Reflections on the System Change Group

Formed at the start of the Golden Key programme, the System Change Group (SCG) was a cross-sector, multi-organisation group of individuals looking to generate system change. The group’s stated aim was to create change in Bristol by ‘unlocking the system for those furthest away from getting their needs met by services’. After six years the group has recognised that it is no longer the best vehicle for system change in the city and has chosen to disband.

In this piece, the Spark team, who has supported the work of the SCG over the past four years is reflecting on the work of the group, and wider changes that have taken place in Bristol during its tenure.

The System Change Group

Initially set up as the Golden Key system change group, the group has undergone several iterations after its conception in 2014. The original group merged with the Bristol Homelessness Health group in 2017 before being redesigned by members in 2019 and finally deciding to disband at the start of 2021. We believe that this willingness of the group to adapt in line with emerging opportunities to try and best meet its aim of creating change in the system should be seen as a real positive. The decision to end the group should not be seen as a failure, but rather as an appropriate response to the current needs of the system.

Impact

Since the SCG began, 83 people from 31 different organisations have been involved. 25 of these have been trained in Systems Thinking. We cannot know the full extent to which people’s involvement in the SCG may impact their work outside of the group, but we do know that those who have attended the training and have been part of the group have demonstrated more systemic ways of thinking and acting. We can assume that this will enable them to continue to act and think systemically outside of the context of the group in other spaces they engage with and in their own (or future) organisations.

As a collective, the group has completed 16 pieces of system change work that have been captured by Golden Key. When asked, members said that some of their most significant accomplishments have been to influence the re-contracting, rather than recommissioning, of the adult homelessness pathways and the inclusion of Psychologically Informed Environments (PIE) in the commissioning of services.

Shifting Landscapes

Since the group’s inception, we have seen the culture in Bristol shift significantly. We are witnessing far more awareness of systems thinking among organisations and individuals working with people experiencing multiple disadvantages. The System Change Group has certainly played some part in this overall picture.

“Change is a journey that we are on together. There has been significant culture change that maybe hasn’t always been recognised.”

There are now several groups in Bristol aiming to create systemic change. Learning from the SCG has directly influenced some of these. For example, Bristol’s Creative Solutions Board which is also supported by the Spark team, has adapted learning from the SCG to define its set up, underlying structures and ongoing support offered to members.

Learning from the SCG, not only about what has worked, but also the challenges the group has faced, has also been shared with a number of other Fulfilling Lives projects across England. This learning offered other groups the opportunity to consider how lessons learned can be applied in their own context.  It is fair to assume that the legacy of the group and its learning may continue to influence groups not only in Bristol, but nationwide, for some time to come.

System change is now also a much more common expectation from funders, both locally and nationally. This was demonstrated by the recent Changing Futures funding from the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government. Changing Futures seeks to  “drive lasting change across the whole system to provide better outcomes for adults experiencing multiple disadvantage.” This feels like a real culture shift, from focussing on service delivery to creating sustainable changes to services. The potential of this new focus on system change is really exciting. We hope it will give services the power to be more responsive to the needs, and emerging opportunities, in their system. This could result in large scale, tangible changes that allow services to truly meet the needs of those that they were designed to serve.

What can we learn from the System Change Group?

If an expectation of system change continues, from commissioners and services, there needs to be dedicated resources to support people to do this. Golden Key’s Spark team was able to support the SCG and members have acknowledged that this was a fundamental part of the group’s success. However, Golden Key is a time-limited project and as things currently stand, the Spark team will soon cease to exist. For support to be sustainable, it would need to be found from elsewhere in the system and consideration should be given to what these roles might look like and how they may be funded.

We believe it is essential to equip people in groups with the skills needed to generate system change outside of the formal structure of a group. System change can only really take place in the system. It happens between the meetings, involving members and non-members. With this in mind, thought needs to be given to how meetings can best support the group’ activity. Meetings may be more focused on feedback, troubleshooting, tracking, sounding out ideas of things to work on, a combination of all of these, or something else entirely. It is for the group to determine how meetings can best help meet its stated purpose.

While it is important for group members to think and act systemically, it is equally important for staff across all levels of organisations to feel empowered to think and act differently. System change can, and does, happen across all levels of the system, from CEOs and managers to client facing staff and service users. There is a role for senior staff (who are often members of more formal groups) to actively encourage this empowerment of staff in their organisations.

Finally, networks and groups are not designed to last forever, but instead should operate for as long as they feel useful. The group’s decision to end is a positive indicator of taking ownership, and feeling a sense of autonomy that has ultimately allowed members to make their own decision about the future.