The power and practice of impact networks: Lessons from food systems transformation

by Stella Odhiambo/

The power and practice of impact networks: Lessons from food systems transformation

Claudia Piacenza

Claudia Piacenza

Latest posts

Share:

Networks that bring together cross-sector leaders to work on shared problems super charge impact in complex environments.

In Africa, the challenges of hunger and malnutrition remain stark: one in five people – over 282 million – are undernourished (State of Food and Agriculture (FAO 2019)), and 30% of children under five suffer from stunted growth. Despite some progress, these figures highlight how far we are from achieving key nutrition and health targets.

Compounding the issue, Sub-Saharan Africa loses over 30% of its total crop production every year – equivalent to more than USD 4 billion in value. These losses not only strain food security but also undermine efforts to lift millions out of poverty.

Amid these challenges, could the power of networks offer solutions?

Why networks (and not just collaboration) matter

One of the biggest challenges when working on complex problems is adapting to an ever-changing context.

One of the pre-conditions for operating in an adaptive way is dynamic learning. When we approach issues from just one angle, one niche expertise, or one specific or static point of view, we risk falling into the well-known trap of the blind scientist who, touching an elephant’s ear believes that she is touching a fan.

It is only by bringing together diverse perspectives that we can truly see the “big picture” (or in other words, the whole elephant).

Spoiler alert: the “big picture” is not just big – it’s rich and multifaceted.

For example, let’s look at the average age of farmers in Africa. Many organisations are working to engage youth in agriculture, recognising the importance of securing the next generation of farmers.

These efforts rightly focus on making agriculture more attractive for young farmers by lowering barriers to access it, increasing the role of tech and digital tools, and reframing the narrative around entrepreneurial opportunities.

At the recent Kenya Transform Food Festival hosted by the African Food Fellowship, we worked around this very issue – engaging youth in agriculture.

By bringing in different perspectives, the conversation quickly moved beyond traditional business models and the cost of agricultural inputs to collective narratives and educational approaches. Suddenly, we looked at a very familiar problem in an unfamiliar way.

We dived into cultural insight: in many rural areas, schools and families use farm work as punishment for undisciplined children. This shift in focus – from economic barriers to cultural narratives and educational practices – was a revelation to many. Suddenly the problem took on a new dimension, leading us to explore how to reshape perceptions about agriculture and food production, starting with very young children in schools.

While this idea may seem obvious to a sociologist or anthropologist, it was an eye-opener for participants from the private and public sectors.

So why was this breakthrough possible?

It came down to one critical approach that defines how networks work: we placed our shared objective at the centre of our discussion, rather than starting with a particular solution or organisational point of view.

As one of our Fellows once said: “Leave your logos and egos at the door and focus on the common purpose.”

The role of trust in building networks

Of course, for networks to work, we need trust at their core. I’ve heard from many leaders that building trust is the foundation for real collaboration.

Trust allows us to share not just knowledge but resources, shifting from a learning phase to actionable plans. It’s about helping everyone see each other as partners rather than competitors.

In practice, trust takes time and care – it grows as we consistently show up, follow through on commitments, and invite open dialogue. This way, networks become not only strong but safe spaces for everyone involved. We create an environment where funders, local organisations, and practitioners feel comfortable sharing ideas, knowing they’ll be met with respect and openness.

Trust is the foundational pre-condition to move from a competitive approach to a place of collaboration.

When we curate a network that wants to stimulate action (and ultimately deliver impact) we tend to focus on the support provided in the form of grants, technical assistance, facilitation and so on. If we don’t intentionally invest in building trust, our efforts are at high risk of not delivering the expected results.

Systems leadership: The key to lasting impact

Ultimately, networks are a means to an end. The end here is to improve the way people eat, their health and the health of our planet, and their inclusion in economies and societies.

Leading change that transforms our current food systems takes a special kind of leadership. Leadership that drives system transformation requires mastery of complex thinking, adaptive management, and collective action.

A recent study by the African Food Fellowship shows that while technical skills are essential, they are not enough. On top of being agronomists, food safety scientists or nutritionists, food system leaders must embody the qualities of a businessperson, an advocate, a communicator, and an organiser.

Do such leaders exist? And what is the right balance between the skills that we need to develop as individuals versus those we cultivate as part of a collective entity?

How do we know if a network is having an impact?

It’s one thing to build a network, but how do we know it’s truly making a difference? There are two indicators that matter most: network health and impact.

A healthy network is one with active participation, where each member feels valued and connected.

A healthy network provides an opportunity to engage in a variety of ways, based on individual gifts, traits, and life stages.

Impact, on the other hand, is harder to attribute directly to the work of networks. For this reason, we focus more often on contribution and influence.

An invitation to join the journey

Do you want to bring organisations and individuals together around a complex problem? Are you interested in exploring the intersection between network curation and system thinking? Get in touch! Reach out to Claudia on [email protected].

The African Food Fellowship recruits new Fellows every year. We will soon be inviting food systems leaders in Rwanda and Kenya to join the Fellowship, which offers a much-needed community of change-makers, learning opportunities about food systems leadership, and chances to collaborate with others working on similar problems.

Visit the African Food Felowship’s website for more information and keep an eye out for calls for application.

Photo by Francesco Rosati

Read more Wasafiri blogs
Download Systemcraft

Share:

Return of the hero: Systems leadership needs individuals willing to step up

by Stella Odhiambo/

Return of the hero: Systems leadership needs individuals willing to step up

The idea of leadership as an activity for a heroic few has been well critiqued. But as we confront a climate crisis and growing social polarisation is it time for a rethink?

Kate Simpson

KATE SIMPSON

Latest posts

Share:

For the last decade or so leadership thinking has encouraged us to see ‘leadership as a team sport’.  Collaboration, distributed action, innovation, participation are the sources of power that leadership draws on and unleashes in the many, not the few. And this is undoubtedly a good thing.

However, as we confront a climate and biodiversity crisis; as we wrestle with growing inequality and polarisation; and as we search for new forms of economy, new forms of national and global governance, and if we are to create private firms capable of more than just maximising share holder profit –  maybe we are going to need a few more heroes to show up? 

We will never deal with the complex and ambiguous challenges we face if we just wait for some sort of heroic leader to show up. That is, someone who seems to have more courage, more certainty, more insight, more knowledge, more passion, more hair, just more… than we have. They are not coming. Mostly because they don’t exist. But also because no one person, however brilliant, and well intentioned can tackle complex problems alone. Collective action is the only form of action. 

However, the sort of challenges we face are going to require significant disruption of the status quo. They are going to require businesses to internalise things that they have long externalised – like their impact on their environment, or on the health and wellbeing of staff. Government departments  need to change how they relate to citizens; academic institutions need to take responsibility for both who they educate and who (and why) they exclude. International NGOs will need to let go of some of the resources they control and let others control them if decolonisation and localisation are to be realised. What ever sector you sit in there are deep changes to make in who has power, who is served, who is excluded. And as with all systems level change, there will be resistance. 

Significant shifts in power have never come through consensus. They have been pushed for and demanded and alternatives built to prove what’s possible. And people have taken risks to do these things. Personal risks – with their own careers, assets, popularity, credibility and even their bodies. And this is the sort of heroic leadership we are going to need. The sort where individuals are willing to risk things that matter to them; and to be seen to do so. 

But it is not an either or. We are going to need both heroic leadership acts and mass unleashed, collaborative, participatory, experimental, unstoppable, relentless leadership. So there are a few caveats in my call for a little more heroism: 

 

All heroes need (a lot) of friends

For change to happen a lot of people need to take a lot of actions. When Rosa Parks decided to claim her right to sit on the bus she put her body on the line. She risked her freedom, her physical safety.  The year long Alabama bus protest which followed saw hundreds of people wear their shoes out as they walked to and from work. 

The ensuing dismantlement of the racist Jim Crow Laws was an outcome both of the action of heroes (of which Rosa Parks was one) and of a legion of people who did the long slow personal work of following. Systems change needs both – the individual heroes who stand out and the masses who stand up. Most of us won’t have what it takes, or the opportunity, to be heroes but we can respond to them when they shown up.

The unsung heroes matter

One of the big problems with ‘hero leadership’ is that it tends to just focus on the internal story of the person and not the wider context they were in. Sometimes the same action done by a different person or in a different moment has much less impact. A few months before Rosa Parks there was Collette Colvin – who also claimed her right to sit where she chose on a bus. Her action was the same, her impact was not. 

Perhaps because of who she was (younger, less well connected) perhaps the moment wasn’t quite right. Likewise, Greta Thunberg was not the first person to mount a school strike for the climate. Systems change is a dynamic thing. There are windows of opportunity that are hard to predict till after someone has charged through them. So if we need heroes then we need a lot of them, and only a few will get their stories told. 

Heroic acts not heroic people

The problem with people who do heroic things is that they always turn out to be flawed. If we are going to ask more of ourselves and each other in terms of visibility and boldness then we also have to accept individuals’ abilities to be both wonderfully right and good and also wrong and flawed. This is not some sort of offset scheme where the good and bad are tallied and an average found. Rather it is an acceptance that both will exist in all of us.  

Ultimately, we can not leave the climate crisis, social justice and the building of a more peaceful and equitable world in the hands of the few. It is going to need collective action. But nor can we expect to make a difference without being seen, without being willing to spend some of the things many of us have carefully built – our careers, our popularity, our security, our networks, our perceived competence, our invisibility.

Read more Wasafiri blogs
Download Systemcraft

Share:

A Movement to shift our Economic System: Reflections from the B Corp Festival

by Scott Hinkle/

A Movement to shift our Economic System: Reflections from the B Corp Festival

Scott Hinkle

Latest posts

Share:

Our Systems Change Specialist Scott Hinkle was at the B Corp Festival in Oxford and shares his insights on what businesses need to do to become a force for good.

I recently had the privilege to attend the B Corp Festival in Oxford. It was a powerful and energising experience that showcased the community’s collective drive toward systems change.

With its impeccable organisation and inspiring content, the event reflected the growing momentum for building a better business ecosystem. However, a key challenge remains  – how do we truly incentivise all businesses to lead and embrace this change on a systemic level?

B Lab UK’s bold vision: Building a movement for lasting change

B Lab UK’s strategy focuses on building a real movement for change, where businesses unite to shift the way business is done, for the benefit of all people and planet.

It’s emphasizes shifting mindsets – moving from ambition and desire for change to taking collective action. The vision is that in 10 years, every business in the UK will be a force for good.

While we don’t yet know exactly what that will look like, the goal is to make “doing good” the norm for all businesses. A big part of this involves harnessing the power of people – connecting the 129,000 B Corp employees to drive change at a systems level.

They aim to expand business reach, create structural changes, and shift cultural narratives to make a real, lasting difference. It’s a bold plan, centred on creating long-term, systemic change.

My experience

Sharing my personal experience can hopefully help people connect with the festival’s impact, showing how the messages of systems change, collective action, and personal growth resonated with me and can inspire others to get involved. 

  • Professionalism at its best. This year’s B Corp Festival was one of the most well-executed events I’ve attended. The “blue jacket” volunteers brought energy and made everyone feel welcome. Overall, the event was meticulously organized, from branding and coordination to logistics, with inspiring speakers and an easily navigable venue, making it truly engaging and memorable. 
  • The topline messages were loud and clear throughout: Systems change, building a collective movement, and action being louder than words. There was a strong sense that the timing was right. Many participants were not only talking about systems change but were eager to learn how to apply it. 
  • The fringe-style events helped us experience the chaos of a systems change movement. The chaotic yet purposeful atmosphere highlighted the dynamic and often unpredictable nature of driving systemic change. By physically navigating different spaces, I experienced the complexities of navigating systems in the real world. This immersive experience deepened the understanding that systems change is not a linear process—it’s filled with twists, turns, and moments of discovery. These moments, full of uncertainty and excitement, are what fuel collective action and innovation. I felt what collective movement-building is like. 
  • Struck the balance between inspiration and information. I left feeling energised and ready to get more involved. The combination of practical takeaways and motivational content ensured that we left inspired and equipped with tangible steps to implement change. 
  • Stepping out of my comfort zone, finding joy in creativity: I had a lot of fun, which is so important. My favourite session, by far, was painting with Isabel. I hadn’t painted since I was a kid and honestly cringed at the idea of ‘doing art,’ but it brought me so much joy. Experiential sessions like this push people out of their comfort zones—crucial for this kind of work. The drawings now hang in my office as a reminder to try new things and not label myself. 
Lord Business
Lord Business
Scott portraits
Scott portraits

The critical challenge

One significant challenge, raised by a few during the festival, is the daunting task of incentivising all businesses – but especially corporaitons, to drive genuine systemic change.

As Anuradha Chugh said, many B Corps are still operating like “beach cleaners” – making positive impacts in their immediate areas but not yet catalysing the large-scale transformation needed.

Jo Alexander’s words also struck a chord. She shared her experience of trying – and failing – to create lasting change within BP, illustrating the deep resistance that exists within many corporations to embrace any type of real transformation.

To me, this question remains unanswered, but the next steps are clear, and they begin with making systemic change the norm, not the exception. Here are some ways we can move forward. 

Call to action

The B Corp community has made remarkable progress in building a movement, but the next step is clear: we must address the challenge of incentivising all businesses—especially large corporations—to lead the way in driving systems change.  

  • Join the B-Corp movement. The first step is getting more businesses to become B Corps. It benefits both your business and the movement, enhancing your reputation, building trust with customers, and connecting you to a like-minded community. By joining, you help drive systemic change, setting a new standard for responsible business that balances people, planet, and profit. 
  • Support the Better Business Act. The Better Business Act seeks to amend Section 172 of the Companies Act to ensure businesses balance people, planet, and profit. It would make it a legal duty for directors to advance the interests of shareholders alongside those of society and the environment. This change will apply to all businesses by default, empowering directors and requiring them to report on their impact. Getting involved is crucial to help create a more sustainable and responsible business landscape. 
  • Learn Systemcraft. For B Corps interested in driving practical systems change, exploring Systemcraft can provide the tools and frameworks needed to make a tangible impact. Systemcraft is Wasafiri’s change framework for how we believe anyone can catalyse systemic change. It helps people unpack the messy and dynamic nature of the problem, provides clear guidance on where to start, how to identify windows of opportunity and ultimately helps people take collective, adaptive, and experimental action on the complex issues they are facing. 

 At Wasafiri, we are always looking for creative and ambitious partners to tackle one of the most pressing issues of our time: building a more socially impactful and sustainable business ecosystem. If you have ideas and opportunities and would like to start a conversation, reach out to us at [email protected]. 

Read more Wasafiri blogs
Download Systemcraft

Share:

What is food systems leadership – and can it drive transformation?

by Stella Odhiambo/

What is food systems leadership – and can it drive transformation?

Brenda Mareri

Brenda Mareri

Latest posts

Share:

In the complex and ever-changing world of food systems, traditional approaches often fall short of addressing the root causes of challenges like malnutrition, hunger, food insecurity, climate change and environmental degradation. This is where the concept of Food Systems Leadership becomes crucial.

Food systems leadership is a term that’s easy to understand in theory or in high-level strategy meetings. But what does it actually mean in practice? When we talk about transforming the way we produce, distribute, and consume food, what does a food systems leader do?

We look at some of the drivers and components of this approach to leadership.

Drivers of Systems Leadership

Systems Mindset: Seeing the bigger picture

Food systems leadership begins with adopting a systems mindset, which means recognising the food system as a complex web of interconnected parts, from production and distribution to consumption and waste management. It’s about actively identifying how various elements like policy, agriculture, economics, and community health interact and impact one another.

For instance, understanding how local farming practices influence nutrition in schools can lead to initiatives that support both farmers and children’s health. It’s about seeing the whole picture so that every action you take addresses the root causes of issues, not just the symptoms.

A great example is the Home Grown School Feeding (HGSF) model which constitutes a school feeding approach that provides safe, diverse and nutritious food, sourced locally from smallholders employing sustainable farming practices, to children in schools. This model is being piloted across many countries in Africa and addresses issues of nutrition, market access, social inclusion and economic development.

By viewing the system as a whole, leaders can better understand the root causes of issues and develop solutions that address the broader picture rather than just the symptoms.

Collective Action: Mobilising real people for real results

At the heart of food systems leadership is the ability to mobilise collective action. This means bringing together farmers, policymakers, business leaders, and community organisations to work towards common goals.

An example could be forming coalitions that lobby for better food safety regulations or creating community-supported agriculture (CSA) programs that directly connect consumers with local farmers. It’s about harnessing the power of many to drive change that no single entity could achieve on its own.

Enabling Conditions: Laying the groundwork for success

Creating the enabling conditions that allow sustainable solutions to take root is key. This goes beyond addressing immediate problems; it’s about shaping the policies, investments, and infrastructure that support long-term change.

For example, advocating for government subsidies that encourage sustainable farming practices or securing investment for building local food processing facilities.

A great example is the Tax Incentives the Nigerian Government introduced in 2022 to scale the purchase and use of solar renewable energy products, this in turn is a positive shift to create an environment to allow sustainable transition into the Green Energy economy.

These are the actions that create the foundation upon which a resilient food system can be built.

Components of Systems Leadership

At Wasafiri, our Systemcraft approach offers a comprehensive framework for this transformation, centred on five core components that are essential for driving systemic change in food systems.

Vision setting: Defining clear, achievable goals (Set the direction)

A shared vision among stakeholders is essential. Clear, achievable outcomes that everyone can work towards will guide the creation of specific initiatives. It’s about setting a direction that everyone can follow, with clear milestones to track progress.

The Malabo Declaration of 2014 was a pivotal Vision Setting strategy that was adopted by the AU Assembly Heads of State and Government in 2014 and still provides the direction for Africa’s agricultural transformation for the period 2015 – 2025.

Windows of opportunity: Meeting you where it matters most (Make it matter)

A systems leader will leverage windows of opportunity that matter the most to stakeholders in the system.

An opportunity can arise for instance, when there’s a shift in public opinion, a new policy proposal, or a crisis that brings food issues to the forefront. A systems leader will spot the opportunity and be ready to act.

An example of this is how the French Revolution of 1789, was sparked by an unexpected window of opportunity, when King Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette living in extreme extravagance and nobility increased grain taxes that led to bread being too expensive. This sparked the revolution that the people exploited.

Ecosystem building: Creating networks that work (Organise for collaboration)

Building the networks and ecosystems that support ongoing collaboration and innovation will create an ecosystem for change. It’s about organising the right people, tools, and information to ensure that the food system functions smoothly and efficiently.

These networks can serve the sole purpose of creating a flow of information amongst stakeholders or more action-oriented networks striving for change at a systems level.

For example, setting up regular meetings between local farmers, policymakers, Market Owners or Associations and Buyers of produce, to discuss supply chain challenges or creating a digital platform where stakeholders can share resources and ideas.

Building incentive models: Aligning interests for change (Change the incentives)

For real, lasting change to happen, stakeholders need the right incentives. This could mean working with local governments to introduce tax breaks for businesses that reduce their food waste or creating financial incentives for farmers to adopt regenerative practices.

These incentive models help align the interests of different stakeholders, making it easier to achieve widespread buy-in and participation.

By addressing what motivates people—whether it’s financial gain, community recognition, or environmental stewardship—you can drive significant changes in behaviour.

Addressing Knowledge Asymmetry: Sharing information where it’s needed (Harness collective intelligence)

Finally, food systems leadership is about making sure that all stakeholders have access to the knowledge and information they need to make informed decisions.

This could mean creating educational programs for farmers on sustainable practices, setting up data-sharing platforms that track food supply chain efficiency, or organising workshops that teach consumers about the benefits of buying local.

Ensuring that knowledge flows freely and effectively among everyone involved could bridge gaps that can otherwise hinder progress.

Conclusion

Food systems leadership is not an abstract concept; it’s a hands-on, practical approach to transforming our food systems for the better. It moves beyond isolated interventions, focusing instead on the underlying conditions and collective actions needed to create lasting change – and in that sense, it is applicable to systems leadership when tackling any complex social issue.

By focusing on these practical aspects, we can drive the real, measurable change needed to build a more sustainable, equitable, and resilient food system for all.

Learn more

Are you interested in understanding how you can use Systemcraft to work out a complex problem you’re working on? Check out our Systemcraft Essentials course.

Brenda Mareri is a Senior Manager for Food at Wasfiri Consulting. Connect with her on LinkedIn.

Read more Wasafiri blogs
Download Systemcraft

Share:

The imperative of radical collaboration in complex times

by Kate Simpson/

The imperative of radical collaboration in complex times

Kate Simpson
Kate Simpson

Latest posts

Share:

Collective problems need collective action. Collaborations are not accidents of timing and serendipity. They need careful crafting to address the challenges we face today.

In our era of complexity we need ways of working together that span traditional boundaries.

Ehrlichman

Human history is punctuated by the tension between collaboration and competition. The historian Niall Ferguson argues that while competition drives innovation and efficiency it is collaboration that enables us to exponentially accelerate knowledge, exchange ideas, pool resources and tackle shared goals.

And yet collaboration is often hard to do. The competitive desire to protect knowledge, control activities, get ahead and go fast all favour ‘going it alone’. But some problems simply cannot be solved alone; they will only give in to the collective action and collective creativity that is unleashed when we collaborate. Whether it is a food and drink company trying to manage its waste responsibly; the need to offer banking services to the unbanked, the battle to bring down greenhouse gas emissions, the future of work in an AI powered world or any other of a myriad sustainability challenges, we can only solve these if we collaborate.

Often collaboration can seem like an accidental by-product of timing and serendipity. But scratch below the surface and there was often pain staking and intentional work to build the conditions that allowed for the eruption of creativity and action that we see.

Know what you are collaborating for

Collaborating takes commitment and effort. None of us will sustain this just because we think we ought to, or because it is a good thing to be seen to do.

Collaboration happens when we know we cannot go it alone (probably because we have already tried and failed). It happens when we know, be it individually or institutionally, that our ability to succeed is locked with the choices, actions and success of others.

So, for a collaboration to sustain we must know what we are together acting upon. We may disagree on the causes of the problem, and almost certainly on how to tackle it and we may have different reasons for addressing it, but we need to have a shared problem to solve or opportunity to grasp.

For example, as we have seen in our work, when national governments, agri-business and civil society collaborate to tackle poverty amongst smallholder famer incomes there are different agendas at work. Corporate interests may be well-meaning but they are also concerned about vulnerable supply chains as young people move away from farming and seek better incomes elsewhere.

Government wants to tackle poverty, drive economic growth and perhaps has concerns about civil unrest. Meanwhile, civil society groups seek to advocate for the rights of often the most marginalised. These different agendas do not make for comfortable or aligned action, but all parties know they cannot progress their agenda alone, they know they are interdependent.

Different agendas and needs will be at work, be explicit about these, and know that progress will depend on everyone meeting just enough of their own agenda.

Be ready to compromise

We love the idea of collaboration – often because we assume it means other people or organisations will support our agenda. But complex problems are experienced differently by different people. And organisations have different agendas and constituents they need to serve. And so, with complex problems agreement and alignment can be hard to find.

It is a myth to think that with enough data and enough talking a single understanding and a single solution can be found. Rather collaborations need to find ways to work together despite differences of view and even disagreement. And this is only possible with sometimes uncomfortable compromises.

Of course, for all of us there are compromises that ask us to go too far, those we cannot make – and so there will be people and organisations with whom we cannot collaborate. But any collaboration will require some form of compromise, you may need to hold a long-term justice goal more lightly in order to achieve a short-term improvement, or perhaps there are additional costs your business will need to internalise or scrutiny you will need to open up to.

Maybe you will have to organise yourselves in ways that feel unfamiliar or learn to value different things as you seek to combine social impact goals with commercial pressures.

Collaborations allow us to achieve different things but that demands, whoever we are, that we work in different ways.

Embrace systems leadership

Inter-organisational collaborations are not like running a project team. There is often no clear ‘boss’, there is a lot of discretionary effort at work, there are explicitly different agendas and parties will ‘own’ resources that everyone needs access to. Working together in these conditions cannot be driven by traditional command and control leadership. The normal modes for assigning accountability are unlikely to work.

Instead, there needs to be leadership focused on relentlessly creating the conditions for collaboration. These include: building the network of relationships between parties, a focus on the collective vision that holds people and institutions together, shared credit for what is achieved and a valuing of the diverse agendas and landscapes inside the collaboration.

Collaboration may be hard; at times it may feel slow; it may ask us to imagine new ways of leading and working together (or resurrect much older ones), but if we are going to tackle the climate and biodiversity crisis, meet the challenges of an AI-driven future of work, navigate accelerating polarisations then we cannot work alone.

Photo by Francesco Ungaro

Read more Wasafiri blogs
Download Systemcraft

Share:

How can philanthropies drive systems change together?

by Stella Odhiambo/

How can philanthropies drive systems change together?

Latest posts

Share:

Systems change approaches offer the chance to accelerate impact but can be challenging to implement.

Every year philanthropic foundations spend billions of dollars to have an impact on complex issues related to food, climate, nature, poverty, health, peace and nutrition. And yet, despite much positive impact, the underlying causes of these issues persist.

Systems change approaches that are built to work with complexity, interdependence, emergence and the ever-present power dynamics that create inequality offer a way for foundations to tackle the underlying causes of the problems they care about. And consequently, many leading organisations are exploring and adopting them.

Each philanthropic organisation that embraces systems change is on a learning journey. They are codifying new language, analysis frameworks, and leadership forms. As we have worked with a growing body of philanthropists, we have come to recognise some common struggles, and the opportunity to learn faster by learning together.

Challenges shared by philanthropies that practice systems change

Strategic focus: Funding portfolios are often delineated by technical themes such as agriculture, gender, climate, or livelihoods. Yet these are entangled in the real world. How might philanthropic organisations support interventions layered together to achieve transformative impact? How can they set strategic boundaries that ensure discrete work delivers impact within indiscrete systems?

Working with grantees: Grant recipients often seek immediate impact on an issue and can lack the tools and motives to work on underlying conditions. How can philanthropies guide and support them in pursuit of systems change?

Power: Power inequalities underpin most systemic issues. How can philanthropies apply their funds in ways that rebalance these? How can they harness or even cede their high-level influence in ways that elevate the disenfranchised?

Collaboration: System change can take decades, yet funding cycles are measured in years. How can philanthropies structure collaboration that ensures support beyond their individual timeframes and mandates? How can they operate as an ecosystem in ways that catalyse rather than capture impact?

Monitoring, evaluation and learning: System change embraces emergence, experimentation, and agility. So, how can MEL focus on dynamically improving impact more than doggedly proving impact?

The response to each of these challenges may be different for different foundations, but there is much that they can learn from one another.

If we are going to realise the speed scale and lasting impact that systems change approaches offer – then we need to learn fast and we need to learn together.

Read more Wasafiri blogs
Download Systemcraft

Share:

Practical steps to unlock systems change

by Scott Hinkle/

Practical steps to unlock systems change

Scott Hinkle

Latest posts

Share:

"Complex problems are the unwanted outputs of systems that are working. And so If we went to tackle these problems we have to change systems that produce them. But just how do we do that?"

In this short blog by Wasafiri’s Scott Hinkle and published by ALNAP – the leading network for learning accountability and performance in the humanitarian system – Scott shares a few of his practical learnings for unlocking systems change within an organisation.

Read the full article
Read more Wasafiri blogs
Download Systemcraft

Share:

Transforming Youth Employment with Systems Change in Africa

by Scott Hinkle/

Transforming Youth Employment with Systems Change in Africa

Scott Hinkle

Latest posts

Share:

Originally posted at Jobtech Alliance

The looming jobs crisis for young people in Africa

In the next 10 years, African countries will add more people to the workforce than the rest of the world combined. However, while 10 to 12 million youth will enter the workforce each year, only three million formal sector jobs will be created.

There simply won’t be enough jobs for the people that want them. This shortage of quality jobs, particularly for Africa’s burgeoning youth population, risks creating high levels of unemployment, social and economic disparities, and potential migration pressures.

Jobtech Alliance believes this mismatch between youth skills and market demands would hamper productivity and persistent unemployment would pose risks of social unrest and undermine innovation and development potential.

Without the addition of significantly more quality jobs for young people, Africa will not achieve the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDG).

Transforming youth employment programming through jobtech and systems change

The world of work is undergoing significant changes, prompting development actors to experiment with new approaches in youth employment programming. This shift is driven by the necessity to adapt to evolving economies and a rapidly changing technological landscape, coupled with mounting evidence challenging the effectiveness of traditional labour market interventions.

Two prominent trends have emerged in recent years to address these challenges:

  • Applying systems change methodologies to labour markets. ‘Systems change’ is an intentional approach to transform the underlying structures, processes, and relationships within a system to address persistent challenges and achieve positive outcomes. In the context of labour markets and youth employment programming, systems change involves re-evaluating and reshaping the complex web of interconnected elements that influence employment dynamics, such as policies, institutions, education, and economic structures. We see it as a holistic, adaptive, and long-term approach that emphasizes partnering with relevant market actors to change the way the system works for young job seekers (Market Systems Development for Employment).
  • The emergence of jobtech which leverages technology to enhance job access, delivery, and productivity. The essence of jobtech are platforms that connect people to work, or which enable them to manage their livelihoods. This includes gig-matching platforms such as ride-hailing, e-commerce, and online job-matching (see Jobtech Alliance’s taxonomy of the jobtech sector in Africa). It is becoming a cross-cutting theme around everything to do with the future of work and how people find work. It is estimated that 30-88 million Africans will earn from jobtech by 2030.

Jobtech Alliance: pioneering systemic solutions for job creation in Africa

Founded in 2021, Jobtech Alliance recognises the potential for ‘jobtech’ to transform the generation of quality, sustainable jobs and do so at a continental scale. The heart of our job-generating ecosystem is jobtech platforms.

We are building an ecosystem around inclusive jobtech to create viable, scalable platforms which provide quality jobs for Africans. We recognise that technology won’t solve youth unemployment on its own, but it plays a crucial role in shaping the skills and opportunities for future generations.

We use a systemic lens to ensure that jobtech interventions go beyond isolated solutions, contributing to shaping the jobtech sector for increased sustainability and inclusivity. Overall, this comprehensive approach acknowledges the changing landscape of youth employment and maximizes the potential impact of jobtech as part of a broader systemic strategy.

How systemic change happens in the jobtech sector

Practically, this means we are working across multiple fronts to shift the dynamics of the current jobtech system, including:

  • Building awareness and knowledge of jobtech, and what works in jobtech: While ‘Jobtech’ gains recognition, a weak understanding persists. Elevating awareness is vital for unlocking the sector’s full potential. We conduct research and host a blog and newsletter to keep the community informed.
  • Nurturing an engaged, informed, and inspired community: Establishing a cohesive community is crucial, and bridging gaps between interconnected stakeholders and fostering collaboration, is essential to share learnings and drive innovation. We host a large community with over 1000 stakeholders including jobtech startup founders, investors, and others to connect and collaborate around our shared vision, with a range of events to connect stakeholders.
  • Nurturing appropriate policies, standards and tools: Striving for policies that consider and align with systemic dynamics is imperative for effective jobtech sector development. We’ve worked with the International Labour Organization to develop a standard tool (currently being piloted) to assess quality of work on jobtech platforms from a user perspective.
  • Fostering a funding network: The jobtech sector faces funding setbacks, with a notable decline in investment. Addressing this challenge is critical for sustained growth and impact. We’re building a Jobtech Investment Network of venture capital and philanthropic funders to ensure that informed funding reaches the right startups.
  • Venture support: Acceleration activities (through advisory and management support as well as capital) for high-potential platforms that can propel the entire sector, fostering successful businesses, generating excitement, and attracting more entrepreneurs and investors. We currently have a portfolio of almost 20 platforms we’re working with.
  • Stimulating global demand for African talent: Jobtech’s essence lies in connecting labour demand (and products and services) with supply. In Africa, addressing the employment shortfall requires stimulating global demand for labour on the continent. This is a big long-term focus.
  • Inclusivity focus: Jobtech can help include groups that traditional labour markets often marginalise – such as women and refugees.

What have we learned so far about applying systems change across Jobtech Alliance?

Jobtech Alliance was started as a systems change initiative and with support from the Small Foundation, the Jobtech Alliance team at Mercy Corps, and BFA Global, have engaged systems change practitioners, Wasafiri, to help more thoughtfully embed this approach into its work. Two early learnings are:

  1. Importance of shared language and concepts. We have integrated Systemcraft as a tangible and applied framework to help gain shared language and concepts that guide our decision-making and implementation. With so many stakeholders involved across the jobtech sector, building a shared language and understanding of how the system works (and how we interact with it) is critical. As we’ll share soon when presenting our systems change model, we’ve integrated multiple overlapping concepts – how the system works, our theory of change, our workstreams, and our principles (see below) – into one common vision.
  2. Need to embed systems principles into everything we do. Whilst the Jobtech Alliance team has been doing systems change for a few years, we have never been able to articulate what such an approach (as opposed to ‘activities’) really means. We were missing some simple, high-level guidance that recognised the interconnected nature of what we do and helped us maintain our mission and character as the Alliance grows. We therefore developed ‘Principles’, which have allowed us to identify blind spots in activities and workstreams and be more comprehensive in our work, from new country engagement strategies to the newsletter and planning events.
Jobtech principles

What’s next, and how to get involved

Systems change doesn’t happen in a day, and even though we’re two years into our work, we’re still early in our systems change journey.

Over the coming months, we’ll share our systems change model for the Jobtech Alliance and how we hope to influence this emerging sector.

We strongly believe that cultivating an inclusive jobtech sector that creates and improves jobs across Africa is key to advancing the prosperity of the African population and offers promising prospects for financial returns and social impact. We are building a movement, and we’d love to get you involved.

To get started, please head to our website to Join our Community.

Read more Wasafiri blogs
Download Systemcraft

Share:

System Change in Action: The Wigan Deal

by Kate Simpson/

System Change in Action: The Wigan Deal

Kate Simpson

Latest posts

Share:

We are often asked for stories and examples of when system change has happened. And examples can be hard to spot. But they are out there. And so we try and share them; those we have been involved in and those that have been the work of others.

We won’t all agree on what is or is not system change. That is because complex problems don’t have a fixed end state where the work is done. And so there is always more work to do.

It is also because complex problems are contested – there will be different views on what needs to change and what ‘better’ means and for whom. And complex problems are produced by systems that are (in some way) working, and so there will almost always be some form of loss for someone somewhere.

What makes something system change anyway?

So I use four rules of thumb to help judge if something feels like ‘system-y’ change:

  1. Is there more equity? (e.g. do the less powerful have more control of decisions and resources?).
  2. Has there been a shift in the mindset or paradigm that shapes this issue?
    (e.g. have different assumptions about who are agents of change, who should control resources or what ‘better’ means driven this change?).
  3. Is there some sort of ‘scale’? (e.g. can we reasonably expect that people or nature not directly involved in this intervention at this time will experience that change? – this ‘scale’ might be over space or time).
  4. Has something structural shifted? This too is part of scale. That something has shifted that will outlast the protagonists involved, that changes the conditions in which this complex issue blossoms (e.g. a change in national or organisational policy, a permanent shift in the locus of control of resources, etc).

Welcome to Wigan

Wigan, a former mill town in the North West of England, is often over shadowed by its bigger more famous neighbours – the city of Manchester to the East and Liverpool to the West. But in this story it gets to take centre stage. For, since 2011, Wigan Council and its partners have been working to change the very relationship between the Council and the people that live and work there. Known as The Wigan Deal, this a story that challenges the dynamic that ‘the state knows best and will fix everything’ and that citizens are passive recipients.

What happened?

In 2011 Wigan Council, like many in the UK, found themselves facing significant financial pressures. The wider political climate of ‘austerity‘ (a package of policies that limited public sector funding) meant no more money from central government. And so the Council decided it needed to find a new way to relate to and work with citizens in order to deliver services. It was time to try something radically different.

The provision of public services is complex. Traditionally in the UK, there is a fairly paternalistic relationship between the state and citizens. In practice, this means the state controls the money and gets to decide what sorts of services are needed and citizens, while they may lobby and campaign for certain things, are not decision-makers or seen as creators of solutions.

A non-paternalistic model would require that the role of communities be taken seriously with a genuine commitment to collaboration and co-creation of solutions.

Wigan Council decided that if they were going to create a better town and do so with shrinking budgets, then they had to change this underlying paternalistic dynamic. They had to truly and deeply work in partnership, sharing power with local communities.

And so, together the council, citizens, community groups and businesses of Wigan created a series of ‘pledges’, covering everything from creating a ‘vibrant town’ to ‘care for adults with disabilities’. These pledges committed everyone to play their part – they required specific commitments from the council but also from businesses and from residents.

For example, under the ‘Vibrant Town Centre’ pledge the council committed to providing free city centre parking and residents committed to using it to visit local shops, businesses and leisure facilities rather than using it to travel out of town. Pledges were formed across a host of different areas and together they formed ‘The Wigan Deal.’

In 2019, ‘The Kings Fund’ – an independent health think tank did an evaluation asking ‘Is the Deal Real?‘ They concluded there had been a ‘genuine transformation’. The scale and consistency with which ideas have been applied significantly trumped other attempts, illustrating ‘the kind of work that is needed to shift to a new model of public service delivery’.

How did system change happen?

As system change practitioners, The Wigan Deal is intriguing. We have evidence of transformational change in a complex system driven through collaboration across institutional boundaries. And whilst the Kings Fund pointed to ‘bold leadership’ and ‘a long-term strategic commitment to working differently with local people and communities’ we want to go a bit further and unpick the approach through a systems lens. Does the approach differ from the linear approaches that we know complex systems resist?

Work to wire the system together

At the outset, there was a recognition that no single institution could tackle this alone. Change was going to require a shift in mindset. It was going to require disparate parties to come together, build relationships, build understanding, share ambitions, share challenges and commit resources for doing work together.

This ‘wiring of the system together’ is fundamentally important in system change – and – goes beyond just bringing people together. It requires the patient work to really get to know and understand different agendas and perspectives. It requires the willingness to share resources and power.

The “Be Wigan Experience” attended by people from different parts of the system was one tool which helped build collaboration and shift mindsets regarding how residents, citizens and others viewed each other. And it took time.

Donna Hall (former CEO of Wigan Borough Council) described how everyone danced around each other for 2 years before getting on with the real work. But through that dancing the ambition for the work was reframed as “it doesn’t belong to any one of us – it belongs between us”.

Get practical

“The Deal” – the pledges between the council, citizens, community groups and businesses to create a better borough – represents a shared, but big and abstract ambition. In system change work we also have to work on concrete goals to create a focus that mobilises resources and pulls you towards the big ambition.

Below the headline Deal are “deals” for adult social care, “your street”, communities, children and young people, health and wellbeing and businesses. There are co-created pledges in specific contexts such as housing in which the provision of council homes for people with disabilities was supported by private landlords willing to let their properties through the council.

This is a tangible, measurable goal that moves towards the bigger, more abstract, ambition.

No single story

Another aspect of the approach that speaks to systems change is the diversity of storytelling. For example, “Rekindling hope: the story of the Wigan Deal” is told by young people, NHS, community groups, council employees, and businesses.

It is not the Council, ‘the state’, telling one story. It is different parts of the system expressing what matters to them.

In systems change, there is no single story and the Kings Fund research highlighted this. Focus groups found that people’s concerns about issues such as crime and antisocial behaviour were overshadowing incredible progress being made in social care and public health.

Build on what's working

Social care is providing help with day-to-day living because of illness or disability. And it is one of the fastest-growing areas of need and cost in the UK.

People’s social care needs vary significantly depending on their circumstances so providing services that meet needs is highly complex and not well suited to a centralised, paternalistic, one-size-fits-all approach to public service delivery.

Because The Wigan Deal was a collaborative effort it had access to an incredible body of collective intelligence, both about people’s needs and also about the varied way these needs could and were being met.

One of the central successes of the Deal was the closure of expensive Council-run day care centres – predicated on a mindset of ‘come to us, use our services’. Instead, investment was channelled into a network of existing community organisations and neighbourhood groups already connected to people with care needs in their community and better able to understand and provide tailored and localised support to those who needed it.

In system change, this is an example of investing in and building collective and adaptive capacity. Day Care Centres focused on ‘the problem’ (e.g. an isolated elderly person) – a very expensive endeavour. Investing in community organisations focused instead on creating the conditions in which the existing organisations who know and represent local people were better able to thrive and adapt to local needs.

Demand was stripped out of the Council’s social care system and there was an improvement in health and wellbeing metrics.

What next?

What makes the Wigan Deal distinctive and an example of system change in action is the focus on building collective and adaptive capacity. The work of ‘wiring the system together’ better has been fundamental in the co-creation of solutions.

It successfully drew on what already existed in the spaces between different stakeholders, addressing unmet needs in a highly resource-constrained context. The Wigan Deal mobilised resources across organisational boundaries, changed the narrative and amplified the visibility of under-utilised strengths, delivering change at scale.

The Wigan Deal is by no means a panacea and it is now four years on from the Kings Fund analysis during which the Pandemic and UK Cost of Living Crisis has hit. Undoubtedly Wigan was better able to adapt to those shocks having adopted aspects of a systems-based approach.

We hope the people of Wigan have managed to hold their nerve and not relapse, under significant pressure, to a fallacy that the Council can solve these challenges on its own.

Image courtesy of Rept0n1x, CC BY-SA 3.0, via Wikimedia Commons
Read more Wasafiri blogs
Download Systemcraft

Share:

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.