Anna Birney: Multi-Level Perspective case study

Dr Anna Birney is CEO (Chief Executive / Enabling / Evolving Officer) of The School of System Change, which enables personal and collective agency to cultivate change in the world with a multi-method approach to systems change learning - with networks, organisations and individuals (Anna's LinkedIn, Medium and Twitter).

This episode is a little unusual. We dive into the Multi-Level Perspective ('MLP'), one of the leading theories of system transition which we teach in the module (here for the Wikipedia explanation). MLP has been used in academic research for the last decade or so. However, there are not a lot of good case studies of using MLP for change.

The #OneLess project, run by Anna when she was at Forum for the Future, is a rare example.

Anna uses slides to explain the story. You can watch the presentation on YouTube here and download the slides here.

Through the course of the interview, we cover (amongst other things):
-Sustainability as "finding the collective of capability to address a complex world and a changing world".
-All models are wrong, just some are more useful than others.
-How the OneLess project came out of the Marine CoLABoration, funded by the Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation.
-The standard 'story' of change in MLP: the macro level ('Landscape')  trends put pressure on the mainstream ('Regime'), which has been dynamically stable but now is struggling, making space for mature new innovations to come in from the bottom level ('Niche').
-Part of the practice of systemic change is paying attention the the boundaries you are choosing, because there is a dance between the boundaries people believe form the system and what interventions can act with that system.
-Four different uses of MLP in the proejct:
  1. As a frame of research questions to understand the challenge.
  2., As a diagnostic analysis of the dynamics.
  3. Create a strategy for systemic impact.
  4. To keep on testing assumptions against experiences.
-Relating the project to the Taxonomy of Innovation used in the Module.
-The importance of keeping an experimental mindset, and to be actively learning-by-testing.
-Also, the importance of having a portfolio of interventions of different types, each justified by the underpinning rationale provided by MLP; not just relying on technological silver bullets.

This is part of a series of interviews about innovation for sustainability conducted for the UCL Institute for Sustainable Resources, as a contribution to a module in this Masters. You can find out more about these interviews, and the module, here.

Transcript

David Bent-Hazelwood: 0:00

Hi everyone, this is one of several interviews on innovation, business and sustainability for the students studying for the MSc in sustainable resources at UCL. My name is David bent, and I'm a lecturer at UCL Institute for Sustainable resources. And I co lead the module on business, innovation and sustainability. Most of the course gives people the latest academic theory and insight. These interviews are with practitioners to get some of the grit underneath the fingernails of innovating for sustainability today. And I'm delighted to say we're joined by Dr. Anna Birney, and a slightly unusual episode of our series, because we're gonna be diving into the multi level perspective, which is one of the things we bring into the transitions lecture. There's not a lot of good case studies out there are people actually using it for change, and Anna and her team have been using it. So we're gonna go into a bit more detail on that. But before we get to that, as I say, Dr. Anna Birney, chief executive officer or chief enabling officer of the School of system change. So first off, what is your role in your organisation?

Anna Birney: 1:10

So yeah, thank you, David. We, we our school system change, which means we bring systems change, learning and practice to change makers, working across the field of sustainability, or social environmental issues. So really trying to find those different methods and tools, and put them into curriculum, support, training, but really support people's development in us. So hence, really excited to be with you today to show some examples of how that has happened for ourselves. Cool.

David Bent-Hazelwood: 1:40

And then question we ask everybody, what does sustainability mean, in your organisation? There are many variations, what does it mean for you?

Anna Birney: 1:47

Well, so actually, we think, you know, the sustainability, we think, is the abilities vein. But actually, we now talk about, we've passed a lot of our environmental limits. And we also be dealing with deep inequity. And so what it means for us is both kind of trying to find a more adjusted and regenerative future. But really, it's about finding the collective of capability to address a complex world and a changing world. So we think sustainability, the ability, our own ability to work with change, and to work with complexity is our mission and what we're here to do for sustainability. So if

David Bent-Hazelwood: 2:23

we, if we have the collective ability to learn and adapt to all of the circumstances that are thrown at us, then we can sustain those things, which we think are important about identity and war. That's the version of exactly cool. And then the thing I should have said up top is one of the other ways in which this episode is a little different is that we are also doing visuals. So if you're listening to this on a normal podcast app, there will be a link in the show notes to the video because Anna is about to share some slides, which helps us to unpack the multi level perspective because it is where it's often best to understand it in quite a visual way. So, Anna, the next question, which takes us away from the normal questions of our of these episodes. And before we get to your story of using MLP, multi level perspective with oneness, can you just give us a high level explanation of what is the multi level perspective?

Anna Birney: 3:16

Thank you. Yes. So as I say, just to sort of frame it up at the school, we use lots of different systems frameworks, and they're all about windows into complexity. They're all about trying to understand how we see the system in its entirety. And as Dave and I both know, all models are wrong, just some are more useful than others. So hopefully, you will see how this one has been useful. So I think the usefulness is that it helps you understand change at different scales and altitudes, it helps you understand what's happening in the niche in the innovation in the socio technological margins of the mainstream, it helps you understand their relationship with what's happening in the regime, which is the day to day business. As usual, the way the system maybe is already configured, what's happening, how that is influencing it, but also how the big picture, the operating context and mega trends, the shared values are influencing that and how they come together, hopefully, will change if we are change makers trying to try to do something. So it's trying to understand the innovation isn't just about trying to break through, it's also about this dynamic of change tries to bring some of that dynamism to find the place of systems change the pressure of the landscape, the niche, the innovations, how they come together to change the system,

David Bent-Hazelwood: 4:34

who and you're showing this slide there, which has like a typical story for change in the MLP version. So there is an existing regime, which is sort of dynamically stable. There are the mainstream organisations which have supply chains, they have customers, they have regulation, they have technologies, all of which sort of work well enough. And of course, there are some changes over time. Fine, but it's you would recognise that regime from one year to another. But then, in the slide here, we have a moment of acceleration, there's pressure from the landscape, which is causing the regime to struggle, and then things which have been developing in the niche. And up until now the regime has been able to ignore become strong enough to take the opportunity of that weakness in the regime and move in. And that becomes a stabilised new regime. That's the basic story of change within MLP. Is that Is that a fair way of expressing it? Almost as if I've been using it. Anyway. So that's, that's the sort of basic theory which comes out of various pieces of economic history that was studied by short and hills, I can never quite managed pronounce their names correctly, other people do that better. So that the history of it as a method is of looking backwards to understand past historical changes. And what's different, I think about some of the work you've been doing is you've been using it to diagnose and to inspire what to do going forward. So let's have a bit of that story.

Anna Birney: 6:10

Yeah. So we apply this framework as the starting framework, actually to a project called one less. So it was all about how do we make London single use plastic water bottle free? And how do we do that to help value the ocean differently is about real connection towards the ocean. And we really wanted to understand what was happening in London, what was keeping the system understand the current conditions of that system. And we also wanted to really understand it in the context of these bigger, bigger trends and ideas. So the first thing we did was, we actually use the MLP as a diagnostic starting place. And what we mean by that is because we turned the questions, in the multi level perspective, only the levels into questions and research questions. So we were asking questions such as what are the emerging alternatives in this system? So things like alumni can or water in a bottle of water in a quarter, for example, or renewables? And what was happening? So what are the alternatives in the system? And we were asking people in the stakeholders, but we were also asking them about what was happening in the system that was creating pressure change? Where was that? Where was the change coming from? So actually, interestingly, in the UK, David Attenborough did their blue planet work about this time. So that was kind of this trend of people showing that the ocean was something that people were valuing, and the connection between ocean plastics and the plastics that we eat the single use plastic that we use when we're making that connection. So we were mapping this out onto onto the multilevel perspective. In the regime, we were also asking, what were the barriers? What were the enablers of change? What were people struggling with? What were the rules of the system? What were the technologies system? What were the power and the people that implements this? All those things Dave talked about a moment ago, we were asking questions of stakeholders. And we did, we actually interviewed about 40 different stakeholders, from local authorities, to businesses, to kind of key actors from NGOs, community groups across London to truly try to understand what was happening. So first of all, this, this method was used as a way to diagnose and research and ask questions over the course of a few months to really build up a stakeholder engagement, but also to start to get a picture of the dynamic of what was happening. And what that materialising too, and you don't need, if you are watching, you don't need to understand the detail of the system map because it was for our internal strategizing. But it helped us map out the dynamics that helped us map out what was happening at the policy level, at the infrastructural level at the behavioural level and at the values. We started, therefore, engage people and find people in the system about where we wanted to put our energy and leverage for change.

David Bent-Hazelwood: 9:03

So just one question on this, it's quite a detailed map, as is the way often when system maps, if you're an outsider who's not used it before, it looks very confusing. But for those who are involved in creating it, it has more more value. Is this a map? Would you describe this as a map of the regime? Or is it a map of the totality? Or does it sort of sit outside of the MLP? Is it is it an independent thing?

Anna Birney: 9:29

Independent we actually decided not to map it just on the MRP because what it started to reveal was was actually the, it stands to move towards strategy. So the current system there was almost at the top here you'll see at the system there was different strategies and ways to which we can intervene in the system for its destruction. So what could the alternative alternatives be and how do we start to it led to a conversation about where might we put our energy where might be there the the possibility to change So there was an option to maybe work with closing the loop on plastics. By that mean, looking at Circular Economy, what does it mean to take out plastics after they've been used, they don't get into the ocean, there was an option to say let's have throw away alternatives. So maybe creating a car people selling parties water rather than Plastics of water. But what we realised as we went through this process, that the the actual system, the new regime that we wanted, was to support a system of referrals, who really look at where the points of the infrastructure needed. So this helped us make boundary choices in this building. So a lot of what happens with multi level perspective is you start to think about where is the boundary of the system? Once you started the functionality dynamics? Where do we want to put our energy? Do we want to focus on waste management is supply chain circularity or what we decided we really wanted to focus on this new infrastructure, change the perception of of, of single use plastic water bottles, and trying to find a new way to hydrate people through through a different system?

David Bent-Hazelwood: 11:05

Yeah. And I think that emphasises that, in this kind of system, change the pre the boundaries of the regime that was before the change, are not necessarily going to be the boundaries of the regime after the change in a way, part of the change is changing, using the word change to return to that sentence, but part of the change is changing what the boundaries are, because that makes great, what resources are available, efforts are available, what tactics, it changes those and therefore gives them more degrees of freedom for what can happen next. Yeah.

Anna Birney: 11:38

And what we find when people use, we use the multi level perspective in other systems as a sort of both at capacity building, but starting off strategy processes, where we get people to use it and ask these questions of their quiet about their challenges. And often they go through this process of realising, oh, we've zoomed out too wide. So it's all of climate change, always zoomed into small. And it's actually just this tiny bit of the energy system. And it's some of this is always trying to say, what is the landscape in this boundary? What is the regime we're actually talking about here? Have we got the right level? And so there's sort of an art and a science of trying to use this not in a rigid way, but in a kind of flexible model to help you understand what what do we define as the machine? What do we think about signup system? Where are we? What kind of innovations might we be looking for in the system?

David Bent-Hazelwood: 12:30

So there's what I hear you describing there as a sort of dance between? If we have this kind of intervention? What boundaries does that imply? And if those are the boundaries, can we really follow through with this intervention? And if the answer is no, then what we're different intervention would imply what different boundaries and sort of playing with a call and response between the diagnosis, the action and the boundaries, all of which feed off of each other. But there's not like one way of finalising the boundaries of the system, or this is actually a choice and a call and response between your diagnosis, the actions which really you feel are available to you and the boundaries that are implied.

Anna Birney: 13:14

So you can if you happen to continue the story, and there was we did the diagnosis. So what the multi level Spectres does is it helps us and this is the process of clicking Change. Those you can see that those of you can't hit does helps us ask questions about what our boundaries are in the system. It helps us diagnose it helps us develop an understanding the relationship that flows, and you really have to look at this model as a dynamic model. And then it also helps us create a strategy, decide and deliver and decide what interventions are as we also use it as a process. We went back to it to start understanding what was our strategy and where do we want to intervene in a system. So let me go to the the interventions that it helps us look at because we will then start to saying we want to work in multiple places in this system. We want to work at both policy influencing at the bigger landscape level. But we also wanted to create value based campaigns to kind of influence the landscape. We wanted to create. Supporting early adopters in this in the regime we wanted to work with receiving actors and we've worked with venues we've worked with oval perfect round offs on football grounds. We worked with the National History Museum, we've worked with Lambeth Council who were putting in new found fountains we worked with Greater London Authority to really look at the barriers to using fountains and then we they rolled out a massive fountain process across London. And we were really looking at catalysing new approaches looking at how what's our role in these new emerging we actually ran a design fellowship that we're starting to, we have some of these big machine players and they set kind of research questions to this design students To say, how do we get? How if both overland Arsenal got together and said, We don't want referrals because people throw them to the pitch for how do we provide water without plastic? So that was one of the questions. Another one was festivals or the London Marathon in London, how do we stop single use basketball, squatters? They're an interesting pens water awkward about them section of water. And how do we shift that untenable to actually change some of their messaging. As a consequence, what we're doing is we're trying to capitalise new approaches to solutions as well, or an innovation. So all of these different intervention points, we saw when we saw that multi level sets as a way to hold our strategy, a way to think about us intervening at different levels, that policy levels, structural levels, or behavioural levels, and also at this value surface, like how will our messaging was trying to change that landscape pressure to talk about this is about the ocean, not just about having infrastructural issue? Great,

David Bent-Hazelwood: 15:59

could you just go back to that previous slide along with the MRP, and the different interventions so slightly to land it for myself. And just to make sure I understand the the train of thought here goes, well, let's assume all models have that are wrong, but some models are useful. So let's assume that the multilevel perspective is useful enough and gives us a good enough heuristic for what needs to happen. But the niches need to be mature enough, the regime needs to make enough space that the new niches can come in the landscape needs to provide enough pressure that the regime is willing and keen for that change keen for the niches to come in. And that gives you and that combined with the specific context and specific work you've done with the stakeholders on identifying what's holding them back and what they would like, that allows you to identify lots of things to do at the nice level, at the regime level at the landscape level, which means which in a way makes the MLP more true, as it means that that that presumed story of a window of opportunity opening up in the regime because of landscape pressure, allowing mature niches to come through, you're trying to make that a reality by making each of those elements in place, and that story to play out. So policy influencing the pressure for change education and values at the landscape level, that design fellowships and other things, which make sure that mature the niche along the way. And then action to increase the willingness of the regime organisations, identifying those barriers and overcoming them. All of that is set up so that you will have you're aiming towards a new regime, which contains the elements of the niche which you've been providing. And that responds to that landscape pressure.

Anna Birney: 17:55

is actually That's right. Yeah, so So we've used the multi level sets of almost in wealth, I'll explain the fourth way in a minute, the first way is as a frame of research questions to understand that. The second was to then lead us into an analysis of the dynamics that led us to a different type of map. But that's sort of diagnostic. The third was to move into strategy to kind of like, say to to systematise, our strategy and to also kind of live into the assumptions in anarchy. And the fourth area was, when I guess it's not really a fourth one, it's sort of a new one. But what we did is we kept on testing, as we went back to the multi level perspective, especially with COVID, it's actually when COVID hits, because some of our assumptions have changed and the dynamics so this idea that you use the multi level perspectives as a one or diagnosis, and you're done, things are constantly changing. We wanted to keep testing and ask yourself the question of where our assumptions ringing true, where were the condition is different. And so we went through a second round of doing that. So I guess the fourth thing I'm having is that kind of continual learning at the continual process of exploring and enabling ourselves to challenge and test our assumptions,

David Bent-Hazelwood: 19:09

which there really fits with the School of system change, sort of approach and definition of sustainability is that ongoing learning is the way in which and then integrating insights that learning is the way in which we will sustain ourselves. And it also fits with a lot of the content of the module, which is particularly for startup organisations. And a huge theme of research there is findings is of continuous learning and learning from trying to do stuff and then taking the insights of that and putting it forward so that we have other podcasts in this series on particularly agile, but also all of the startup CEOs will that you might turn to from this earlier interviews. We talked about the importance of learning by doing and integrating those into writes into the next round of things that you do. And so that fourth way you just described of using MLP is as a frame for that learning. And to make sure that you don't just strategize plan, and then clunk out the plan and turn the handle without any kind of observation of what's happening to you. And one question I should have asked right at the beginning is who is the weak? So who are you acting with? And for, which was the, which was this oneness Coalition who was involved?

Anna Birney: 20:32

So, yes, this takes a step back, just stay in the framework. The project actually emerged out of a collaboration. It's called the marine collaboration funded by political banking Foundation, trying to address the valuing of the oceans. That was actually the first question about how do we shift the how we see and value the ocean, it was almost a landscape level intervention itself. And from that, there were about nine organisations who weren't spending time together to explore what where, where might they leverage, why am I maybe interventions, and that was also a lot of the technique they were using, there was actually horizon scanning, trying to understand that horizon of what was going on in the space of marine marine environment. It was also a bit about mapping the organisational capabilities and the mapping of the organisation to a part of that coalition or collaboration with collaboration. And the four organisations actually said, Well, we're creating a third collaboration of one less, and that was the Zoological Society of London, they were obviously the marine experts, they've done a lot of work on marine plastics, then it was someone called comms Inc, who were actually working a lot with marine policy and had a lot of experience with both communication campaigns, but also policy advocacy and influence. We then worked for 10 pens, atrophying partnership. So they had a lot of community engagement around the terms a lot on litter picking, for example, a lot of behaviour change questions. And then the organisation that I was a part of for the future with the school was nurtured from more assistance change methodology bought the stakeholder engagement or the facilitation, and between us we therefore had a different capabilities to support this overall strategy we had. And this is why we also determined what boundary we chose, because it was London because that SL works in London, Thames Estuary, Archer, London, it determined our approach, because we were bringing the system's change approach, it also made sure we're working at from the policy down to the community level. So really having those different capabilities is really critical to the process of change. And that's that this interesting dance, as you say, David, between you might have the MLP, and where the perfect place to intervene. But actually, you need to match that with who the people are, who are the people and what resources do they have, and whether they want to put their energy for change. And that was also part of that initial scoping before we even launched the one less project.

David Bent-Hazelwood: 22:57

And I think, another piece of thinking that we have within the module is about sort of a taxonomy of innovation. And just trying to relate what you do a story that that taxonomy, that coalition in of itself is an ecosystem innovation that you've got together in a particular way. And that, using the MLP, in a way, which the multiple perspective in a way, which has these different features as a diagnostic tool, as guide as frame for learning, and so on, that's a process innovation. And out of that came a whole host of other innovations, mostly products, but not exclusively, which were then parts of evolving the niche, making the regime ready and able to change, making increasing the landscape pressure, all of which resulted in a shifted regime. So when it comes to that evaluation, if you would name like the top three things that happened, like the three outcomes, or five, like a small number of outcomes that resulted from this one less project, what would you say is like, you can point out and go, these things exist, which otherwise wouldn't have.

Anna Birney: 24:09

So I would say that we now see fountains funded by the Greater London Authority around London. And there are more refillable points in London. And we do see people using them and being maintained. And we also did a lot of work on sort of ensuring their maintenance, not just their installation. So that actually was a big win. Certainly, we do see venues across London and this sort of changing of the norm. So we do see perhaps for example, having a place you can fill your water bottle now we can't create attribution to that, but we know that was part of our stakeholder group and they were doing that work anyway, at the same time. So there's something about there are pioneers or innovators who are doing things you know, we know oval Cricket Ground didn't change what they were doing. They were doing some of this work anyway, but we know I mean, part of the group really supported that journey. So that that is a really big win. We've got different ways of doing things, I think we can say we contributed to changing their perception through plastic water bottles, and the ocean. There's it's a massive movement. It's not just down to ourselves, but we know we were part of that. But it did implement things and stories when policymaking. So we know we had an influence on plastics, single use plastic in its totality in the UK Government. So that in itself, we were part of that conversation, we were part of that movement of really understanding single use plastic water bottles, and this, what a lot of us say is this tangibility of our system, wines approach really help them understand this wasn't about just creating a tax on straws, for example, it was actually about trying to find alternatives. And it gave them a way to show how the system needs to change around that. Not just that it's about policy, but you know, a policy tax on single use. So that was definitely a win. And I guess, the final one I will mention here is, you know, other places, so the Philippines, for example, has got the highest amount of plastics to ocean, that that is that the most ocean countries from the Philippines, there is a programme now in the Philippines that is really trying to adopt some of this methodology and ways of working. And we hope that it's also working in other territories. Great,

David Bent-Hazelwood: 26:21

it's wonderful to be able to point at some things that have come out of these kinds of processes. And just taking a different kind of step back. What are the lessons you take from the story, particularly around the use of the multi level perspective, what what insights do you have there?

Anna Birney: 26:37

I think it helped us hold our strategy in a broader perspective. And I think maybe us at the school and at forums have worked in systems that do that quite naturally, but we're holding it. But I really do think and I hope this isn't patronising to our collaborators. But I think they would say this, that it has helped them hold the multiplicity of strategies, it helps them understand the dynamics. And actually, I remember whoever who was the marine lead at cetera cell, she often talks about, it helps to take actually an experimental mindset, how to take an innovate, innovative mindset to bring on this approach of both NLP, but also systems change, but we use them on here as a route into that, it helps them realise that it wasn't all down to one intervention, it was down to this multiplicity of approaches, and on two levels of it. And so it's helped her she says, and I've heard her speak, like they use that kind of approach in other projects, or conservation projects and environmental projects, and how to realise it's not just about the conservation, but it's also trying to understand kind of how you change the regime or the structure of the system, and the consequences. So I think harass it was kind of a holding, you know, as a fine, it's actually very simple. It wasn't the big bit of the programme, I'd say that the capacity building of the stakeholders that the working collaboratively together was where I learned constantly learning is huge amount, the energy bar as a fame and as a way to state, it definitely helps hold that together.

David Bent-Hazelwood: 28:03

Yeah. And so amongst the things I hear there is opening up from just we need one technological syllable, it's weirdly, the silver bullet, often here is about straws, or banning plastic or something. But just like trying for one big hit, we'll do it all. So expanding the width of what can be done, but then also having a common way in which people can see all of the things that need to be happening over a long period of time, and maintaining the energy for all of the things which are they're part of that puzzle, I think is also an important one. And then just last part of our question, so I suppose is, is there anything else important that you want to sort of bring to our attention, particularly around multi level perspective, but also about, I suppose innovation for wider change as well. Anything else that wanted to say?

Anna Birney: 29:03

I think you've sort of said it summarise a couple of points. One, that this isn't about individual innovation and technological innovation, either. It's about the multiplicity of that I think you are, which you are alluding to, and how that intersects with the system. And so there's something about how do you keep a mindset of dynamism or thinking about change in these models and these frameworks is really critical. It's whenever we teach it, we sort of say, Yes, this is a static model. But actually, how do you start seeing it as the interconnection points and the relationships that are happening and dynamism rather than seeing it as just like the box that we fill in here in the box, you fit in there? So that for me is the biggest learning teaching hospital perspective through some of our courses and our taster sessions. When we use it? It's getting them both to start realising they can understand the complexity and make it simple. And then you have to move them to the simplicity of that to understand how innovation and had done animism needs to keep on changing anything as well. Wonderful.

David Bent-Hazelwood: 30:04

Well, I think with that it's been great having you with us. So thank you very much to Dr. Anand Bernie of the school system change, talking about the multi level perspective. We'll be putting this video available in various formats and she going to find it through the show notes. And thank you want to add those slides as well. So thank you once again to Anna. Thank you, Damon. And as you all