Change – Integration and Implementation Insights

Integration and Implementation Sciences (i2S) 3.0: An updated framework to foster expertise for tackling complex problems

April 30, 2024April 16, 2024

By Gabriele Bammer

gabriele-bammer_nov-2021 — Gabriele Bammer (biography)

How can researchers interested in tackling complex societal and environmental problems easily find and draw on what they need from inter- and transdisciplinary approaches, systems thinking, action research, post-normal science and a range of other ways of combining disciplinary and stakeholder perspectives in order to bring about improvements? How can the necessary expertise be fostered and supported in a systematic way?

These are the questions that I have been addressing for more than 20 years in considering whether a new discipline – Integration and Implementation Sciences or i2S – could provide a way forward. i2S 3.0 is the third conceptualization of this discipline and the current version is summarised in the figure below.

At this stage in its development, i2S is focused on providing a framework and conduit for sharing concepts, methods, processes and other tools that are currently fragmented across inter- and transdisciplinarity, systems thinking, action research, post-normal science and other approaches.

Change planning: Dreamer, realist, critic

April 30, 2024April 2, 2024

Edited by Gabriele Bammer

editors-addition_change

How can change be planned for in an effective way that creatively develops new ideas, plans the practicalities of their implementation and assesses risks?

The process described here is also referred to as Walt Disney circle, Disney creative strategy, and Disney brainstorming method, and is adapted from Nauheimer (1997).

Planning change involves four phases. The first three phases, in turn, are to 1) create new ideas, 2) plan the practicalities of their implementation and 3) assess the risks. Phase 4 is an iterative phase that reviews further input needed in each of the first three phases.

The process is conceived as involving three roles: dreamer, realist and critic. The idea of separating the process into these three roles is to ensure that each is fully considered without interference from the others. For instance the aim is to allow the creative ideas to be fully developed, without being stymied by criticism. One person or a group could take all three roles in turn or different people could take different roles. What is important is that all three roles are fully brought into play.

Effective capacity development in and with the Global South

February 20, 2024February 20, 2024

By Jon Harle

How to do capacity development well in the research and knowledge for development sector? And since the pandemic pushed everyone online, how can capacity development be done well digitally too? In particular how to avoid making the same mistakes, with disappointing results and frustrated partnerships?

As an international development organisation, INASP has been doing this work for the last thirty years and while it isn’t easy, we think it is possible to do it well. There are also very simple starting points: we have to listen carefully, start with what already exists, and see ourselves as enablers and partners, who are also learning in the process, not experts with all the answers.

We recognise capacity building is an imperfect term too – and a contested concept, with origins in colonial and in post-war technical projects to accelerate development and ‘catch-up’ the South.

The INASP approach is summarised in our learning and capacity development framework shown in the figure below.

Learning to use Appreciative Inquiry

January 16, 2024January 16, 2024

By Rachel Arnold

What is Appreciative Inquiry? How does one shift from research that focuses on problems and negative details to the strengths-based approach of Appreciative Inquiry? What are the benefits and requirements of such an approach? And what is it about Appreciative Inquiry that fosters change?

Appreciative Inquiry, developed by David Cooperrider and Suresh Srivastva, is a five-step process (originally four steps), as shown in the figure below. The steps are:

Definition – deciding what to study is critical in moving humans in a positive direction
Discovery – discovering and appreciating best experiences
Dream – imagining the ideal – how it would be if those valued experiences happened most of the time
Design – defining the dream more clearly and discussing steps towards realizing it
Destiny – implementing wide ranging actions, improvisation, learning, and adjustments.

Eighth annual review

January 12, 2024December 12, 2023

By Gabriele Bammer

Which i2Insights contributions inspired you in 2023? What did you learn that was new and how did it help you in tackling the complex societal or environmental problems you focus on? What would you like to see in 2024 and beyond?

One of the delights of curating i2Insights is learning something from every blog post. Another is the personal interactions involved in broadening the global community of contributors, introducing fresh voices and fresh insights, alongside those who are more seasoned contributors.

In this last blog post for 2023, I survey three of the year’s many highlights and what they mean for the operation of i2Insights:

integration and synthesis as an emerging ‘hot’ topic
re-introducing “golden oldies,” ie. tried and tested tools
increasing the number of countries represented by contributors, with an accompanying focus on decolonisation.

How measuring impact gets in the way of real world change

December 12, 2023November 28, 2023

By Toby Lowe

Why is the idea that we can measure our impact to understand how well we are performing fundamentally flawed? Why is it impossible to “demonstrate your impact” in complex environments?

Although the idea of measuring impact is seductive, almost all useful social change is achieved as part of a complex system. In other words, your work is a small part of a much larger web of entangled and interdependent activity and social forces.

The systems map of the outcome of obesity, shown in the figure below, illustrates this perfectly – it shows all the factors contributing to people being obese (or not), and all the relationships between those factors.

This is the reality of trying to make impact in the world – your actions are part of a web of relationships – most of which are beyond your control, many of which are beyond your influence, quite a few of which will be completely invisible to you.

Achieving change by transforming engagement

January 12, 2024November 14, 2023

By Katja Jäger

How can civil society organisations, which rely on volunteer efforts, contribute more effectively to societal change? How can they position engagement with volunteers in a forward-looking way, so as to unleash the potential of committed people? What lessons does this have for researchers interested in social change efforts and in stakeholder engagement?

As a leader of a civil society organisation which works in the field of volunteer support, I am interested in how organisational engagement with volunteers can be most effective in supporting change efforts. Here I share a framework that we have found useful, along with four sets of questions for civil society organisations to reflect on in cooperation with their volunteers.

This work also aims to give researchers interested in social change insight into how they might effectively partner with civil society organisations, as well as how they might expand their thinking about engagement.

As a starting point, I have used the AQAL (All Quadrants All Levels) model shown in the figure below, which was developed by Ken Wilbur (1995) in his framework of integral theory. The model as shown was drawn by Keks Ackermann in Breidenbach and Rollow (2019).

Systemic interventions for complex problems: The Intervention Design Process / Para problemas complejos, intervenciones sistémicas: el Proceso de Diseño de Intervención

October 31, 2023October 24, 2023

By Daniel Marín Vanegas

A Spanish version of this post is available.

What is a useful systemic process for tackling complex societal and environmental problems?

The Intervention Design Process (IDP) is a non-linear approach that integrates different models, methods, techniques, and tools in a set of four iterative stages that are both systematic and systemic (Marín-Vanegas, 2023). The four phases – captured in the acronym IDP-3DC – are:

Diagnosis
Dialogue
Decision
Change.

Co-producing knowledge: Phases, issues and the td-net toolbox

October 17, 2023October 10, 2023

By Sibylle Studer and Theres Paulsen

authors_sibylle-studer_theres-paulsen — 1. Sibylle Studer (biography)
2. Theres Paulsen (biography)

What are the steps involved in co-producing knowledge in transdisciplinary research? What tools are available to help knowledge co-production and for what purpose should they be used?

Based on our experiences with the td-net (Network for Transdisciplinary Research) toolbox, we discuss how knowledge co-production can be organized along an ideal type of a transdisciplinary research process.

Phases and key issues of co-production

In developing the td-net toolbox, we used the following four phases of knowledge co-production, which require an iterative, rather than linear, approach:

Diffusion of innovations

August 1, 2023August 1, 2023

By James W. Dearing

james_dearing — James W. Dearing (biography)

How—and why—do people decide to try new things?

Studies of diffusion have frequently demonstrated a mathematically consistent sigmoid pattern (the S-shaped curve, see figure below) of over-time adoption for innovations. Innovations include new beliefs, practices, programs, policies, and technologies.

The “S” shape is due to the positive engagement of informal opinion leaders in talking about and modeling an innovation for others to hear about and see. The initial slow rate of adoption gives way to a rapidly accelerating rate, which then slows as fewer non-adopters remain. Alternatively and more commonly, when informally influential people do not get positively engaged or when they ignore or actively reject an innovation, diffusion does not occur and the resulting slope of a cumulative curve stays flat or turns negative.

Using the arts to flip understanding: An arts intervention for non-arts researchers

August 3, 2023June 20, 2023

By Margot Greenlee, Martina Jerant and Veronica Dittman Stanich

authors_margot-greenlee_martina-jerant_veronica-dittman-stanich — 1. Margot Greenlee (biography)
2. Martina Jerant (biography)
3. Veronica Dittman Stanich (biography)

What do the arts bring to interdisciplinary research? Can arts practices lead STEMM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics and Medicine) researchers to new insights on their work?

We—a choreographer-and-professional-facilitator (Margot), a scientist-athlete-facilitator-entrepreneur (Martina), and a dancer-turned-arts-researcher (Veronica)—had a hunch that the arts have something to offer STEMM researchers: a different understanding of their own work.

We posited that thoughts are intertwined with actions, and when there is no opportunity to do things differently, it’s hard to think differently—to get a fresh perspective. By “actions”, we mean the practices researchers do every day as part of their work: for example, read, collect data, analyze data, present ideas in written form, revise that writing. Whatever the typical practices of a field or discipline are, as researchers train and eventually become experts in that field, its practices become habitual.

Using archetypes as a systemic lens to understand the complexity of sustainable development

August 3, 2023June 13, 2023

By Hossein Hosseini, Enayat A. Moallemi, Sibel Eker, Edoardo Bertone and Katrina Szetey

authors_hossein-hosseini_enayat-moallemi_sibel-eker_edoardo-bertone_katrina-szetey — 1. Hossein Hosseini; 2. Enayat A. Moallemi; 3. Sibel Ekern; 4. Edoardo Bertone; 5. Katrina Szetey (biographies)

What are systems archetypes and how can they be used to bring a deeper understanding of causal drivers, potential dynamic behaviour in the future, and policy resistance when tackling complex problems, including those in sustainable development?

Systems archetypes are recurring generic systems structures found in many kinds of organisations, under many circumstances, and at many levels and scales. They are distinctive combinations of reinforcing and balancing processes theoretically rooted in systems thinking and modelling.

There are eight common archetypes, each with specific underlying causal drivers (eg., feedback loops, delay), expected dynamic behaviour (eg., acceleration, disruption, tipping point), and policy implications (eg., how to respond, where to intervene). Archetypes can help shift an analytical focus from simple behavioural correlations or a limited understanding of interactions between certain goals to a generalised knowledge of recurring patterns, causes, and consequences.