This approach sees each problem as linked to others. It studies links among components of the system. It avoids focusing just on single events.
Government often encounters problems that are intertwined. Regular methods can miss the ties between problems. With this approach, the broader context is clearer.
This approach helps governments spot underlying problems. This leads to more effective solutions. The approach avoids unexpected policy outcomes.
Collaboration across government is supported by systems thinking. Silos are eliminated in government by systems thinking. This improves communication and coordination.
It lifts the quality of decision making. Effects of decisions are easier to predict. Policies become more sustainable with these insights.
This method is gaining popularity among governments. It supports creative responses to change. Challenging policy issues benefit from this approach.
It allows reaction to new challenges. Past experiences guide future decisions. Policies can change and adapt more easily.
It builds resilience into government policy. Problems can be stopped before they grow. It supports strategic planning.
It values input and assessment. Real-world data inform policy updates. Government policy keeps improving over time.
It fits into all policy phases. Systems thinking is helpful in every phase. Effectiveness is maintained.
Systems thinking also supports public engagement. Diverse groups are better understood. Inclusive policies are created.
Governments can use systems thinking to break old patterns. It stops mistakes from returning. This approach fosters a culture of learning and improvement.
Systems thinking cracks tough issues. Flexible thinking is promoted. Climate and health issues are addressed.
Various perspectives are welcomed. Diverse input is valued. It results in well-rounded policies.
Skills development is important. Governments support staff development. It equips staff for challenges.
Resources are managed more efficiently. Best actions are found. Money is spent efficiently.
Results are measured effectively. The approach uses specific indicators. Progress is easier to observe.
Openness is promoted in government. Dialogue with citizens increases. Public confidence grows.
Overall, systems thinking can lead to better government policy. It creates more effective, resilient, and inclusive solutions. Governments should consider using systems thinking in all policy areas.
new ideas for improving policy making cannot mask the shortfall in funding that many public services are facing.
from complexity to capability: in this blog post, kristian hudson, yharc implementation specialist's recent podcast conversation with professor harvey maylor explores how embracing uncertainty and the interconnectedness of real-world systems – core tenets of complexity science – can revolutionise implementation science. we dive into practical applications and how to shift systems towards better outcomes.
systems thinking brings problems to the surface, making it easier for governments to collectively develop, influence and shape solutions, including in relation to grand missions, policy domains and governments themselves.
in a world of rapid change and complex challenges, governments are increasingly recognizing the need to think ahead, plan better, and work together. the ministry of finance, national planning and trade of seychelles realized the potential of strategic foresight and systems thinking for adopting a more integrated approach to strategic planning. what started as a collaboration between the government of seychelles, the resident coordinator office (rco) for mauritius and seychelles in 2022, the united nations department of economic and social affairs (un desa), and unitar, is gradually evolving into a way of working for the ministry.
guest blog from the applied systems thinking in practice group, school of engineering & innovation, the open university (uk) systems thinking in times of complex challenges the covid-19 pandemic has shown what governments can do when faced with an existential threat: the climate and associated emergencies are existential threats. these will require even more of governments and of governance. further, these new ways of governing are what is needed to enable governments to achieve real...
by pete barbrook-johnson, co-author of systems mapping: how to build and use causal models of systems.
by catherine hobbs and gerald midgley systems leadership involves organisations, including governments, collaborating to address complex issues and achieve necessary systemic transformations. so, i…
a systems thinking approach is essential for public health policy development, offering a framework to navigate the dynamic complexities inherent in public health issues. this methodology enables policymakers to comprehend the interconnections ...
this post forms one part of the policy analysis in 750 words series overview and connects to previous posts on complexity. the first 750 words tick along nicely, then there is a picture of a cat ha…
context knowledge mobilisation (km) is a vital strategy in efforts to improve public health policy and practice. linear models describing knowledge transfer and translation have moved towards multi-directional and complexity-attuned approaches where knowledge is produced and becomes meaningful through social processes. there are calls for systems approaches to km but little guidance on how this can be operationalised. this paper describes the contribution that systems thinking can make to km and provides guidance about how to put it into action. methods we apply a model of systems thinking (which focuses on leveraging change in complex systems) to eight km practices empirically identified by others. we describe how these models interact and draw out some key learnings for applying systems thinking practically to km in public health policy and practice. examples of empirical studies, tools and targeted strategies are provided. findings systems thinking can enhance and fundamentally transform km. it upholds a pluralistic view of knowledge as informed by multiple parts of the system and reconstituted through use. mobilisation is conceived as a situated, non-prescriptive and potentially destabilising practice, no longer conceptualised as a discrete piece of work within wider efforts to strengthen public health but as integral to and in continual dialogue with those efforts. a systems approach to km relies on contextual understanding, collaborative practices, addressing power imbalances and adaptive learning that responds to changing interactions between mobilisation activities and context. conclusion systems thinking offers valuable perspectives, tools and strategies to better understand complex problems in their settings and for strengthening km practice. we make four suggestions for further developing empirical evidence and debate about how systems thinking can enhance our capacity to mobilise knowledge for solving complex problems – (1) be specific about what is meant by ‘systems thinking’, (2) describe counterfactual km scenarios so the added value of systems thinking is clearer, (3) widen conceptualisations of impact when evaluating km, and (4) use methods that can track how and where knowledge is mobilised in complex systems.
by catherine hobbs and gerald midgley. originally published on the integration and implementation in
this blog launches “systemic” – a game that simulates how policy-making systems function and possible shifts that can be made to improve policy outcomes. systemic has been inspired by the world of board games, and was co-created by policy lab
increased systems thinking capacity—that is, the capacity to consider systemic effects of policies and actions—is necessary for translating knowledge on sustainable development goals’ (sdgs) interactions into practice. various models and tools that seek to support more evidence-based policy-making have been developed with the purpose of exploring system effects across sdgs. however, these often lack integration of behavioral aspects and contextual factors that influence the decision-making process. we analyze three applications of a decision-support approach called sdg synergies, which aims at building capacity in systems thinking among decision-makers and implementing agencies. our objective is to explore how behavior and context influences whether and how knowledge is taken up and acted upon when making decisions. drawing on empirical material from mongolia, colombia, and sri lanka, we identify three sets of mechanisms that appear important for enabling more systemic thinking: system boundaries (time, scale, and space), rules of engagement (ownership, representation, and purpose), and biases (confirmation biases and participation biases). results highlight some key challenges for systemic thinking that merit further attention in future applications, including the importance of localizing sdgs and incorporating this knowledge to national-level assessments, an unwillingness of stakeholders to acknowledge trade-offs, the challenge of addressing transformational as opposed to incremental change, and striking a balance between the flexibility of the approach vis-à-vis scientific robustness.
systems thinking, a holistic approach to problem-solving, offers a powerful lens to navigate today’s interconnected world,
nihr sphr phd student ke zhou discusses her phd research about how systems approaches can be used to help tackle complex public policy issues. in social welfare and public health, we often aim to address challenging policy problems across many issues, disciplines, and, most importantly, governance departments. to successfully tackle complex questions, a variety of […]
this article explores the importance of systems thinking as a mindset for designing, developing, procuring and delivering products, services, programs and policies, and how to apply it to product management.
by catherine hobbs why does public policy go wrong? how can researchers who are systems thinkers begin to create the conditions in which those involved in public policy may flourish within their po…
worldwide there is increasing interest in both academic and government sectors to evaluate the different impacts of electronic government (e-government) systems. a number of predictive, cause-effect, linearly and functionally oriented models of evaluation have been proposed and applied. the focus of...
background systems thinking is an approach that views systems with a holistic lens, focusing on how components of systems are interconnected. specifically, the application of systems thinking has proven to be beneficial when applied to health systems. although there is plenty of theory surrounding systems thinking, there is a gap between the theoretical use of systems thinking and its actual application to tackle health challenges. this study aimed to create a framework to expose systems thinking characteristics in the design and implementation of actions to improve health.methods a systematised literature review was conducted and a taxonomy of systems thinking objectives was adapted to develop the new ‘systems thinking for health actions’ (stha) framework. the applicability of the framework was tested using the covid-19 response in pakistan as a case study.results the framework identifies six key characteristics of systems thinking: (1) recognising and understanding interconnections and system structure, (2) identifying and understanding feedback, (3) identifying leverage points, (4) understanding dynamic behaviour, (5) using mental models to suggest possible solutions to a problem and (6) creating simulation models to test policies. the stha framework proved beneficial in identifying systems thinking characteristics in the covid-19 national health response in pakistan.conclusion the proposed framework can provide support for those aiming to applying systems thinking while developing and implementing health actions. we also envision this framework as a retrospective tool that can help assess if systems thinking was applied in health actions.
systems thinking for better social policy: a case study in financial wellbeing
an overview of thinking in systems and quick tips on how to recognize issues and apply solutions.
under national or state-based legislation, local governments are commonly required to prepare municipal health and wellbeing plans. yet, the issues these plans aim to address are often complex, and programmatic planning approaches traditionally used by practitioners struggle to engage with such complexity as they assume these issues can be ‘solved’ in isolation. systems thinking is increasingly being used as an approach to deal with those struggles more effectively, yet little is known about whether local governments and other stakeholders think systems approaches are feasible and acceptable in practice. this study tested a systems thinking approach to gauge if it could better address complex place-based health and wellbeing issues, such as to reduce noncommunicable diseases. guided by a systems change framework, the approach comprised a facilitated systemic inquiry and rich picture process involving diverse stakeholders in a remote municipality in the australian state of tasmania. among the participants there was broad support for the systems approach tested and they thought it was effective for increasing systems thinking capacity, collaboratively revealing systemic issues, and identifying opportunities to address those issues. they valued the rich picture because it created shared understandings of local issues. the findings suggest more is needed from macro-level policy to support place-based stakeholders to undertake systems approaches in practice, which could result in more sustainable and effective systems change required to improve health and wellbeing outcomes. the findings have implications for theory, research, and practice across interdisciplinary fields concerned with placed-based systems change, especially in rural and remote municipalities.
in recent years, there has been a marked rise in the use of systems thinking approaches in uk policy making institutions, especially in environmental domains. to better understand practice
the challenges facing government tend to be mutlifacted, complex, chronic, social, economic and environmental, and their causes and potential solutions are typically unobvious, suggests paul kett, director general at the department for education. as part of csap's 2020 annual virtual conference, we explored how systems thinking can help government seek solutions to wicked problems.
it
a systems thinking approach to public health policy development is essential as it ensures there has been a thorough investigation into the dynamic complexit...
alyx slater from food standards agency reflects on why systems thinking is an essential component of policy design.
climate change is one of the most pressing challenges facing present and future generations, with far-reaching impacts on the environment, society and the economy. addressing this complex issue requires a holistic and collaborative approach that goes beyond traditional top-down governance models.
better decisions emerge when we think across systems - understanding how different policies influence health outcomes and economic vitality
traditional innovation approaches—breakthrough and design thinking—often ignore the complex ripple effects they produce in interconnected systems. in a world facing multifaceted challenges like climate change and sustainability, a systems-thinking approach offers a more resilient and holistic path forward. systems thinking emphasizes understanding interdependencies, redefining problems iteratively, and engaging diverse stakeholders to co-create solutions. this article outlines a four-step framework: (1) define a desired future state. (2) reframe problems so that they resonate across stakeholders. (3) focus on flows and relationships over discrete products. and (4) implement small nudges to gradually shift the system. examples from maple leaf foods, co-operators insurance, and the csa group illustrate how this approach can realign business models for long-term sustainability. while not a replacement for other innovation methods, systems thinking addresses their limitations in tackling “wicked problems.” it encourages companies to anticipate unintended consequences, build coalitions, and adaptively guide transformation in complex environments.
decisions in one realm have ripple effects in others. public programs need to reflect that reality.
“the covid-19 pandemic has shown what governments can do when faced with an existential threat……”