Deconstructing the Bird Cage How Social Entrepreneurs are Catalyzing Systems Change by
YO R DA N O S E YO E L , J O H N K A N I A , A N D K I M SY M A N
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Executive Summary In 2019, New Profit launched the Systemic Solutions Initiative to investigate whether the field of social entrepreneurship, which has spurred sector innovation at the program and policy level for the past several decades, could also function as a catalyst for holistic systems change.
To examine this question, New Profit’s Systemic Solutions team has engaged in conversation and analysis with over two dozen social entrepreneurs in the U.S. who are attempting to work at the systemic level of change. We’ve sought to understand how a social entrepreneur’s systemic work differs in nature from scaling programmatic work and the implications for required organizational and leadership capacities. In the process, we have identified three “system impact models” that these social entrepreneurs are pursuing. In this article, we share our emerging understanding of these three models as well as questions and implications for social entrepreneurs who might wish to pursue them.
E X E C U T I V E S U M M A RY
Key Sections How Systems Change Happens We explore a framework that has deeply informed our understanding of social entrepreneurs pursing systems change. The framework defines systems change as “shifting the conditions that hold a problem in place.” There are six systemic conditions that hold problems in place: policies, practices, resource flows, relationships and connections, power dynamics, and mental models. These six conditions occur at three different levels with respect to their visibility to players in the system, largely due to how explicit, or tangible, they are made to most people. The three levels are Structural, Relational, and Transformational. Holistic, sustainable systems change cannot happen without focused efforts at all three levels.
System Impact Models We share three “system impact models” that seem promising to us as approaches to achieve holistic systems change. None of these system impact models are new in and of themselves. In fact, as approaches to systems change, they have been around for decades. Nonetheless, these approaches have the potential to take on increased salience when employed by social entrepreneurs. The system impact models we discuss in the article are as follows:
• Fostering an Ecosystem: Supporting a set of interdependent actors (often cross-sector) in making progress towards a common goal by helping players collaborate and co-create in mutually reinforcing ways (examples explored: FoodCorps and The Burns Institute). • Building a Movement: Strengthening agency amongst a group of individuals (often marginalized) who share common cause so that they have greater personal and collective capacity to change oppressive systems and achieve their goals (examples explored: GirlTrek and The People). • Changing Government Systems: Catalyzing and supporting holistic change in government that results in transforming the quality and the scale of positive outcomes influenced by a particular agency (examples explored: Family Independence Initiative and Prosecutor Impact).
Deconstructing the Bird Cage
3
E X E C U T I V E S U M M A RY
Challenges in the Work We share seven challenges that we observe all the social entrepreneurs focused on systems change facing, regardless of their system impact model:
1. “The Fierce Urgency of Now”: Social entrepreneurs seeking to achieve this type of impact must continually wrestle with how to balance the incremental progress of today with the larger revolutionary change they aspire to achieve in the longer term. 2. Balancing Scale and Impact: For social entrepreneurs seeking systems change, the question of scale is complex, as the deep layers of relational and transformational change are cultural and informed by context. This creates a tension between scale and impact for social entrepreneurs, which they must wrestle with in order to identify a culturally and strategically appropriate resolution. 3. Measuring What Matters: While the field has progressed in its understanding here, the question of how to measure systems change is a persistent challenge confronting social entrepreneurs and funders. 4. Money, Money, Money: Systems change models are by design in conflict with the dominant paradigm in philanthropy that focuses on short-term, quickly scalable, and easy to measure solutions largely at the level of structural change (i.e. practices, policies, resource flows). 5. “Every Action Has an Equal and Opposite Reaction”: Social entrepreneurs seeking systems change not only need an offensive strategy but a defensive one in order to persevere through what often are better capitalized and powerful forces devoted to holding existing systemic conditions in place. 6. Adaptation is the Rule Rather than the Exception: For social entrepreneurs attempting systems change (and particularly for their boards), the assumption should be that their model, approach, and theory of change will need to be revised regularly, no matter their degree of experience or how strategic they are. 7. Systems Change is an “Inside-Out” Game: Real change starts with recognizing that not only are we a part of the systems we seek to change, many of us often benefit from the “brokenness” of the system. Our actions won’t become more effective until we shift the nature of the awareness and thinking behind our actions.
Deconstructing the Bird Cage
4
E X E C U T I V E S U M M A RY
Leadership in the Work Because of the multi-dimensional, multi-actor nature of systems change, one cannot drive systems change by oneself. The goal should be to help bring about systems change by catalyzing leadership in others. In the article we briefly discuss three core capabilities that systems change leaders must possess in order to catalyze collective leadership in others.
1. Helping others to see the larger system 2. Encouraging reflection and more generative conversation 3. Shifting from reactive problem solving to co-creating the future
As New Profit continues our exploration of social entrepreneurs engaged in systems change we hope to gain an even deeper understanding of how these dimensions of collective leadership play out across system impact models.
Concluding Perspectives Given what New Profit is observing related to how systems change happens, we have developed the following five investment criteria to inform our selection of social entrepreneurs engaged in systems change. The social entrepreneur must:
• Have or create proximity to those most affected by the problem, engaging them as assets and cocreators to develop solutions • Be system-aware (e.g. understand the relationships and dynamics at play between players and resources in the system) • Focus her/his efforts towards shifting multiple interrelated systemic conditions across the three levels of systems change • Give sufficient attention to the deeper relational and transformative levers of systems change that ultimately are the source of long term sustainable change • View and embody collective leadership as a critical part of the work in achieving systems change
As our work in systems change unfolds, we plan to continue sharing what we are learning about the role of social entrepreneurs in systems change, and we invite your reactions and reflections.
Deconstructing the Bird Cage
5
225 Franklin Street, Suite 350 Boston, MA 02110 info@newprofit.org www.newprofit.org
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY