This document summarizes research on evaluating systems thinking interventions in the UK housing sector. The research examines the impact and sustainability of systems thinking approaches implemented by a major social housing organization. The research aims to evaluate key factors influencing the overall success and sustainability of the systems thinking interventions. It discusses Seddon's unique approach to systems thinking, which focuses on understanding current work performance. It also examines sustaining change through building motivation, the importance of evaluation, and the research design involving three categories of analysis: intervention substance, context, and process.

1. Organizational Change: Evaluating
Systems Thinking in the UK
Housing Sector – A Work in
Progress
Joe Marshall
Leny Vasidatur 145030207121008
M. Tantowi Jauhari 145030207121009
Ahmad Nursada Ilhami 145030207121010

2. Introduction to the chapter
The purpose of this chapter is to report on the work in progress
of a three year research project investigating the impact and
sustainability of systems thinking on service performance in the
UK housing sector.
The purpose of this research is to examine and evaluate the
systems thinking interventions taking place at a major social
housing business in the UK in terms of the key factors that are
believed to influence their overall success and sustainability
(Buchanan et al. 2007).

3. Local
Context

4. A. Organizational change and systems thinking
 Organizational change in the housing sector, the particular focus is that of a recent
growing interest in systems thinking employed to bring about organization
change, improvement, and performance.
 In a series of publications on organizational change for the UK NHS Organizational
Change – A Review for Healthcare Managers, Professionals and Researchers a great
deal of time is devoted to the explanation and contribution of systems thinking.
The authors claim:
Within the NHS the term whole systems thinking is now routinely used by managers
and clinicians. (Iles and Sutherland, 2001, p. 17)

5. Seddon’s approach to systems thinking
• Philosophy
Seddon describes his approach to systems thinking as different to others:
managers [should] see systems thinking as a means to get knowledge ... and
be able to act with prediction and confidence of improvement ... while all
systems theorists agree a system is a sum of its parts and the parts must be
managed as one, the Vanguard approach is unique in that it starts and ends
with the work. (Seddon, 2003 p. 182)

6. Seddon’s approach to systems thinking
• Methodology
The methodology ‘Check- Plan-Do’ is a variation of the ‘Plan-
Do-Study- Act/Plan-Do-Check-Act’ model (Deming and Walton,
1992) used in many business improvement methods but one
which starts with ‘Check’ rather than ‘Plan’: ‘getting knowledge
of the what and why of current performance as a system:
nothing is assumed other than we almost certainly don’t know
what that performance is’ (Seddon, 2008 p. 78).

7.  'Check’ is undertaken by the system intervention team (in-house staff
directly familiar with the work) who will learn the approach by carry- ing it
out. ‘Check’ examines:
1. the purpose of the service in customer terms
2. the types and frequencies of customer demand
3. how the system responds to demand
4. the flow of work; the value work and waste
5. the system conditions that create waste
6. the management thinking that governs current performance
Seddon’s approach to systems thinking

8. B. Sustaining change and systems thinking
The authors (Armenakis and Harris 2009) cite six ‘signposts’ of their research journey
during this time:
1. change recipients motivation to change
2. change recipients active participation in the change effort
3. the importance of diagnosis
4. importance for creating readiness for the change
5. strategies for influencing change recipients motivation
6. the assessment of reactions to organizational change
 The most significant signpost they argue is ‘change recipient motives
to support change efforts’ and which ‘therefore increases the likelihood
of successful sustainable organisational change’ (Armenakis and Harris,
2009 p. 127).

9. C. Evaluating change and systems thinking
According to Huz et al. (1997) four issues in the evaluation of systems
thinking interventions should be considered:
1. Do organizations and norms/operating procedures change?
2. Does the quality of services delivered to customers improve?
3. Do individuals who participate in the interventions change the way
they think?
4. Does the overall efficiency and effectiveness shift in a measurable way?

10. D. Research design and data collection

11. Analysis and discussion
These factors and
conditions are now
discussed with
regard to the
findings to date
under three broad
analytical categories
of :
Intervention/change
substance
Intervention/change
context
Intervention/change
process

12. Intervention/change substance
 The Perceived Benefits arising from change interventions is
considered a key factor of success. The intervention method
evident in this study achieves strong credibility in terms of the
extent of the ‘current performance’ problems found in all
three of the interventions.

14. Intervention/change context
Regardless of the change methods, the culture of the
organization is thought to be important in successful
change. Conflicting priorities, multiple agencies,
readiness, resources, current performance targets, and
the history of change efforts, will all influence the
momentum and sustainability of change.

15.  Key roles, power and influence
The role of CEO and senior management is a ‘crucial and
pivotal’ factor in the sustainability and spread of systems thinking.
 Temporal issues
Systems thinking is beyond a short- term quick fix and needs
time to embed. To make a ‘cultural shift’ to systems thinking will
demand a long timeframe.
Intervention/change process

16. And thank you
Any question?