Systems Approach handout at MASH Lab 2012

Using Whole Systems approaches for the MASH Lab An overview for inquiry team members May 2012

1. Introduction This short paper explains how whole systems approaches are effective means by which to undertake the second stage of Dudley’s MASH Lab, by introducing some systems theory to our situation. It explains how a systemic appreciative inquiry can be undertaken for each of the three areas formed by the Our Society Planning Group following stakeholder engagement at the MASH Lab Launch on 17th April 2012; • Collaborative approaches to service delivery • Engagement and communication • Resource sharing Throughout the course of the three inquiries, the content of each area may shift as our approach is that the inquiries are emergent, i.e. the results are not pre-determined or restricted in

any way.

2. Complex and Messy Situations Services traditionally provided through the public sector are often required to meet a diverse range of needs as the issues and requirements of people requesting or accessing these services are complex and ‘messy’ (1). The situations which public services attempt to manage or support have many influences upon them, and so are dynamic, unpredictable and subject to many changes over time.

These are sometimes called ‘wicked problems’ (2), which, because of their complex and dynamic nature, cannot be effectively resolved and managed through traditional single linear, problem solving approaches.

For public services to be effective, a wide range of stakeholders from across different sectors and individual service recipients need to be engaged in design and delivery of those services. These stakeholders however, can have radically different values and beliefs; alongside diverse frameworks and systems for understanding and managing a variety of issues.

1

The three areas of inquiry which have been developed through Dudley’s research with local groups which led to the MASH Lab are also complex, messy and dynamic.

Whole systems practice utilises a broad set of approaches which help unpack complex and dynamic situations, particularly where views and frameworks for addressing them are diverse.

Through these approaches, it is possible to develop a better understanding of: • the overarching purpose of the organizations and / or systems; • what the customer is asking us for; how they want to transact with service providers and what matters to them; • how this aligns to meeting purpose; • how we currently perform against this; • the causes of unplanned costs / unforeseen consequences • how we then improve this from the customer viewpoint.

Social and Organisational Learning Engaging a range of stakeholders in a whole systems approach to a service inquiry or review, creates an environment where those involved can actively learn and understand how their own, and others practice, has evolved. This is achieved through building their appreciation of the different relational dynamics between providers and recipients, as well as between different services, through ongoing activity and reflection. An important attribute therefore, of whole systems approaches are their focus on embedding social learning whilst developing services.

This systemic approach to managing change and learning ensures that, when designing strategy and delivery, consideration is given to the potential positive and negative impact of choices made on the whole system, including users and other organisations. This should serve to avoid unintended consequences which can often lead to unexpected costs.

The ability to self-organise is the strongest form of system resilience. A system that can evolve can survive almost any change, by changing itself ... insistence on a single culture shuts down learning and cuts back resilience.

Donatella Meadows: Thinking in Systems: a primer

Building a Collaborative Learning Environment and Culture Because organisations learn through individuals, it is essential that collaborative approaches are developed that are inclusive, as those that exclude wider stakeholders create organisations which are less motivated to learn (3). Hyatt and Kaplan identify three critical features for learning as being: • The conscious self –which listens and engages with others; 2

• The centred self- where we define our values; • The emergent self – which is aware of our personal power and influence.

They advocate for people to experience sustainable learning then organisations ‘processes and practices must ensure that the conscious self and centred self are open to the emergent self’.

The approach we are endeavouring to develop through Our Society in Dudley borough is one which values shared reflective learning. Through participation in the MASH lab approach stakeholders can:



 Open up their ‘conscious self’ by exploring mutually agreed situations and services;  This should enable them to build understanding how their ‘centred self’s’ perceptions and values translate into different perspectives of what is required from a service;  Thus facilitating a shared understanding of the practices and frameworks which have emerged through both their individual and organisational influence; And a clearer understanding of what it feels like to navigate these from the perspective of others.

Appreciation A key component of an organisational or social learning approach is developing appreciation. The concept of appreciation was introduced

by Geoffrey Vickers, who over many years explored it in a diverse range of settings and situations. In the context of collaborative decision making, Vickers identified appreciation as a three step process: 1. A reality judgment about what is (observed) 2. Value judgments around what ought to be (expected) and 3. Instrumental judgements about what can be done to reconcile the difference between what is observed and the expected standard.

This process is depicted in diagram 1 on the following page (from Wyk, 1997) This is a dynamic process constantly self adjusting to both external and internal changes and influences, and can take place at both an individual and collective level.

If collective decision making is to be effective and sustainable an appreciative approach needs to be built through a process of collaborative social learning. The MASH Lab process provides such an opportunity. Part of its ambition is to create safe and creative spaces where stakeholder participants can explore how services have evolved, including how different individual and organisational values and frameworks, shape and influence decision making and delivery. This could foster a shared and more transparent understanding of how different stakeholders can better interact within the system, providing opportunities to negotiate a more shared vision and values, and ultimately allowing more effective services to be designed.

3

Diagram 1: Appreciation as a 3 step process

Next Steps: - a systemic appreciative inquiry This next stage in the MASH Lab journey aims to develop a systemic appreciative inquiry through developing the each of the Investigative Team’s participant’s appreciation of the different perspectives that have: • shaped current practice and • influenced different stakeholder’s expectations.

Each team will undertake a series of meetings with different stakeholders who have some stake in one or all of the three inquiry areas. These meetings will be used to explore what purpose different stakeholders ascribe to each inquiry area and their experiences in shaping and engaging in it to date.

By listening and reflecting on these experiences participants will be afforded an opportunity to develop their appreciation of how these areas are viewed from other stakeholders perspectives, so they can better understand the constraints or challenges which other stakeholders perceive to shape the current practice or expectations.

Compiled by Bridget Brickley and Joanne Weston, Dudley Community Partnership May 2012

4

References and additional papers (1) Ackoff (2004) Paper http://www.acasa.upenn.edu/RLAConfPaper.pdf (2) Rittel, H.W.J. and Webber, M. M. (1973) Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences 4 (3) Hyatt, J. and Kaplan, A. (2006) ) ‘Seeing differently? Donors as learning organizations. Space for learning?’, Alliance Magazine, June.

Vickers, G (1995) The Art of Judgement: A study of policy making, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks CA. A paper by Blackmore, C (2004) on Vickers work http://oro.open.ac.uk/3237/1/Learning_to_appreciate.._Blackmore.pdf Wyk Paper: http://www.systems-thinking.ca/myfiles/Appreciative%20systems.pdf

5