Change for Change Networks

We are swimming in a world of “change”. But not all change is the same, and very often
the wrong strategies and tools are applied to a change challenge. The result? Lots of
frustration, wasted energy and disillusion about our capacity to realize change. Everyone
involved with change strategies should be clear about the differences between three
different types: incremental, reform and transformation.
Understanding the differences helps set reasonable goals, identify appropriate actions and
ensure the presence of skills that are necessary to support it. I spent some time clarifying
the differences with Philip Thomas, co-author of a UNDP book on change, and Jouwert
van Geene of the Centre for Development Innovation. The product is the Table below.
 Types of Change
Type of Incremental…changing Reform…changing the way Transformation…reconceiving the
Change quantities parts interact in a system system
Focus Changing ways of acting Changing ways of thinking Changing ways of perceiving
and behaving
Core How can we do more of the What rules should we create? How do I make sense of this?
Questions same? What are my mental models and What is the purpose?
Are we doing things right? assumptions? How do we know what is best?
Are we doing the right things?
What is best practice?
Learning Single loop Triple loop Triple loop
loops
Type of Enacting/applying known Reflection and learning, critical Unlearning and relearning
action approaches/scripts/solutions analysis
When to use For simple issues with For complex, non- To innovate and create previously
causal order programmable issues unimagined possibilities.
For routine, repetitive, When new solutions have been When no “solution” is apparent?
predictable issues, agreed upon When breakthrough thinking is needed
When the “answer” is When a problem is well-defined
known
Purpose To improve performance To understand and change the To redefine/reinvent/reconceive “the
(behavior and activities) to system and its parts system”, its purpose and relationships
implement defined
solutions.
Partici- Current actors addressing Stakeholders of the currently An exploratory microcosm of
pation the problem defined system participants in the evolving
understanding of “the system”
Power and Confirms existing rules. Opens rules to revision. Opens issues to creating new ways of
relation- Preserves the established Suspends established power thinking and action about what
ships power structure and relationships; promotes sustains the system and what can
relationships among actors authentic interactions; creates a emerge. Promotes fundamental shifts
in the system space for genuine change in the in power relationships and structures
system with emerging system awareness and
identity.
General Implementing the Defining and negotiating the Emerging the previously unimagined
Dynamic predictable/projectable projectable.
Skills/ Project management Naming, framing, negotiating Co-authoring/narrative
methods roles and strategies dialogue/revisioning tools, deepening
awareness of world views
Personal I am acting on the problem Others are the problem I am part of the problem, “we” are in
role this together

Transformation
When Thomas Kuhn wrote his seminal 1962 book on paradigm shifts, The Structure of
Scientific Revolutions, he was writing about the physical sciences. He describes how
changes occur in explanations (theories) about how the world works and what is possible.
For him a paradigm consists of definitions of what an analysis should observe, the kinds
of questions that should be asked, how the questioning should be developed, and how the
results should be interpreted. (Kuhn 1962) These questions and paradigm shifts are
associated with transformational change.
A wonderful example is with Sam Daley-Harris’ frustration over the way traditional
organizations ignore and marginalize data that does not conform to what they believe is
possible. “There’re these figures,” says Sam, Director of the Microcredit Campaign
Summit, “,…Yunus Mohammed (Grameen Bank, Nobel Prize Winner), Ingrid Munro
(Kenyan microcredit innovator)…and they (people in power) write off these people who
break rules as ‘special cases’…they dismiss it or marginalize it. If I walk into a USAID
or World Bank office and said ‘Ingrid in Kenya is making microloans successfully to
former thieves, prostitutes, gang members’…what would they do with that information?
Why didn’t they look at Grameen Bank 25, 15 years ago? Why isn’t that happening in
Kenya? Because it breaks their pre-conceived conventional wisdoms of what is
possible…it can’t be replicated, it’s a special case.” Sam and the USAID/World Bank
are looking with different paradigms.
Transformational change involves significant change in relationships and power
structures. GANs typically arise out of questions requiring this type of change. The
Sustainable Food Lab, for example, began with questions about how to transform the
agriculture and food system into a sustainable one. This requires visioning strategies, and
the SFL developed one of the most disciplined ones I’m aware of, by applying insights
and approaches associated with Peter Senge who founded the Society for Organizational
Learning, Otto Scharmer at the Presencing Institute, and Adam Kahane with Reos
Partners.

Reform
This type of change is much more familiar. For example, often people refer to “reform of
x industry”. They mean that the formal rules that guide its operations should change. In
fact, it is one reason many social change activists identify a successful change campaign
with “advocacy” as a tool to change laws and policies. Other tools associated with
Reform change strategies include negotiations and mediation.
Reform also follows successful transformation activities. To move into this stage the
SFL began prototyping with action experiments and pilots that reflected their vision for
sustainable agriculture. This experience aims to develop new procedures, formal
relationships, and ways of behaving to reflect the values and beliefs of the vision.
For example, one SFL project is developing new business models to connect small-scale
farmers and food companies “…that distribute risks and rewards more evenly across the
supply chain, improve the flow of market information, and increase access to credit and
technical assistance.” (SFL 2010) These qualities of the business model arise from the
vision and new insights about interdependence. They challenge assumptions of the
traditional business model of company plantations by identifying new relationships, rules
and processes.

Incremental
The change challenge then passes into the domain of scaling up. This is change with
widespread replication and adaptation of the models, and adoption of the reformed rules,
processes, beliefs and values. This might seem like the easy part, but history is littered
with proven pilots that have never become influential. On the global scale that GANs are
working, scaling up change is an enormous and important challenge.
SFL’s strategy at this stage is product- and organization-focused, through the product-
line. For example, SFL participants Rainforest Alliance and Unilever are joining together
to produce a Lipton tea bearing the Rainforest logo. Lipton markets about 12 percent of
all tea sold worldwide. Separately, Unilever committed to use exclusively palm oil
certified by Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil for its beauty products by 2015.

Join us for a webinar on these change strategies, June 16 at 10:00 EDT, 14:00 UK, 15:00
CET. Click here for more information.