R. K. (1968). Social theory and social structure. Simon and Schuster. � See Holland, J. H. (2000). Emergence: From chaos to order. OUP Oxford. and Cilliers, P., & Spurrett, D. (1999). Complexity and postmodernism: Understanding complex systems. South African Journal of Philosophy, 18(2), 258-274. � Needs full citation: http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/ bitstream/10603/22229/7/07_chapter%203.pdf

�� Scott, W. R. (1995). Organizations and institutions. Foundations for Organizational Science; Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA. �� Powell, W. W., & DiMaggio, P. J. (Eds.). (2012). The new institutionalism in organizational analysis. University of Chicago Press. �� DiMaggio, P. (1988). Interest and agency in institutional theory. Institutional patterns and organizations culture and environment, 3-21. �� Battilana, J., Leca, B., & Boxenbaum, E. (2009). How actors change institutions: towards a theory of institutional entrepreneurship. Academy of Management annals, 3(1), 65-107.

� Le Bon, G. (1895). 1960. The crowd. New York: Viking. � Park, R. E. (1915). The city: Suggestions for the investigation of human behavior in the city environment. American journal of sociology, 20(5), 577-612. � Blumer, H. (1951). Collective behavior. New outline of the principles of sociology, 166-222. � Olson, M. (2009). The logic of collective action (Vol. 124). Harvard University Press. � McCarthy, J. D., & Zald, M. N. (1977). Resource mobilization and social movements: A partial theory. American journal of sociology, 82(6), 1212-1241. and Tilly, C. (1977). From mobilization to revolution. �� Edwards, B., & McCarthy, J. D. (2004). Resources and social movement mobilization. The Blackwell companion to social movements, 116-152. �� Meyer, D. S. (2004). Protest and political opportunities. Annu. Rev. Sociol., 30, 125-145. �� Benford, R. D., & Snow, D. A. (2000). Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment. Annual review of sociology, 26(1), 611-639.

�� Wijen, F., & Ansari, S. (2007). Overcoming inaction through collective institutional entrepreneurship: Insights from regime theory. Organization studies, 28(7), 1079-1100. �� Wheatley, M., & Frieze, D. (2011). Leadership in the age of complexity: From hero to host. Resurgence Magazine, 264(January/ February), 14-17. �� Rittel, H. W., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy sciences, 4(2), 155-169. �� Wheatley, M. J., & Frieze, D. (2011). Walk out walk on: A learning journey into communities daring to live the future now. BerrettKoehler Publishers. �� Kahane, A. (2017). Collaborating with the Enemy: How to Work with People You Don’t Agree With, or Like, or Trust. Berrett-Koehler Publishers. �� Prahalad, C. K. (2006). The Fortune at the Bottom of the Pyramid. Pearson Education India. �� Cornelissen, J. P., & Werner, M. D. (2014). Putting framing in perspective: A review of framing and frame analysis across the management and organizational literature. The Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 181-235.