Complexity and theories of change: redux

The problem is that too few people actually revise their theories of change in practice.

Alternatively, Dave Snowden recommends a vector theory of change. In this, you forget about long-term goals entirely. You start from where you are and map the system’s current dispositional state, identify a desired direction of travel, but not a final destination . If you have a broad outcome area, or options for different possible outcomes you do... See more

Morell argues that it’s worth signalling the strength of relationships through thicker or thinner lines in diagrams.

We know that in complex systems many factors combine to produce outcomes. Though not all factors are necessarily equally important .

Cartwright’s work emphasises moderating factors: “support factors” and “derailers.” The presence or absence of these factors by no means guarantees success or failure, but they help us to think more seriously about what factors may need to be in place (or absent) in a particular context for a programme to make a difference (see Davey et al. 2018; M... See more

In Causal-Link Monitoring, Heather Britt and Richard Hummelbrunner focus on how likely critical assumptions are to fail (i.e., how vulnerable they are).

A rather better framing, in my view, is assessing degrees of uncertainty .

Our influence is limited , and many other actors play an important role in achieving any significant outcomes

Duncan Green argued that:

“We need to distinguish between theories of change (how the system itself is changing, without our involvement) and theories of action (the small differences we can make, usually in alliance with others). If theories of change start by putting us at the centre of everything, that is a serious problem — we almost never are.

... See more