scholarly journals Can Systems Thinking Become "The Way We Do Things?" Comment on "What Can Policy-Makers Get Out of Systems Thinking? Policy Partners’ Experiences of a Systems-Focused Research Collaboration in Preventive Health"

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bev J. Holmes
Keyword(s):  
Systems Thinking ◽  
Critical Success Factors ◽  
Success Factors ◽  
Research Collaboration ◽  
Preventive Health ◽  
Prevention Research ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Mutual Learning ◽  
Critical Success ◽  
The Way

In "What Can Policy-Makers Get Out of Systems Thinking? Policy Partners’ Experiences of a Systems-Focused Research Collaboration in Preventive Health," Haynes et al glean two important insights from the policy-makers they interview. First: active promotion of systems thinking may work against its champions. Haynes and colleagues’ findings support a backgrounding of systems thinking; more important for policy-makers than understanding the finer details of systems thinking is working in situations of mutual learning and shared expertise. Second: coproduction may be getting short shrift in prevention research. Most participant comments were not about systems thinking, but about the benefits of working across sectors. Operationalizing the ‘co’ in co-production is not easy, but it may be where the pay-off will be for prevention researchers, who must understand the critical success factors of co-production and its potential pitfalls, to capitalize on its significant opportunities.

scholarly journals What Can Policy-Makers Get Out of Systems Thinking? Policy Partners’ Experiences of a Systems-Focused Research Collaboration in Preventive Health

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 65-76
Author(s):  
Abby Haynes ◽  
Kate Garvey ◽  
Seanna Davidson ◽  
Andrew Milat
Keyword(s):  
Systems Thinking ◽  
Research Collaboration ◽  
Systems Approach ◽  
Policy Design ◽  
Preventive Health ◽  
Policy Action ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Policy Work ◽  
Policy Problems ◽  
Depth Interviews

Background: There is increasing interest in using systems thinking to tackle ‘wicked’ policy problems in preventive health, but this can be challenging for policy-makers because the literature is amorphous and often highly theoretical. Little is known about how best to support health policy-makers to gain skills in understanding and applying systems thinking for policy action. Methods: In-depth interviews were conducted with 18 policy-makers who are participating in an Australian research collaboration that uses a systems approach. Our aim was to explore factors that support policy-makers to use systems approaches, and to identify any impacts of systems thinking on policy thinking or action, including the pathways through which these impacts occurred. Results: All 18 policy-makers agreed that systems thinking has merit but some questioned its practical policy utility. A small minority were confused about what systems thinking is or which approaches were being used in the collaboration. The majority were engaged with systems thinking and this group identified concrete impacts on their work. They reported using systems-focused research, ideas, tools and resources in policy work that were contributing to the development of practical methodologies for policy design, scaling up, implementation and evaluation; and to new prevention narratives. Importantly, systems thinking was helping some policy-makers to reconceptualise health problems and contexts, goals, potential policy solutions and methods. In short, they were changing how they think about preventive health. Conclusion: These results show that researchers and policy-makers can put systems thinking into action as part of a research collaboration, and that this can result in discernible impacts on policy processes. In this case, action-oriented collaboration and capacity development over a 5-year period facilitated mutual learning and practical application. This indicates that policy-makers can get substantial applied value from systems thinking when they are involved in extended co-production processes that target policy impact and are supported by responsive capacity strategies.

scholarly journals The Challenges of Putting Systems Thinking into Practice Comment on "What Can Policy-Makers Get Out of Systems Thinking? Policy Partners’ Experiences of a Systems-Focused Research Collaboration in Preventive Health"

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Boswell ◽  
Janis Baird ◽  
Ravita Taheem
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Systems Thinking ◽  
Research Collaboration ◽  
Preventive Health ◽  
Recent Analysis ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Policy Actors ◽  
Concrete Action ◽  
Preventive Public Health

In theory, ‘systems thinking’ offers a remarkably attractive solution to the persistent challenges of preventive public health. Haynes and colleagues’ recent analysis of the Prevention Centre in Australia offers reason for optimism that it might be possible to translate this promise into action on the ground. In this commentary, we critically assess the claims from this promising case study and their broader applicability to the cause of preventive health. We argue that, in many other contexts, persistent obstacles remain, such as a lack of buy-in from senior policy actors, and a lack of tangible or concrete action following through on an abstract commitment to systems thinking.

scholarly journals Applying a Systems Perspective to Preventive Health: How Can It Be Useful? Comment on "What Can Policy-Makers Get Out of Systems Thinking? Policy Partners’ Experiences of a Systems-Focused Research Collaboration in Preventive Health"

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matt Egan ◽  
Elizabeth McGill
Keyword(s):  
Systems Thinking ◽  
Research Collaboration ◽  
Preventive Health ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Support Intervention ◽  
Political Consequences ◽  
Potential Barriers ◽  
Systems Perspective ◽  
Mixed Response ◽  
Intervention Planning

Advocates suggest that a paradigm shift in preventive health towards systems thinking is desirable and may be underway. In a recent study of policy-makers’ opinions, Haynes and colleagues found a mixed response to an Australian initiative that sought to apply systems theories and associated methods to preventive health. Some were enthusiastic about systems, but others were concerned or unconvinced about its usefulness. This commentary responds to such concerns. We argue that a systems perspective can help provide policy-makers with timely evidence to inform decisions about intervention planning and delivery. We also suggest that research applying a systems perspective could provide policy-makers with evidence to support planning and incremental decision-making; make recommendations to support intervention adaptability; consider potential barriers due to incoherent systems, and consider the political consequences of interventions.

Benchmarking Local e-Government

2012 ◽  
pp. 624-640 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susana de Juana-Espinosa ◽  
Juan José Tarí
Keyword(s):  
Central Europe ◽  
Critical Success Factors ◽  
Success Factors ◽  
Project Managers ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Critical Success ◽  
Tourist Town ◽  
Government Project ◽  
Development Plans

The aim of this chapter is to examine the stages of business process re-Engineering (BPR) and the critical success factors needed to successfully implement e-Government initiatives in a major tourist town in Spain. The research utilises a case study as the main methodology for understanding the penetration of e-Government in a tourist town in Spain. This town is one of the most attractive destinations for holiday travelers from Northern and Central Europe, as well as for many Spanish people. The chapter shows how the stages of BPR are deployed in a local e-Government project and how the critical success factors (CSFs) have been addressed. These results may serve as an exemplary approach to understanding BPR and critical success factors in local e-Government strategies. The study provides lessons for policy makers and other stakeholders, including project managers and implementers that will help them to increase the efficiency and efficacy of their e-Government adoption processes especially if their economy is tourism-centered. Accordingly, the local government in many tourism-oriented, emerging economies may benefit from this experience, since it will allow them to identify the relevant success factors and to overcome possible barriers culminating into the increase of efficiency of their e-Government development plans.

Digital Government Development Strategies

2011 ◽  
pp. 394-420 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu-Che Chen ◽  
Richard Knepper
Keyword(s):  
Critical Success Factors ◽  
Success Factors ◽  
Development Strategies ◽  
Digital Government ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Critical Success ◽  
Country Comparison ◽  
Cross Country ◽  
Comprehensive Framework ◽  
Government Development

This chapter provides policy makers with a comprehensive framework for developing national digital government strategies. This framework raises the importance of technical and economic situations, cross-country comparison of laws and institutions, and the necessity of considering political contexts. More importantly, it outlines the general developmental strategies and critical success factors for improving the practice of national digital government efforts. To illuminate the utility and application of the framework through an examination of Poland and Taiwan’s experience, this chapter also yields insights into specific considerations for designing and improving digital government.

scholarly journals Driving the Transition to a Circular Economic Model: A Systematic Review on Drivers and Critical Success Factors in Circular Economy

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (24) ◽  
pp. 10672
Author(s):  
Davide Aloini ◽  
Riccardo Dulmin ◽  
Valeria Mininno ◽  
Alessandro Stefanini ◽  
Pierluigi Zerbino
Keyword(s):  
Circular Economy ◽  
Critical Success Factors ◽  
Success Factors ◽  
Scientific Literature ◽  
Scientific Work ◽  
Intergovernmental Organizations ◽  
Business Organizations ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Critical Success

The circular economy (CE) is arising as a novel economic system that is restorative by design. In light of its capability to boost sustainable economic development and to cope with environmental challenges, it has recently attracted increasing attention from academics, practitioners, policymakers, and intergovernmental organizations. Despite the wide speculation on this issue, the scientific literature lacks a wide-ranging, systematic, and updated identification and classification of the main drivers and Critical Success Factors of CE initiatives, which appears increasingly necessary to facilitate future scientific work, practical implementations, and policy guidelines. With this aim, this paper develops a systematic literature review by starting with over 400 manuscripts. A final set of 55 selected papers was selected for singling out and classifying drivers and Critical Success Factors in the CE context. The results may provide clear indications for further research, may help business organizations in evaluating CE initiatives, and may guide policy makers in developing and refining CE normative frameworks.

scholarly journals Overcoming Barriers to Applying Systems Thinking Mental Models in Policy-Making Comment on "What Can Policy-Makers Get Out of Systems Thinking? Policy Partners’ Experiences of a Systems-Focused Research Collaboration in Preventive Health"

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sobia Khan
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Mental Models ◽  
Systems Thinking ◽  
Mental Model ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Research Collaboration ◽  
Preventive Health ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Solution Generation ◽  
Australian Researcher

Systems thinking provides the health system with important theories, models and approaches to understanding and assessing complexity. However, the utility and application of systems thinking for solution-generation and decision-making is uncertain at best, particularly amongst health policy-makers. This commentary aims to elaborate on key themes discussed by Haynes and colleagues in their study exploring policy-makers’ perceptions of an Australian researcher-policy-maker partnership focused on applications of systems thinking. Findings suggest that policy-makers perceive systems thinking as too theoretical and not actionable, and that the value of systems thinking can be gleaned from greater involvement of policy-makers in research (ie, through co-production). This commentary focuses on the idea that systems thinking is a mental model that, contrary to researchers’ beliefs, may be closely aligned with policy-makers’ existing worldviews, which can enhance adoption of this mental model. However, wider application of systems thinking beyond research requires addressing multiple barriers faced by policy-makers related to their capability, opportunity and motivation to action their systems thinking mental models. To make systems thinking applicable to the policy sphere, multiple approaches are required that focus on capacity building, and a shift in shared mental models (or the ideas and institutions that govern policy-making).

scholarly journals CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTORS IN DIGITAL PUBLISHING TECHNOLOGY USING AN ANP APPROACH

2015 ◽  
Vol 22 (5) ◽  
pp. 670-684 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lon-Fon SHIEH ◽  
Ching-Chiang YEH ◽  
Ming-Cheng LAI
Keyword(s):  
Critical Success Factors ◽  
Success Factors ◽  
Evaluation Model ◽  
Digital Publishing ◽  
Analytic Network Process ◽  
Successful Implementation ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Critical Success ◽  
Network Process ◽  
Publishing Technology

Digital publishing technology (DPT) has been recognized as one of the most important technologies for economic development. The purpose of the study is to develop an evaluation model based on analytic network process (ANP) approach to explore the critical success factors (CSFs) for the successful implementation of DPT. It can objectively identify related criteria of DPT, and then prioritize improvement criteria to the success of promoting DPT for government. To demonstrate the applicability of the proposed approach, the Taiwan’s DPT is conducted. The results of this study could serve as a new method and offer insights to policy makers to indentify and prioritize CSFs for DPT implementations systematically.

scholarly journals Reflections on Methodological Congruence in Systems and Complexity-Informed Research Comment on "What Can Policy-Makers Get Out of Systems Thinking? Policy Partners’ Experiences of a Systems-Focused Research Collaboration in Preventive Health"

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana Teixeira de Melo
Keyword(s):  
Systems Thinking ◽  
Research Methodology ◽  
Research Collaboration ◽  
Preventive Health ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Traditional Research ◽  
Or Practice ◽  
Complex Forms ◽  
Patterns Of Interaction ◽  
Forms Of Knowledge

In this paper we argue, for an increased congruence between the conceptual frameworks and the research methodology in studies focused on the theory or practice of systems and complexity-informed thinking (SCT). In doing so, we believe we can build more complex forms of knowledge with clearer and more impactful implications for practice. There is scope for both methodological innovations and the adaptation of traditional research methods to enact properties congruent with the systemic complexity of our targeted realities. We organise our reflection around the paper of Haynes et al. We provide examples of how a research methodology more deeply embedded in systems and complexity-thinking may add depth and meaning to the research results and their interpretation. We explore the creative adaptation of the interview techniques to integrate systemic forms of questioning (eg, circular and reflexive questioning) to map the patterns of interaction contributing to the outcomes of interventions.

scholarly journals Sense-Making, Mutual Learning and Cognitive Shifts When Applying Systems Thinking in Public Health – Examples From Sweden Comment on "What Can Policy-Makers Get Out of Systems Thinking? Policy Partners’ Experiences of a Systems-Focused Research Collaboration in Preventive Health"

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Monica E. Nyström ◽  
Sara Tolf ◽  
Helena Strehlenert
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Systems Thinking ◽  
Research Collaboration ◽  
Soft Systems Methodology ◽  
Sense Making ◽  
Systems Methodology ◽  
Soft Systems ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Mutual Learning ◽  
Double Loop Learning

It is widely acknowledged that systems thinking (ST) should be implemented in the area of public health, but how this should be done is less clear. In this commentary we focus on sense-making and double-loop learning processes when using ST and soft systems methodology in research collaborations with policy-makers. In their study of policymakers’ experiences of ST, Haynes et al emphasize the importance of knowledge processes and mutual learning between researchers and policy-makers, processes which can change how policy-makers think and thus have impact on real-world policy concerns. We provide some additional examples from Sweden on how ST has been applied to create learning and shared mental models among stakeholders and researchers in national and regional healthcare development initiatives. We conclude that investigating and describing such processes on micro-level can aid the knowledge on how to implement ST in public health.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document