The author shares insights from workshops with Prof Dave Snowden about Complexity thinking versus Systems thinking. Complexity thinking focuses on understanding the present and evolving rather than aiming for an ideal future. It recognizes that complex systems are influenced by multiple factors, making outcomes unpredictable. Additionally, setting strict targets can harm motivation and lead to unintended consequences. Finally, people are viewed as unique individuals with agency, not as interchangeable parts in a system.

Dave Snowden visited Hull to give a lecture and reconnect with his friend Yasmin Merali, who recently moved there. They discussed the need for clear boundaries between different systems thinking approaches. Snowden believes a multi-dimensional typology could help differentiate these approaches. He mentioned several dimensions to consider, such as causality and power orientation. Snowden plans to create a SenseMaker® database to gather different methods and create this typology.

Polynesian navigators used traditional techniques to navigate the ocean, inspiring modern leadership approaches. Wayfinding leaders adapt to change and help others realize their potential. They focus on being present and responsive to their environment. Key practices include fostering a shared purpose and moving from a state of stillness. This leadership style emphasizes exploration and personal growth.

“Pause and Reflect” emphasizes the importance of taking time to understand our biases and perspectives before acting. It encourages a holistic view of complex situations, considering diverse knowledge systems and relationships. “Sense and Discover” focuses on building awareness of the current situation and the various viewpoints involved. “Make Sense” involves collaboratively figuring out what is happening and exploring multiple possible responses. Finally, “Learn and Adjust” highlights the continuous need to learn from our actions and adapt as necessary.

Matt Bell discusses the need to rethink accountability in public services. He argues that current views often focus on blame rather than learning. Positive accountability should involve open communication and shared responsibilities among diverse stakeholders. At POP+, they implement networked accountability to enhance collaboration and trust. Their Street-to-Scale funding model encourages community action by prioritizing trust and transparency.

Buddhism and evaluation both help people achieve their goals by addressing challenges. The paper discusses how Buddhist concepts can improve evaluation. It highlights five key aspects where Buddhism offers a unique perspective. This approach emphasizes the relationship between evaluators and what they evaluate, and it values the nature of knowledge. Ultimately, applying Buddhist ideas can make evaluation more honest and inclusive.

The report discusses the Human Learning Systems (HLS) approach to public management. It emphasizes that people are at the center of complex systems and have multiple roles in their lives. Practitioners have created case studies and participated in discussions to share their experiences. This approach encourages social learning and emphasizes shared purpose among community actors. The work of various organizations showcases the practical application of HLS principles.

Ralph Stacey, a key figure in organizational complexity, passed away earlier this month. He founded the Complexity & Management Centre at the University of Hertfordshire. Stacey is best known for the Stacy Matrix, which influenced Agile methods like Scrum. He had a background in economics and psychotherapy, which shaped his later work. Stacey’s ideas deserve continued attention and engagement within the field of complexity.

USAID staff are generally familiar with the Local Systems Framework (LSF) and believe it is crucial for sustainability. However, LSF implementation relies heavily on individual champions rather than being institutionalized within the Agency. Most operational units lack dedicated systems experts, which affects their ability to implement the framework effectively. Workshops identified key constraints to LSF implementation and explored potential solutions. A positive perception of LSF’s value is essential for motivating staff to adopt its principles in their work.

The Mike Jackson Lecture 2023 at the University of Hull discusses the importance of complexity science in understanding human systems. It emphasizes using theory-informed practice to facilitate meaningful change in management and public policy. The lecture highlights how to manage complex problems by recognizing patterns and encouraging innovation. Decision-making is improved by addressing the perceptions that influence human interactions. Overall, it advocates for a systems thinking approach to better navigate complexity in various environments.

The literature review by Lisa Denney and colleagues explores accountability in the Pacific region. It highlights how traditional governance and modern accountability concepts intersect in six Pacific countries. The review emphasizes the importance of understanding local contexts and power dynamics in shaping accountability practices. It also discusses various accountability actors, including citizens, and their roles in promoting responsive governance. Finally, the review raises key questions for further research on accountability in the Pacific.

The Pacific region is facing challenges in governance as international competition increases. A new research partnership is exploring accountability ecosystems in Pacific Island Countries. This study focuses on how power is held accountable and the relationships among various actors in society. Traditional governance systems are important and need to be understood by external actors. The research aims to find ways to improve accountability that consider local contexts and interests.

Critical systems thinking combines different approaches to understand complex systems. It recognizes the importance of various perspectives and methodologies. This type of thinking helps us address challenges in human, social, and technological contexts. It encourages collaboration and co-creation for better system awareness. Ultimately, critical systems thinking aims to improve our understanding of the world and how we engage with it.

The blog introduces “Systemic,” a game designed to help policymakers understand and improve complex policy systems. Co-created by Policy Lab and Matteo Menapace, the game allows players to simulate policy-making and test potential changes. It focuses on addressing deep-rooted issues that require a systems approach, like climate change and inequality. Players will learn about how their current policies work and can explore new solutions in a safe environment. A beta version of “Systemic” is available for download, enabling teams to facilitate their own sessions.

The Ecosystem Cards are a tool designed to help individuals and groups understand and engage with socio-ecological systems. They guide users through three phases: diagnosing the current state, envisioning desirable futures, and planning strategic experiments. The process encourages collaboration, as no one can fully represent an ecosystem alone. Each card includes questions, tips, and resources to deepen understanding. The cards were developed through collaboration with various experts in systems change and ecosystem building.

—

Relational Data Practice focuses on combining stories and data to show the impact of building relationships in communities. Traditional data methods may hinder the growth of trust and connections among community members. Instead, organizations should track relationship-building activities like gathering, care, action, and conflict. Collecting and analyzing relational data helps identify community strengths and areas for growth. This approach fosters trust between funders and communities by illustrating progress and potential for impact.

+1 Elevate is a new collaborative fund launching in 2025 aimed at strengthening vulnerable communities in Sub-Saharan Africa. It will support locally-led initiatives that focus on systemic change and resilience in various areas such as health, food security, and the environment. The fund will provide flexible funding and resources to empower these initiatives and enhance their impact. +1 Elevate seeks to connect and amplify the efforts of these organizations to attract more attention and support. Ultimately, it aims to improve community resilience and inform philanthropic practices in the region.

Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning (MEL) in philanthropy is affected by power dynamics that influence how impact is defined and measured. Grantmakers often hold the power to shape MEL processes, which can marginalize the perspectives of grantees. Trust-based relationships can lead to more equitable conversations and decision-making. Employing methods like Forum Theatre can help address these power imbalances and foster collaboration. To improve MEL, it is essential to listen to grantees, adapt approaches to their contexts, and recognize the value of lived experiences.

The text discusses the concept of relationality across different cultures. It highlights how various cultures view relationships with others, nature, and their communities. Indigenous cultures express relationality through terms like kinship, which includes connections to the land and animals. Filipino psychology emphasizes “Kapwa,” showcasing shared identity and mutual care. Other cultures, such as Māori, Japanese, and Chinese, also illustrate the importance of community ties and collective well-being.

USAID’s Local Systems Framework (LSF) is marking its 10th anniversary, prompting plans for a new position paper. The LSF was created to improve international development by shifting from linear thinking to systems thinking. It emphasizes the importance of relationships and co-production among various actors for sustainable outcomes. Over the years, the framework has influenced many development approaches and policies. However, there are still challenges in fully embracing systems thinking, particularly in valuing learning and accepting limits on control.

In the context of polycrisis and systemic collapse, the primary challenge we face is a widely shared sense of collective depression—a lack of agency in regard to the bigger picture. What does it take to serve evolutionary transformation in the face of this collapse? In our view, it takes a form of knowing which extends beyond the current constructs of first-, second- and third-person knowing around which much of our current learning, knowledge, and leadership systems are organized. In this paper, we suggest fourth-person knowing as a distinct epistemology at the intersection of the other three, and we draw on our action research to illuminate five phenomena that point to and distinguish fourth- person knowing: (1) knowing that comes through me but is not of me; (2) knowing that shows up in my individual experience as a decentering of perception; (3) a heightened sense of potential, of possibilities that previously were experienced as unattainable now appear to be in reach; (4) sensing your own agency in helping the ‘universe’ (the larger field) to evolve; and (5) significant long term impact in terms of practical results.

The article “Fourth Person” by Otto Scharmer and Eva Pomeroy discusses a new way of knowing called fourth-person knowing. This concept helps individuals and groups connect deeply with each other and their environment. The authors argue that this deeper awareness can lead to significant societal change. They emphasize the importance of bridging the “knowing-doing gap” to inspire action. Overall, embracing fourth-person knowing can foster a more interconnected and sustainable future.

La Trobe University is working with the UNDP Pacific Office to study accountability in six Pacific countries. The research will explore local views on accountability and the key players involved. It aims to highlight how accountability functions differently across the region. The project will also identify opportunities to improve accountability led by Pacific Islanders. Various country studies and a literature review will support this research.

The article discusses the shift from “field building” to ecosystem approaches in supporting place-based initiatives. It emphasizes the need for collaboration among diverse organizations to create greater impact. Ecosystems focus on co-creating value rather than scaling individual efforts. This approach encourages flexibility and innovation while recognizing the roles of both competition and collaboration. Ultimately, it aims to enhance community-led practices and improve outcomes for local challenges.

This policy paper explores responsive governance in the Pacific, developed by UNDP and La Trobe University. It emphasizes the need for locally tailored governance models that consider regional values and practices. The analysis draws on international literature and insights from a workshop with key stakeholders in the Pacific. It suggests that hybrid and locally led governance models could lead to significant changes in governance systems. The paper aims to guide UNDP’s efforts in creating more inclusive and accountable governance in the region.

International organizations like USAID can help local actors lead development by respecting their priorities and decisions. They should create partnerships that empower local groups and strengthen their abilities. Funding should support local organizations and make them equal partners in projects. Donors need to ask local leaders how they want to work together and adjust their practices accordingly. The goal is to build a more effective and sustainable system that centers on local leadership.

Philanthropy should focus on improving government systems to create fair and sustainable societies. Strong governance is essential for addressing social and economic issues effectively. Donors can support initiatives that promote transparency, accountability, and civil service capabilities. Countries like Malawi show how strategic philanthropy can lead to meaningful progress in governance. Investing in good governance worldwide is crucial for lasting positive change.

The session at the LCS Forum 2024 focused on strengthening local capacities for development. Participants discussed the importance of collaboration among local partners and communities. They emphasized the need to create flexible action plans that align with local goals. The goal is to empower organizations and improve educational outcomes through collective efforts. Overall, the forum aimed to brainstorm solutions for enhancing capacity building initiatives.

The LCS Forum 2024 discusses how to improve local capacity and leadership. It emphasizes the importance of supporting local actors and building trust among stakeholders. The forum highlights the need for shared understanding and collaboration to address community issues. It also focuses on social accountability as a way to strengthen governance and improve public services. Overall, the goal is to empower communities to take action and drive positive change.

Facing the great scale of societal challenges, philanthropic organizations are increasingly calling for systems change. Evaluating systems change requires innovative approaches that respond to the complexities of such change in ways that support equity and multiracial democracy rather than undermining them.

A key concern in evaluating systems change is how to do so rigorously. Rigor has traditionally been equated with evaluative criteria such as independence and objectivity, and experimental methods and evidence hierarchies which sit uncomfortably with both complexity and equity. Yet when taking an alternative approach, many philanthropic organizations fear that without these standards, there are no standards at all.

Establishing means to assess evidence standards is a key challenge for complexity-informed evaluation. This article argues that more appropriate, flexible, and inclusive standards for assessing evidence qualityin systems-change efforts are achievable. Based on a review of evidence standards, learning from the causal pathways and inclusive rigor networks, and using the example of evaluation of the CLARISSA program, it lays out a set of principles and tools to guide assessment by philanthropic organizations of evidence quality in systems-change evaluation.

The presentation discusses mental models related to systems change in evaluation and strategy. It highlights the importance of aligning these mental models with the systems in which they operate. Two main models are explored: Systems Dynamics and Systems Emergence. Misalignment between models can lead to conflicts and ineffective strategies. The session encourages participants to make their mental models visible and take action to align them.

The Learning Framework helps teams engage in evidence-based decision-making for systems change. It emphasizes setting boundaries, integrating diverse perspectives, and acknowledging uncertainty. The Framework consists of five elements: hypotheses, assumptions, learning questions, evidence collection, and sensemaking. Regular reflection and adaptation are crucial to ensure effective learning and course correction. This approach aims to improve understanding and outcomes in complex systems.

The author explores “Ecotone Organising” as a new model for effective collective action, especially in climate transitions. This approach emphasizes creating spaces that are not owned by any single organization, fostering collaboration across sectors. It aims to build relationships and support initiatives through shared capabilities and flexible governance. Examples of existing models similar to Ecotone Organising include social labs and collective impact initiatives. The goal is to unlock new possibilities for collaboration and address complex challenges together.

The author emphasizes the need for a new approach to development that focuses on collaboration across sectors. They highlight the UNDP’s portfolio approach, which addresses complex challenges by moving beyond traditional projects. This method has successfully mobilized significant funding and demonstrated the need for long-term systemic change. The author calls for a transformation in public sector governance to tackle pressing global issues effectively. They urge stakeholders to adopt this collaborative model as the default for achieving lasting impact.

The text discusses the importance of “collaborative agency” in the context of cybersystems and the current global challenges. It emphasizes that understanding ourselves happens through relationships with others, requiring both responsibility and the ability to respond. The “praxis of co” refers to the practice of collaboration, which can take many forms and is influenced by technology and social interactions. Effective collaboration needs a thoughtful design that acknowledges the unique histories and perspectives of participants. Finally, achieving meaningful collaboration requires a commitment to transparency and ethical purpose.

The text discusses the importance of community and connection. It emphasizes that society is about friendly associations and shared humanity. Words have deep meanings that can reflect our experiences and transformations. The author encourages us to see the beauty in our communities and the potential for growth. Ultimately, we are both the gardeners and the garden, learning to nurture each other.

Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson, and James Robinson won the Nobel Prize for their work on economic institutions. They argue that inclusive institutions lead to prosperity, while extractive institutions hinder growth. The author highlights that their analysis overlooks the interconnectedness of British and colonial economies, particularly regarding slavery. He urges economists to engage more deeply with historical perspectives and the complexities of institutions. Understanding both the positive and negative aspects of institutions is essential for better policy-making today.

Over the last few years, many of us have been talking more and more about the importance of putting relationships first in our organisations, systems and communities. In being party to some of these brilliant conversations, and developing our own thinking, we’ve amassed an ever-growing list of useful terms and phrases that help us explore ideas around relationship-centred practice, and make the case for it.

Some of these terms are, by now, well-established; others have made their way into the world more recently. You might have different definitions or explanations for some of the terms. Our aim in sharing this list is not to draw boundaries around their definition or lay claim to their usage, but rather to help expand our shared vocabulary and equip us all to advocate for relational ways of working.

The Local Systems Position Paper from USAID outlines how the agency plans to use systems thinking in its work. It emphasizes the importance of understanding and engaging local systems to achieve sustainable results. USAID has identified six approaches to strengthen its systems practice. The paper also highlights the need for humility, curiosity, and collaboration with local actors. Overall, it aims to promote resilience and adaptability in development efforts.

The literature review emphasizes the importance of understanding systems before proposing solutions. It highlights that no single actor can drive change alone, and collaboration is essential. Systems thinking acknowledges that reforms must align with existing incentives and contexts. Engaging the right people is crucial for effective systems change. Ultimately, systems change is iterative and unpredictable, requiring ongoing adaptation and learning.

Samantha Power, the leader of USAID, wants to give more decision-making power to local actors in development. Many countries, like the UK and Denmark, support the idea of localization, but it is challenging to implement. There is no clear definition of what localization means or how to apply it effectively. Donor agencies often have systems that make it hard for local organizations to participate. To improve localization, donors should clearly define it, streamline processes, and learn from their experiences.

A new book by Dan Davies highlights a crisis of unaccountability in organizations, leading to public frustration and conspiracy theories. Many systems, from customer service to corporate governance, lack identifiable accountability, causing poor decisions. This unresponsiveness is linked to a focus on maximizing shareholder value, which neglects broader social and environmental concerns. Davies suggests that using cybernetics, a field focused on systems and feedback, could help improve decision-making processes. He argues for making private equity firms accountable for their debts to foster better corporate governance and reduce systemic issues.

Dr. Michael C. Jackson discusses systems thinking and its role in managing complexity. He emphasizes the importance of understanding complex systems for effective decision-making. Systems thinking allows for diverse perspectives, helping to clarify issues within a system. Jackson also highlights the challenges faced when applying traditional science to complex situations. Overall, he advocates for critical systems thinking as a way to improve understanding and problem-solving in complex environments.

USAID launched a Local Systems Position Paper to promote systems practice in development work. This approach emphasizes understanding local contexts and fostering strong relationships within communities. It encourages action and collaboration, moving beyond mere analysis to create lasting partnerships. The paper outlines practical steps for integrating systems thinking into programs to enhance locally led development. Overall, it aims to elevate local knowledge and ensure effective engagement in the development process.

The author critiques the view that democracy alone explains prosperity in the West, arguing that this perspective overlooks colonial extraction’s role. They highlight that the classification of countries as “good” often favors Western democracies. The piece suggests that while democracy is important, it coexisted with exploitative practices in history. The author emphasizes that China’s rapid economic growth occurred without adopting Western-style democracy. Lastly, they call for a new approach to understanding global development that moves beyond Western-centric ideologies.

Renee Lertzman reflects on the importance of understanding human unconsciousness in her journey through psychoanalysis and personal growth. She emphasizes the need for safe environments that support personal and collective healing. Lertzman connects her insights to the Jewish concept of Tikkun Olam, which means repairing the world by addressing our own brokenness. She shares a poignant moment with her mother, discussing the significance of acknowledging past injustices. Ultimately, she encourages readers to engage with their feelings and foster connections for healing and growth.

Transition mapping is a new approach to diagnose and support changes in systems, particularly in regenerative agriculture. It helps identify key areas where capital can effectively intervene to drive transformation. By focusing on underlying drivers and challenges, it prevents misallocation of resources and uncovers investment opportunities. This method emphasizes the need for coordinated efforts among various capital allocators to achieve greater impact. Ultimately, transition mapping aims to guide sustainable investments that foster significant systemic change.

International development organizations often seek quick “best practice” solutions, known as “best buys,” for complex problems like education. However, these approaches overlook the unique contexts and political factors that influence the effectiveness of interventions. Many recommended strategies focus too heavily on test scores and simple metrics, ignoring broader learning outcomes and complex changes needed in education systems. The evidence supporting these “best buys” is often limited and biased, favoring certain studies while ignoring others. A more effective approach would consider context and relationships, advocating for “best fit” strategies instead.

The article argues that valuing interventions in education should focus on relationships rather than just technical methods. It highlights that accountability is relational, and strong connections among stakeholders can improve outcomes. The current “smart buys” approach overlooks the importance of these relationships and the complexities of implementation. Donors are encouraged to invest in understanding systems and engaging local actors to support effective education practices. Overall, a shift in focus from narrow research methods to broader relational dynamics is needed for better educational results.

Participatory action research (PAR) is a collaborative approach to solving complex challenges like climate change and social equity. It combines reflection and action in cycles to create sustainable solutions that involve diverse voices. Key principles of PAR include collaboration, empowerment, and addressing root causes of problems. This method encourages critical reflection, helping participants rethink their assumptions and improve their strategies. Overall, PAR fosters inclusive and adaptive solutions that are relevant to local communities.

The text discusses different places to intervene in a system, ranked by effectiveness. It emphasizes that changing our mindset is crucial for meaningful change. Systems are seen as fictions we create for our purposes, not fixed objects. Real change may take time and requires inner transformation. Ultimately, we should learn to engage with systems more lightly and allow reality to guide us.

Indy Johar, the innovative founder of Dark Matter Labs and a Professor of Planetary Civics, shares his insights on urgent global challenges. He discusses the alarming potential for societal collapse and the foundational shifts needed to redefine our relationship with the planet. With a focus on community and interconnectedness, he urges transformative actions to avert crises. Johar emphasizes the critical role of sustainable practices and resilience in creating a hopeful future, encouraging a conscious evolution towards a planetary civilization.

A new online course on Data-Powered Positive Deviance (DPPD) is now available. The course teaches how to use digital data to find successful practices for solving complex problems. It includes five modules covering the DPPD method, identifying positive deviants, and designing effective interventions. This course is for anyone interested in making positive change through data, from beginners to experienced professionals. You can join for free and earn a certificate by visiting atingi.org and searching for “Data-Powered Positive Deviance.”

This week, twenty people met on Zoom to discuss the language of relationships. They explored the need for a broader vocabulary to describe different kinds of relationships. The group emphasized the importance of understanding that terms may have different meanings for different people. They also discussed the significance of naming ideas to advocate for change. Overall, the conversation highlighted the need for deeper understanding and reflection in our relational language.

The United Nations Development Programme is developing guidance for Systems Monitoring, Learning, and Evaluation (SMLE) in partnership with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. They have held several workshops to gather feedback from practitioners on this evolving approach. The guidance aims to help organizations transition from traditional Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning (MEL) to a more systemic approach. Key challenges include understanding diverse organizational contexts and bridging the gap between traditional and systems-oriented practices. Adopting SMLE is a journey that requires commitment to learning and adapting to complex development challenges.

We are delighted to introduce this limited series produced by the Portfolio MEL (PMEL) programme in Nepal, funded by the British Embassy Kathmandu and implemented by Abt Global. We talk about systems practice through an action-oriented lens and see what has and has not worked in practice. The episodes will debunk complexities around systems thinking, portfolio approaches, adaptive management, PEA in action and evidence use for impact. In short, some of the deceptively simple or surprisingly complex approaches used today in our sector.

Focusing too much on outcomes can distract us from what truly matters in complex social change efforts. We should embrace a cycle of reflection and adaptation instead of rigidly pursuing specific goals. It’s important to regularly zoom out and reassess our assumptions about the world around us. This approach allows us to stay flexible and responsive to changing circumstances. Ultimately, meaningful change requires us to balance focus with the ebb and flow of our dynamic environment.

The term “polycrisis” describes the many interconnected threats facing humanity today, like climate change and inequality. Experts often react with fear, focusing on small solutions rather than systemic change. Traditional development thinking is based on outdated views of progress and control, which can ignore local solutions and diverse perspectives. New approaches should recognize the complexity of social and natural systems and value local knowledge and creativity. Embracing these ideas can lead to better development strategies and help us address the challenges of the polycrisis.

We hope you enjoyed the first part of our deep dive into portfolio practices in the British Embassy Kathmandu in Nepal and the British High Commission in Nigeria. This episode is a continuation of our conversation with Federica and Craig, this time exploring how to work at the portfolio level beyond ODA, how to support a learning culture and the role of external facilitators in systems practice.

—

—

Peter J Evans admires Ken Opalo’s rapid and insightful analysis during Kenya’s political crisis. He values Opalo’s ability to provide both critical analysis and actionable advice. Evans even created visuals to better understand and share Opalo’s ideas on fiscal challenges. By sketching system diagrams, Evans aims to help non-specialists grasp complex issues discussed in Opalo’s blogs. The visuals serve as a tool to digest and apply the economic insights presented.

The author is surprised that people outside of technical philosophy are interested in complexity. They emphasize that simplifying complex problems can lead to losing important qualities. Understanding complexity requires recognizing its limits and nuances. The discussion explores how cause and effect are more complicated in complex systems. Ultimately, the author suggests using terms like “influence” or “constraint” instead of just “cause” to better describe these relationships.

The text discusses the concept of constraints in complex systems. It explains how these constraints interact and can lead to emergent behaviors. Understanding these constraints can help us predict outcomes in dynamic environments. The relationship between context and constraints is crucial in analyzing complex situations. Ultimately, recognizing these patterns can enhance our ability to navigate unpredictability.

Dave Snowden receives both constructive and misguided criticisms of the Cynefin Framework on social media. Some critics misunderstand the framework by not reading supporting materials and confusing it with other models. He believes that reductionism in science is not inherently bad and can help explain complex systems. Snowden argues that complexity science reveals patterns that may vary but still follow an underlying structure. He emphasizes that abandoning science is unwise and often stems from a lack of understanding.

Dave Snowden discusses the concepts of emergence and regularity in complex systems. He emphasizes that emergence arises from the interactions of actants, not just their individual parts. Snowden criticizes the idea of always taking a holistic approach, noting it can distort understanding. He stresses the importance of monitoring for weak signals and managing interactions within the system. Finally, he highlights that while regularities help us navigate the world, disruptions can lead to significant changes.

USAID is actively fighting corruption, which harms development in health, education, and other sectors. Corruption costs developing countries about $1.26 trillion each year and fuels violence and crime. To combat this, USAID has introduced an Anti-Corruption Policy and is increasing funding for anti-corruption efforts. They are also working with local journalists to expose corruption and improve accountability in supply chains, especially in the energy sector. By mobilizing collective action and resources, USAID aims to strengthen democratic institutions and support vulnerable communities.

Alicia Juarrero explores how constraints shape complex systems and our actions within them. Her ideas emphasize that context changes everything, influencing our behavior and identity in different settings. She introduced the concept of “constraint regimes,” which are stable patterns in dynamic systems, like whirlpools. In her recent seminar, she discussed how to navigate change in complex systems by focusing on feelings and contexts. Understanding these ideas helps us manage complexity in various environments, whether stable or turbulent.

Dave Snowden discusses the importance of mindset in understanding complexity. He emphasizes that individual behaviors and mental models influence how people perceive and interact with their environment. Snowden suggests that thinking holistically [AI’s summary, which I’m sure Dave would object to!] and recognizing context is crucial for effective decision-making. He also highlights the need to change discourse and foster collective thinking. Overall, he advocates for a shift in how we approach leadership and collaboration within complex systems.

Systemic challenges need systemic solutions, but current funding practices often focus on short-term projects. These funding methods do not support the collaborative and flexible approaches necessary for lasting change. Systemic investing aims to strategically use various forms of capital to create transformative effects in human and natural systems. It promotes deeper collaboration and recognizes the need for different types of financing for different outcomes. The goal is to enhance understanding and adaptability within interconnected systems, allowing initiatives to thrive together.

The article discusses how to use insights from The Foundation Review to create meaningful change. It emphasizes the importance of building trust and community among participants. The authors highlight the role of mental models in shaping strategies for addressing complex problems. They suggest that aligning mental models can enhance collaboration and impact. The overall goal is to foster systems change through collective learning and action.

Gregory Bateson was a key thinker of the counterculture, yet he is often forgotten today. His work focused on the connections between technology, environment, and psychology. Bateson believed that society is facing dangers when these elements conflict. He introduced important concepts like the feedback loop and the double bind, helping us understand complex issues. His ideas remain relevant as we navigate the challenges of the digital age.

System work is not about solutions; it’s about discovering and steering local pathways for change at a pace appropriate for our ability to learn and for what local communities can enact and absorb.” – Stanford Social Innovation Review. This quote perfectly sets the tone for part one of our two-part series on USAID’s Local Systems Position Paper. This paper isn’t just another framework—it’s a bold vision for reimagining development by prioritizing local actors within the system and locally-led solutions. In this episode, we’ll delve into the thinking behind the paper, explore its key ideas, and discuss how it fosters local ownership, trust, and sustainable systems. What inspired this shift, and what could it mean for the future of development? Let’s dive in!