Readiness for Systemic Change

1. Readiness for Systemic Change Peter Watson Director, NRCOI March 17, 2008

2. What the Literature Suggests • Systemic change is complex, lengthy and multidimensional • Numerous change theories • No simple way to define and measure readiness for systemic change • But some common readiness domains emerge • Key question: readiness for a specific change initiative or readiness for change in general?

3. Multilevel Influences on Successful Implementation Influence Factors: Social, Economic, Political Organizational Components: Selection, Program Evaluation, Admin, Systems Intervention Core Implementation Components: Training, Coaching, Performance Measurement Fixsen, D.L., Naoom, S.F., Blase, K.A., Friedman, R.M. & Wallace, F. (2005). Implementation Research: A Synthesis of the Literature. Tampa, FL: University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, The National Implementation Research Network (FMHI Publication #231). Pg. 59.

4. Readiness Domains:the Usual Suspects • Sustained and intentional leadership focus • Vision for change linked to outcomes • Meaningful stakeholder involvement • Monitoring, feedback and accountability • Communication plans and capability • Identification and availability of key resources • Staff skills and time

5. Readiness Domains: A Few Unusual Suspects • Organizational culture and climate • External influence factors—social, political and economic • Alignment of key systems to support and sustain change • Tone of monitoring and feedback process: “Gotcha” or “Got your back”

6. What Experience Suggests • Time pressure for changes in child welfare often at odds with knowledge about how long lasting, systemic change takes (preparation, implementation, sustainability) • If an organization is not “ready” yet, what has to happen? • Develop integrated T/TA strategies to support systemic change initiatives

7. What Experience Suggests • We don’t have a handy tool we can use to assess readiness • But is this statement true: Readiness is difficult to define, but “you know it when you see it?” • Good consultants should help you identify the key domains to consider in your planning

8. What Experience Suggests • “Readiness” undoubtedly varies across an organization • One of main lessons from CFSRs—inconsistent practice across states, local offices and units • Search for champions or potential early adopters is a key strategy • We need to look beyond the child welfare agency for solutions

9. One Last Thought • The Eureka factor • Link between relaxation and insight • You cannot “force” systemic change

10. Contact Information Peter Watson, Director NRCOI 207-228-8330 (office) 207-632-0892 (mobile) pwatson@usm.maine.edu National Child Welfare Resource Center for Organizational Improvement A service of the Children’s Bureau, Member of the T/TA Network

11. References • Barbee, Anita. White Paper on Models of Organizational Change and Systems Change, unpublished. 2007 • Fixsen, D.L., Naoom, S.F., Blase, K.A., Friedman, R.M. & Wallace, F. Implementation Research: A Synthesis of the Literature. Tampa, FL: University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, The National Implementation Research Network (FMHI Publication #231). 2005 • Hemmelgarn, Anthony. The Impact of Organizational Social Context: Training Impacting Context or Context Impacting Training? Presentation at the 11th Annual National Services Training and Evaluation Symposium. (May, 2008) • Kotter, John P. “Leading Change: Why Transformation Efforts Fail,” Harvard Business Review, January, 2007. Pp. 96-103. • Lehrer, Jonah. “The Eureka Hunt,” The New Yorker. July 28, 2008. Pp. 40-45.