Summary of my speech SOCAP Global this year:

Can I get a raise of hands please. Who in this room lives and works in the cities, towns and rural areas, in the center of the US. Sometimes known as ‘flyover country’?

Ok not many of you — as I suspected.

I’m Rachel and I live in flyover country.

4 years ago I was sitting on the dusty floor of my kids’ walk-in wardrobe, 2 miles up the road, here in the Inner Sunset in San Francisco, surrounded by princess costumes and robot uniforms, and I was crying.

I had just a phone call from my husband telling me that after a long search, he’d found a job in St Louis, Missouri and we had to move.

I was devastated. I thought for certain my career would be over, but more than that, I had learnt how people in the major US cities think about the people who live and work in the center of the country, And it wasn’t good. I thought I was moving to the land of bigotry and backwardness.

I’m not from America. I grew up amid the roses and apple trees in my parents’ garden in English countryside.

I went on to live in London for 10 years, where I co-founded an early example of a systems change initiative, in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis.- The Finance Innovation Lab, A partnership between WWF and ICAEW, it was an exhilarating experiment in bringing together people who don’t normally talk to each other, at an unprecedented moment.

We nurtured the seeds of new movements for change at the time — fintech for good, alternative currencies, impact investing and natural capital. We spotted leadership, built policy coalitions and accelerator programs and hosted 100s of gatherings.

I won a person of exceptional ability Green Card for my work and moved with my young family to New York in 2016. We went on to move to San Francisco where I really hoped to put down deep roots.

All this time I was teaching systems change to people leading systemic initiatives internationally at The Systems Sanctuary, and co-founded Illuminate, a network designed to bring equity power and justice lens, to the white western and academic field of practice.

In both New York and San Francisco, I learned about ‘flyover country’, places like St Louis, are seen as less sophisticated, more conservative and generally a bit of a downgrade.

But when I got there I met amazing people like Heather, an ex-Alderwoman who lives two streets down from me, and runs the incredible midwest climate collaborative.

She said “I don’t have the luxury of saying ‘I’m not going to work with someone who doesn’t agree with me on my whole liberal agenda. But this makes for stronger relationships. We have to forge them on things that aren’t shared political views.”

I met Saras Chung who is whip-smart, international systems dynamics expert, who happens to live in St Louis, and is leading a groundbreaking initiative SKIP, looking at the root causes of inequity in early childhood education in the city.

Natalie, who worked in New York and at big foundations in the past and now leads economic development work at Cortex, with a strong focus on creating a more equitable economy for those who hadn’t benefited in the past.

I spent this past summer interviewing 35 womxn leading systems change and ecosystems across the flyover country, the rustbelt and the sunshine belt. As a Brit I’m not sure what to call this land exactly — but it’s those States of the US that raise the eyebrows of my coastal colleagues.

When I widened my search, I remembered Gayle in Duluth leading Re:AMp climate collaborative and found Irma in Arkansaw- building an entrepreneurial ecosystems for her Latinx community, from her own lived experience.

I spoke to Sam in Allentown, doing some of the most sophisticated place-based health systems change work I’ve come across in my 7 years of hearing strategies for systems change.

My takeaway is this — the womxn I interviewed have so much to teach us all. I lost count of the number who were working from lived experience of the systemic problem they were trying to solve. They were ex-psychologists, ex-sociologists, ex-teachers, and entrepreneurs themselves. In the professionalized field of systems change, this stands out.

They are Master Bridge Builders. As Gayle said “People can get ideas in their heads, what a type of person is like. One of the things that ReAmp is good at is helping people get through that.”

These womxn collectively are exceptionally skilled at forging relationships across political and ideological divides.

There is a humility among these womxn that I have found refreshing and a deep commitment to the work because they care so much about the place they live.

These are skills we so badly need at this moment in history.

— -

And as the old Feminist adage goes -’Whoever names the world, owns the world.’

As the field of systems change solidifies. As evaluation frameworks take hold and money starts to flow in new ways, we must be mindful of the unintended consequences for the people we leave behind.

I know from my experience that many of the leaders who build the models of systems change and fund it, live and work in some of the most progressive cities in the world.

In places like London, New York, Boston, San Francisco.

Some of you might be in this room. You might have moved out of the big city, but you probably live in the suburbs — surrounded by people who used to live in the big city!

My plea to you is this — as we fix these concepts and as you design your strategies, please do not forget the brilliant womxn who are blazing a trail in often very difficult political circumstances, in places you might not expect.

They are building infrastructure for long-lasting systemic change.

I have learned that flyover country is a hotbed for systems change work.

And I believe strongly that these womxn deserve a seat at the table, they deserve your respect, and they would love to partner with you.

Thank you.

Building Collective Intelligence

The spirit of The System Sanctuary is rooted in collective learning. We know from our experience that we don’t have systems change figured out and we also know that systems change journeys are emergent. They twist and turn, they ebb and flow, people become close companions and they sometimes move away. These initiatives rarely end up where you think they are going to end up.

Building in learning throughout this nebulous journey is therefore a smart move. Systems Theory teaches us that we never hold the whole truth, that we just represent one perspective. We believe in the power of collective insight that comes through practice and doing.

Systems change initiatives are usually portfolio in nature. They are working in many places in the system at the same time to push for change — policy, changing narratives, supporting innovation and community healing. Our vision of learning creates a process that connects learning across an ecosystem so that we can see in new ways, make connections that haven’t been made and then use this insight to inform wiser action.

As we track the learning in the portfolio of projects we work on from human trafficking, to climate change to GBV to immigration,, we are able to weave learning together across our programs and projects. We look for the meta patterns that emerge from this tracking and tracing and we share this broadly and openly to inform the field.

Ecosystem weaving

We capture learning, not primarily for the purpose of evaluation, but for the purpose of strategy generation. As a core team you need to know what’s working, what’s not, what’s growing? The learning that is generated becomes an iterative feedback loop that inform next steps. You may need to also capture the most groundbreaking learning in your network to share this with the world, or work out the dynamics, the challenges, the opportunities in a given field of practice.

We typically accompany an ever-changing initiative, team or field of practice, over a long period of time.

We know learning is important, but how do you fit it in?

As a core team of a busy project, collective learning often falls off the to do list. Faced with an expanding portfolio of work, writing this down feels like a nice to have, never a need to have.

We at The Systems Sanctuary love to do this. We create a learning infrastructure, where we acknowledge the complexity of an initiative and build in a way to capture learning as it grows, morphs, changes, over time.

At what level?

We typically create learning infrastructure at three scales; at a team or ecosystem level, at a field level or as a meta collective inquiry which reaches beyond.

1. Team level learning: Creating a regular space to learn together as a team about a given question on topic. We have been working with Ashoka Canada for two years exploring organizational DEI at a team level.
2. Ecosystem level learning: This is the level of a systems change project. It is motivated by a collective of actors who are working to shift a system or an issue. In this context, learning facilitates collective sensemaking and is used to inform collective action. We have worked with CASE a project looking at Human Trafficking in Canada, tracking the learning around this ecosystem project for two years.
3. Field level learning: We also work to support learning at a field level. We do this through Illuminate and feminist systems change field building. Both collaborations are looking to advance the field of systems change practice.
4. Collective Inquiry: We see meta level trends that emerge from the multiple projects we work across. There is one theme that comes up over and over again, that we feel connected to and passionate about and a question bubbles up. In these cases we set out to learn about what this question means, what it points to, what work is being done to move this along, what are other people seeing. For us, collective inquiry intends to hone in on that question and to surface insights that can help move a systemic block, reframe an issue, connect disparate work etc. Examples for us have included the question of how care connects to multiple systems. In 2022, we co-led an inquiry into the intersections of care and systems change with the Turtle Island Institute and MakeWay. Our inquiry into the art of Scaling Deep for systems change is exploring practices and impacts with Ashoka Canada and we recently wrapped a two year inquiry into the role of Bridging in systems change, which we explored with a Cohort through Illuminate.

How?

To do this we use a combination of interviews, peer-learning and collaborative sense-making to support leaders to develop and strengthen their practice. Participants share the challenges they’re grappling with, we make sense together and we use this knowledge to help them to inform strategy and decision making. We use a very simple process.

Facilitate the learning

This is about getting some insight into the current strategies and status of a project or initiative or the main challenges people are facing at a certain time. We usually approach this through a two step process. First we do some interviews ourselves to get a somewhat biased snapshot of what’s going on. Then we create learning spaces where people can layer stories and experiences on top of those insights, to emerge new collective insights based together.

One-to-one interviews research

We do one to one interviews to get a range of perspectives, transcribing everything. Interviewing a set of 15 or so stakeholders who surround the issue or project. We ask open-ended questions about their experience, challenges and opportunities they see.

Through peer-learning circles

We create a cohort of up to 15 people who are focused on a given issue in a field of practice. We use peer-input method to hear from people one by one, about the challenges they are facing in their work over a long period of time (typically 8 months, once a month). We always the calls.

This allows a group to make sense together of their shared experience. Value is created for the people convened, as much as from the people who are convening. This helps us to move away from the extractive form of research that takes from community and doesn’t offer value in return.

The value of working in this way has become increasingly clear to us over the 5 years we have been hosting peer-learning circles. It becomes a way of connecting and deepening relationships across an ecosystem and it becomes a space to strengthen leadership, as people are given the space and time to step away and reflect. This approach grounds in the collective reality and surfaces learning from experiences. Resources are shared, insights are exchanged. Participants walk away with new ideas and possibilities.

Theme & pattern it out

We transcribe all of the sessions, and then we go back to identify the emerging questions, patterns and insights. We share this back with the participants and use this data to map into a systems change framework. This informs collective and individual actions and next steps.

We always use direct quotes from participants in our write up, for a number of reasons. Firstly, people are able to articulate the same thing in a range of interesting different ways. This allows us to pick up nuance in the language used and to avoid, to some extent, our own bias. We get to hear first voice by doing this and it is SO much more interesting than hearing our own tone of voice throughout the write up.

Summarize clearly and to the point

After this we do multiple things with the data, depending on the objectives for sharing. Sometimes we will show how these themes map onto a framework of systems change.

Working with Ashoka Canada, looking at their internal DEI we mapped out the challenges we identified at an individual, team and organizational level and shared that back with the team. We created a framework against which we could track progress over time. We then set quarterly learning and reflection sessions to track the individual and collective learning. This allows the team to make connections across their work, to anchor the learnings, to validate their successes and identify priorities for moving forward.

Working with CASE on Human Trafficking in Nova Scotia, we interviewed key stakeholders and mapped out the shared systemic challenges they faced in their work on the power shift framework. We use this as a baseline for evaluation purposes as well as for strategic decision making. This has been a really helpful tool for the team to gather feedback from partners and to adapt and pivot their strategy in a responsive and agile way.

For the Illuminate Funder node research, we simply listed the collective challenges faced and captured the key questions people were asking. This data helped us to hone in on the real needs of the stakeholders so that the Iluminate team could design a process that aligned with our values as well as ground in the depth of the work required by a funder node.

Thinking through how we share this is always part of a bigger discussion about why we’re sharing it in the first place. Inform strategic decision making? Illuminate key challenges shared at a field of practice level? To create a way of tracking progress over time?

Our approach

Our approach has certain principles underpinning it.

You are the expert in your own experience

We pride ourselves on our ability to listen deeply, to empower leaders to find solutions from their own experience, and on turning these insights into clear strategy. We share frameworks on systems change, meeting participants where they are at, to help them take the next wise step strategically.

An intersectional lens

Our work is grounded in an equity lens. We use a feminist frame which takes into account intersections of gender, race, class, ability and sexual identity. Practically this means centering the experience of people with lived experience, valuing different ways of knowing, creating the conditions to work across difference, prioritizing diverse experiences and inclusion, reflecting on power dynamics to understand challenges and opportunities and integrating learning for participants to advance understanding and action on equity.

Some examples

Much of this work is for internal purposes for clients, so can’t be shared publicly. But here are three examples of summary reports we’ve written weaving learning together.

• We see you — challenges faced by Systems leaders
• We see you too — challenges faced by women systems leaders
• Funders node research — Illuminate

Where does this come from?

Both Tatiana and Rachel (Co-Founders of The Systems Sanctuary) are trained in qualitative research methods. Rachel has a BA in Psychology and an MA in Marketing. Tatiana has been practicing adult education methods, participatory methodologies, and feminist praxis for thirty years. These methods challenge traditional notions of expertise and shift power from dominant hierarchical traditions to decentralized and collaborative practices. We have innovated and tweaked our training to meet the needs of the ecosystems, networks, organizations we work with.

How we do Learning Weaving at The Systems Sanctuary was originally published in Refuge for systems leaders on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Mapping your existing field of practice or ecosystem for positive change

How do you map your ecosystem or your field of practice? Who else is contributing to the same movement as you? How does your work fit together? Where are the gaps? Funding? Someone to write down best practice? Lack of disruption in the status quo?

Here we share a framework I created to map out the different roles people can play, to build an ecosystem project or to connect an emerging field of practice.

We call these ‘ecosystems for positive change’.

I created this in a publication in 2015 (Mapping Momentum) with SiG in Canada and co-authored the report with Tim Draimin, who was Executive Director there at the time. I did it as a way of mapping the emerging field of systems change practice.

Since then we (at The Systems Sanctuary) have used the framework many times with those who are working in all kinds of fields of social or environmental practice from climate change to gender based violence and beyond.

We published Building Ecosystems for Positive Change in 2020 with these updates. We have added a few roles that came up in our work and tweaked things, but the basics remain the same.

We share this often in our Masterclass in Systems Practice, but when Leanne Burton, a former participant, nudged us for it recently, we realized we hadn’t shared it clearly in a blog.

I hope it’s useful.

Why build ecosystems for positive change?

One of the characteristics of systems change work is that systems leaders work in many places in the system at the same time. They are typically doing things like trying to change policy, supporting innovation, changing the stories we tell ourselves about a given system. This leads to an ‘ecosystem strategy’ where they are managing a portfolio of interventions that are intentionally linked together to push for systemic change.

These initiatives are often called for when an individual, foundation, NGO or community sees one of two opportunities:

TO CONNECT PROMISING PEOPLE FOR SYSTEMS CHANGE:

• Connect the people doing amazing work, encourage them, resource them.
• Help the system “see itself” and in doing so break down silos and duplicated, disconnected efforts.
• To link the people in need of support with the people who can help them, the people with interesting ideas to others with complementary ideas.
• In doing so we move closer to our goal of positive change.

TO BUILD COLLABORATIONS THAT WON’T EXIST WITHOUT INTERVENTION:

• Support people to work together to tackle tricky systemic issues they could never shift alone.
• The Theory of Change in this case is — what we’re doing isn’t working, there are big roadblocks like policy that stand in our way, narratives from the media that need to shift and alternative innovations that need significant funding to have a real impact.
• Let’s bring key actors together and see what we could get done if we work together.

If things are going well, all this connecting or great people in an ecosystem will better support the people who are already doing the great work around your topic, or give birth to multiple interventions in the system that bolster what is already there.

Common projects include coalitions driving for policy change, accelerators supporting new business models in the system, new networks with a shared interest in systems change, and campaigns to shift negative stories that get in the way of changing hearts and minds.

Why do this kind of mapping?

When an ecosystem project is underway, it can be helpful to create a kind of snapshot of who’s already doing what to work towards your shared goal.

When you start to look at a given issue, it’s important to acknowledge that you are never starting from a blank sheet of paper. There is an active network of people who are already working on issue and mapping out collectively who’s doing what is a useful place to start.

We created this framework to be used in a workshop or team setting, to map out the roles people are playing to build a field of practice, a network or an ecosystem that supports positive social or environmental change.

By doing this exercise, we are looking to identify people and organizations: Who is calling out the need for change in the mainstream? Who has the good ideas about how to change things? Who’s convening people? Do you have any kind of leadership incubators or leadership programs? Is anyone funding this field of practice or not? Who’s writing down best practice?

Understanding the framework

To understand it, it helps to first understand the framework that sits behind it. The ecocycle or the Panarchy cycle is the basis of this framework.

This framework reflects in very simple terms, the birth and death of natural systems. We map out what is planted (germination), growing (growth), relatively stable (conservation) and what needs to be let go of, in order for new life to be grown (creative destruction).

The ecosystems for positive change framework

We used this framework to then map out the roles that people play to support the emergence of ecosystems for positive change.

We recognize that people often play multiple roles at the same time, sometimes swap and sometimes there are gaps in the roles played. We will certainly have missed some, but we always ask this question when we use it in our workshops, so it can become a living, developing map of roles that help to build a field of practice.

Here’s a description of each role

GERMINATION Seeding new initiatives

• THE STRATEGIST: the intraprenuers who starts multiple new systems change ventures from within an organization, convenes the partners, pulls in resources and makes things happen
• THE FIRESTARTER: The dynamo who partners with pioneers of new projects from outside institutions — more scrappy to help turn ideas into reality, paid and sometimes not.

GROWTH Building amplifying and accelerate the work of the ecosystem

• THE ILLUMINATOR: The pattern spotter who creates maps, writes articles and shines a light on emerging trends
• THE DIGITAL DESIGNER: Builds the digital platforms that support systems change work
• THE EXPERIMENTER: The leader of a growing systems change project. This group is head down, fully immersed in a cycle of action and learning
• THE CONNECTOR: The connector, out in the field meeting people in the ecosystem, introducing fellow system change practitioners to one another
• THE CONVENOR: The host who builds gatherings of key people at well designed events exploring different elements of systems change.
• THE LEADERSHIP ACCELERATOR: Organizations that support existing systems leaders so that they can do their work better
• THE ECOSYSTEM FUNDER: Funders who recognize the need to fund the field of practice to organize effectively
• THE BRIDGER: Strategic role building relationships across difference and connecting communities across sectors, ways of knowing and system actors. Bridgers can work from the dominant center or from the margins.

CONSERVATION Stabilizing roles that turn experiments into established cornerstones of the field

• THE SHINING STARS: ‘Demonstrator’ projects that have moved beyond a start-up stage to become established organizations and can be used as case studies.
• THE KNOWLEDGE BUILDER: Create theoretical and practice-based research within the field you’re working on. This work tends to be based at Universities, Colleges and learning hubs.

CREATIVE DESTRUCTION What do we need to let go of for this field of practice to emerge?

• THE WISE HEALER: Bringing in spiritual practice, holding space and connection to a deeper sense of truth about what needs to change. Connecting and facilitating healing to bring about system change.
• TRUTH-TELLER: Those on the front line who call out the truths of injustice.
• THE INCUMBENT DISRUPTOR: Individuals who sit in a place of power and influence and use their position to talk about the need for a systems lens in the mainstream.
• THE CIVIL SOCIETY ACTIVIST: Raising awareness, getting people engaged in an issue, organizing protests, building movements.

THE SYSTEMS LEADERSHIP CORE TEAM

• THE SYSTEMS LEADERSHIP CORE TEAM: Nurture the ecosystem. They identify key actors who are already doing the work, connect them, strategically build projects that plug some of these gaps. Sometimes they play these roles themselves.

Here are descriptions of the roles again.

How to use this framework

You can use this framework in a workshop setting or with your team to:

• Get clear on the contribution you are making and those around you are making to build this field of change
• Analyz/se your progress towards building an ecosystem that could create long-term change
• Create strategies around specific places ripe for opportunity e.g. ‘were going to convene more people’
• Allow understanding of multiple levels of intervention and the interconnection between them.

Ways to use this framework

We ask people in a workshop to do a combination of the following:

• What role/s are you playing to build your field of practice?
• Fill out actors, orgs, initiatives that are working towards the same goal as you.
• What role are they playing?
• What role are you playing?
• What do you notice?
• Where is the majority of activity in your ecosystem? Where are the gaps?
• What does this tell us about what we need to work on collectively, next?

What do you think?

Does this framework make sense to you and your ecosystem project? Your field of practice? What would you add? What would you remove? Why?

Find our more

We teach this framework and many others in our Masterclass in Systems Practice. Applications are open for January 2023. Find out more here.

We at The Systems Sanctuary teach and train people who want to create the conditions for systemic change.

We use many frameworks and tools to do this. Here are some of the frameworks we have created ourselves (along with a few favorites created by others).

We teach these in our Masterclass and in Strategy Intensives and in our ecosystems peer learning cohorts. Get in touch if you want to find out more about either.

The Wave Model: Systems Change Practice Competencies

In simple terms this represents “what do you need to get good at to do systems change work?”

These are the building blocks we cover in our Masterclass on Systems Practice which you can find out more about here. We also teach and train on these different capabilities in our strategy intensives.

The Feminist Systems Change Practice Framework

Our framework which blends feminist and systems change practice together as a powerful strategy for change.

It shows how feminist practice like centering lived experience and using intersectional frames shifts power and can become the solid building blocks on which strategy for systems change can emerge.

The Power Shift Framework

Our favorite model for making sense of systemic challenges and looking at your current strategy for systems change.

Building on Geels’ (2011) Transition Theory, The Power Shift Framework adds a much needed ‘Deep Roots System’, where we can locate grass roots movements, healing and personal change as strategies for systems change.

Scale Deep

In Social Innovation we know about Scaling Up (addressing policy and mainstream institutions), Scaling Out (replicating and spreading innovations that work), but Tatiana added a new layer to this thinking Scaling Deep — working to impact change at a cultural level.

We use this to look at how your current strategy for systems change is working at multiple levels (or not).

Building ecosystems for positive change

This framework can be used to explore the different roles you need in order to build a field of practice, that will support systems change. It builds on a framework Rachel developed with Tim Draimin (in Mapping Momentum 2016),

We use it with groups who have the makings of an ecosystem who are already addressing a systemic problem, but want to get more organized in building a powerful, unified movement for change.

Other Systems Frameworks we love (and use often)

The Berkana Two Loops

Created by two brilliant minds in systems change Margaret Wheatley and Deborah Frieze, this helps us to understand how systems change over time.

Importantly is gives us the beginnings of a Strategy for Systems Change which is based on finding the inspiring individuals that are already working on the systemic issue at hand, connecting them in a community of practice, that can lead to a system of influence over time.

The Panarchy Cycle

Tracks the life and death of natural systems and used for personal, team and collective reflection on work and life transitions.

The Finance Innovation Lab’s Strategy for Systems Change

This is a useful framework for mapping an existing strategy that works at multiple places in the system, to track gaps and opportunities. It’s also a very useful tool to share with stakeholders so they get a sense of the overall picture of your work.

The framework was create by Rachel and colleagues Charlotte Millar and Jen Morgan when she was co-leading The Finance Innovation Lab in the UK.

The Iceberg

Helps us to map out the root cause challenges in a system.

The Actor Map

We use this map actors across a system and to see the interconnection between them clearly.

Forces

This is a helpful framework for uncovering the dynamics in a system that help or hinder progress towards your goal.

Equity Framework

This framework from The World Trust is something we use at the start of everything we do, to get participants thinking about their role in the system.

We also explore how identity, culture and history shapes your story, informs your work, and gives you challenges, privileges and strengths.

About us

We at The Systems Sanctuary, work with leaders who already have a Network, Cohort, Team or Ecosystem and are trying to create the conditions for it to have a deeper systemic impact.

We work individually and with cohorts across an ecosystem.

Specifically we offer coaching, strategy support and peer learning processes. We also train leaders internationally on systems change practice.

With ties to the UK, US and Canada, we work internationally.

We teach a Masterclass on Systems Practice for teams and also as part of an annual cohort and also host Strategy Intensives as deep dives.

www.systemsanctuary.com

Our Systems Change Frameworks was originally published in Refuge for systems leaders on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

In the systems change field we are preoccupied with mapping the system. We pull together a group of diverse actors and use mapping tools to find the leverage points which, if acted upon, could address root cause issues and could create an outsized impact in the direction we are hoping for.

The backbone of systems change work pre-COVID was really a snapshot that looked like this:

Illuminous yellow and pink sticky notes, small group tables, sharpies, half finished coffee mugs, a beige conference room somewhere, with tables pushed to the side and a cluster of people learning over a large sheet of white paper, debating where all the sticky notes should go.

Pre-COVID this was always face-to-face.

The trouble with face-to-face facilitation when what’s at home matters

The last time I went away on a three day retreat my 6 year old daughter left a note on my bedside that said this “I know you love your work, but we love you too and we miss you when you go away. You have to think about your kids too”

Dagger to the heart at the start of a trip on an airplane across the country.

Tatiana’s son Zak, who was part of the growing youth climate change movement and has since stood as a Green Party candidate in Montreal, had a strong opinion about how many air miles she was clocking up too.

On top of this, can we just say it out loud, facilitation can be downright exhausting, even for an extrovert like me.

We learned from our program, The Systems Sisterhood, a peer learning program to support women-identified leaders of systems change, that the exhaustion we felt when we returned from multi-day facilitation gigs, was absolutely shared. The travel and intense days of workshops, away from our families and back to all the emails we’d missed while we were away, led regularly to burnout if unchecked.

Our virtual peer learning programs at The Systems Sanctuary (because Tatiana was based in Montreal while I was in San Francisco at the time) were the only viable way for us to work together regularly. They pushed back against the dominant narrative that we had to be together to do anything meaningful.

We always focused on creating a space to have a depth of conversation we don’t usually have in our day-to-day work lives. They could be done in pajamas, while eating and with small people running around in the background as needed.

What we hadn’t anticipated when we started, was that this methodology, to meet virtually and hear about each participants’ challenges at work- might help us formulate, map and understand possible new places to intervene in the system- new strategies for systems change.

From peer-learning to strategy

The backbone of our calls is always the peer input process. We’re asking people to highlight “challenges they face at home or at work, that keep them up at night, that they think the group could bring valuable insights to.”

We have always transcribed all our peer learning calls together and Tatiana and I will periodically go back through the notes and highlight key insights, clustering them into common barriers the group found themselves facing.

These we found could be mapped easily onto our systems maps. They shone a light on places where we might intervene in a system, leverage points in the system that helped or hindered participants in doing their work.

We were mapping systems, but we were doing it from home, over a period of 7 months, as trust between our groups had deepend, hearts opened and people were able to share vulnerably about what was really working for them.

The good ideas that were generated in our sessions became opportunities to intervene in the system too. Possible solutions, crowdsourced by the group.

When does this type of mapping work?

This approach doesn’t work for every systemic challenge but it is particularly useful if used at a field level. If a group works in the same field of practice, or in the same organization and we want to uncover processes and procedures, ways of operating, stand in people’s way of succeeded. What stories are being promoted that cause detriment to its progress; whether there are barriers to innovation or whether healing needs to happen in a field, before everything else will.

What do you mean by a field?

The philanthropic field, called out for inequality. The environmental movement which focuses on the technical solutions, rather than cultural levers for change. Organizations who are trying to support a new generation of leaders within outdated structures. Many professions are at once facing cross cutting disruption from technology to racial and gender reckonings. The systems change field itself which is white, western, academic and disconnected to the field of equity, power and justice. Our NGO’s and social change organizations, many of which have toxic work cultures that create the conditions for burnout and failure.

Many of our fields of practice need systemic change themselves if they are to bring about the kind of positive change they hope to achieve.

Peer learning circles, hosted independently, with care and love, can create the conditions for vulnerability to emerge, where it didn’t seem possible. Throw in a feminist intersectional analysis, good note taking and a systemic frameworks and you can leave with a solid strategy for systemic change.

What’s best about this approach in my mind, is that the solutions that arise are held collectively by a group of people who have bonded together deeply because they’ve been having conversations at depth for multiple months. The 3 day workshop thing can get us ideas, but the ideas are s fragile if they are not held by a community who care about them and about each other.

Turning this into an ecosystem for positive change

Some of our peer groups are now taking the systemic analysis of common challenges and potential solutions, and launching new ecosystems for positive change.

Rather than starting with a meeting of strangers, they are setting out with a nuanced understanding of the context and a set of champions, friends and companions with whom they are deeply connected, to start the next chapter of their work with.

When it comes to fundraising for action, they have allies to partner with. When they need to bring in new connections, they have friends to call upon. It makes the whole thing easier, more authentic and based on friendship. Built upon trust.

We are yet to see the outcome of these new ecosystems emerging right now after COVID, but we will be keeping tabs and will let you know what happens next.

Build you brown peer-learning program

We are launching a new program next January designed to support people who are tasked with creating their own peer-learning programs and are overwhelmed at the prospect.

Learn how to build effective, inspiring and successful peer-learning cohorts in service of systems change.

We bring with us all the lessons, the templates and the back-end processes to make hosting peer learning cohorts stress free. We will get you clear on the ‘how to’ and prepared to launch or deepen your peer-learning Cohorts. Do join us if you would find this useful.

In the systems change field many practitioners are focused on mapping the system and creating a strategy for action quickly.

We pull together a group of diverse actors and use mapping tools to find the leverage points which, if acted upon, could address root cause issues and could create an outsized impact in the direction we are hoping for.

The backbone of systems change work pre-COVID was really a snapshot that looked like this:

Illuminous yellow and pink sticky notes, small group tables, sharpies, half finished coffee mugs, a beige conference room somewhere, with tables pushed to the side and a cluster of people learning over a large sheet of white paper, debating where all the sticky notes should go.

Pre-COVID this was always face-to-face, and it was always done at break neck speed.

The trouble with face-to-face facilitation when what’s at home matters

The last time I went away on a three day retreat my 6 year old daughter left a note on my bedside that said this “I know you love your work, but we love you too and we miss you when you go away. You have to think about your kids too.”

Dagger to the heart at the start of a trip on an airplane across the country.

Tatiana’s son Zak, who was part of the growing youth climate change movement and has since stood as a Green Party candidate in Montreal, had a strong opinion about how many air miles she was clocking up too.

On top of this, can we just say it out loud, facilitation can be downright exhausting, even for an extrovert like me.

We learned from our program, The Systems Sisterhood, a peer learning program to support women-identified leaders of systems change, that the exhaustion we felt when we returned from multi-day facilitation gigs, was absolutely shared.

The travel and intense days of workshops, away from our families and back to all the emails we’d missed while we were away, led regularly to burn-out if unchecked.

Our virtual peer learning programs at The Systems Sanctuary (because Tatiana was based in Montreal while I was in San Francisco at the time) were the only viable way for us to work together regularly. They pushed back against the dominant narrative that we had to be together to do anything meaningful.

We always focused on creating a space to have a depth of conversation we don’t usually have in our day-to-day work lives. They could be done in pajamas, while eating and with small people running around in the background as needed.

What we hadn’t anticipated when we started, was that this methodology, to meet virtually and hear about each participants’ challenges at work- might help us formulate, map and understand possible new places to intervene in the system- new strategies for systems change.

From peer-learning to strategy

The backbone of our calls is always the peer input process. We’re asking people to highlight “challenges they face at home or at work, that keep them up at night, that they think the group could bring valuable insights to.”

We have always transcribed all our peer learning calls together and Tatiana and I will periodically go back through the notes and highlight key insights, clustering them into common barriers the group found themselves facing.

These we found could be mapped easily onto our systems maps. They shone a light on places where we might intervene in a system, leverage points in the system that helped or hindered participants in doing their work.

We were mapping systems, but we were doing it from home, over a period of 7 months, as trust between our groups had deepened, hearts opened and people were able to share vulnerably about what was really working for them.

The good ideas that were generated in our sessions became opportunities to intervene in the system too. Possible solutions, crowdsourced by the group.

When does this type of mapping work?

This approach doesn’t work for every systemic challenge but it is particularly useful if used at a field level.

If a group works in the same field of practice, or in the same organization and we want to uncover:

• Processes and procedures or ways of operating, that stand in people’s way.
• Stories that are being promoted that cause detriment to its progress?
• Whether there are barriers to innovation or whether healing needs to happen in a field before everything else will.

What do you mean by a field?

We mean a field of practice.

The philanthropic field, called out for inequality.

The environmental movement which focuses on the technical solutions, rather than cultural levers for change.

Organizations who are trying to support a new generation of leaders within outdated structures.

Many professions are at once facing cross cutting disruption from technology to racial and gender reckonings.

The systems change field itself which is white, western, academic and disconnected to the field of equity, power and justice.

Our NGO’s and social change organizations, many of which have toxic work cultures that create the conditions for burnout and failure.

Many of our fields of practice need systemic change themselves if they are to bring about the kind of positive change they hope to achieve.

Peer-learning circles, hosted independently, with care and love, can create the conditions for vulnerability to emerge, where it didn’t seem possible. Throw in a feminist intersectional analysis, good note taking and systemic frameworks and you can leave with a solid strategy for systemic change.

What’s best about this approach in my mind, is that the solutions that arise are held collectively by a group of people who have bonded together deeply because they’ve been having conversations at depth for multiple months.

The 3 day workshop thing can get us ideas, but the ideas are so fragile if they are not held by a community who care about them as much as they care about them as much as they care about each other.

Turning this into an ecosystem for positive change

Some of our peer groups are now taking the systemic analysis of common challenges and potential solutions, and launching new ecosystems for positive change.

Rather than starting with a meeting of strangers, they are setting out with a nuanced understanding of the context and a set of champions, friends and companions with whom they are deeply connected, to start the next chapter of their work with.

When it comes to fundraising for action, they have allies to partner with. When they need to bring in new connections, they have friends to call upon. It makes the whole thing easier, more authentic and based on friendship. Built upon trust.

We are yet to see the outcome of these new ecosystems emerging right now after COVID, but we will be keeping tabs and will let you know what happens next.

Build you own peer-learning program

If you are in the process of creating your own peer-learning circle, come and learn with us, as we share how we do it.

We are launching a new program next January designed to support people who are tasked with creating their own peer-learning programs and are overwhelmed at the prospect.

Learn how to build effective, inspiring and successful peer-learning cohorts in service of systems change.

We bring with us all the lessons, the templates and the back-end processes to make hosting peer learning cohorts stress free. We will get you clear on the ‘how to’ and prepared to launch or deepen your peer-learning Cohorts. Do join us if you would find this useful.

Peer Learning = Systems change strategy , built on trust was originally published in Refuge for systems leaders on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

‘Peer-learning for systems change’, Tatiana Fraser and I at The Systems Sanctuary, are all about it.

In this two part Series, we will share why this overlooked idea to bring together leaders to learn is a brilliant strategy for systems change.

First up, we share a personal story of how we got into this in the first place four years ago and why peer learning is valuable for those who are steeped in practice.

Done well, peer-learning facilitates the connection of diverse systems actors, by sharing key challenges and patterns in a system and learning in real time about impacts.

This approach to systems change emerges a collective intelligence across an ecosystem from which new collaborations and interventions emerge, to create the conditions for systems change.

The value of diving into practice with others who ‘get it’

The Systems Sanctuary was created because we needed it, and it didn’t exist at the time.

When I was leading a system change project myself, the most valuable moments of learning were simply finding one person at a conference, and sitting down in a corner getting into practice.

In these conversations we would cover ground quickly — the real nuts and bolts of what it was like to try to launch and stick with a systemic change initiative over time. The challenges of influencing change from within, managing the workload as it increases exponentially, fundraising when you can’t find the words to describe what it is you’re doing.

I felt validated, heard and slightly heady with love and understanding as I left those conversations. Someone understood my work, someone was cheering me on, someone had good ideas that I could immediately apply to my own work. I felt like I had a new friend, an ally and confidant who had my back.

The only problem was that they always seemed to live on the other side of the world.

Launching our first peer-learning program

Tatiana and I were both collecting people who ‘got it’ on our own, in parallel, for a few years when we met. Tim Draimin, then of SiG in Canada introduced us in 2016, by inviting me to a small retreat of people exploring systems change on Bowen Island off Vancouver.

We kept in touch and two weeks after I had baby number three, Tatiana emailed me and said “It’s now or never. We need an international community of practice around systems change, let’s just do it.”

Our foundational culture

The Sanctuary and our flagship program In the Thick of It were devised between feedings and cuddles and walks in Golden Gate park in San Francisco with my newborn baby. It began that way, with home and work mixed intrinsically.

The background chaos and the ability to still care deeply about the work I was doing, were meshed together in our culture and invited others to show up like that too. We had toddlers on peer input sessions and husbands in underpants walk past, along with plenty of tears.

In the Thick of It was always niche and it was always small. You had to be at least two years into leading your systems change work.

We interviewed people to check they were all in the same boat. We called it ‘In the Thick of it’ because that’s how it felt to be that stage of systems change work.

You know something is working, but you have so many unfinished threads that sometimes it’s completely overwhelming. You feel isolated because there’s always a good measure of naysayers around and making decisions is confusing.

We wanted systems leaders to join us. We wanted to create space for people to bring that energy or being so hands on you couldn’t see the wood for the trees, and transform it together into clear next steps.

A virtual program, ahead of its time

We launched virtually because I was in San Francisco and Tatiana was in Montreal. The model created through necessity, became our structure in contrast to the workshops and workshops and more workshops, that were the standing operating procedure for our field of practice — a structure that left women with newborn babies firmly out of the work.

It was a refreshing change from the narrative that you had to be there for it to count and people made it work across many timezones.

These were our peeps and their friends. Bringing together our networks was electric.

Process

What’s been important for groups who are steeped in practice, is really allowing them space to speak.

Systems leaders who arrive with the energy of overwhelm need a light process that allows them to make sense together.

We have always used the Peer Input Process as the backbone of our circles and created a standard ritual each session, so that everyone knows what to expect.

In recent years we have built in a brief meditation before we begin, because people who arrive often are in their heads and we want to create the conditions for slowing down and deep listening.

We keep our groups small so everyone can contribute and don’t feel like they have to fight to be heard, and we encourage them at the start to leave any shiny professionalism at the door. We want to have real conversations in these spaces, about the genuine challenges at work and often at home, faced by people courageously leading systemic change work.

We transcribe the calls, facilitate sense-making, and share the learning back to the Cohort, building in a structured way of learning together across time and people speak between calls to make sense of what they’re hearing, in the gaps.

Can’t you just do this yourself?

The people we work with are often skilled facilitators. But they are almost always stretched beyond the pale for time. They have questions like: How do I do it well? How much work does it involve? Do I have capacity to hold this over the long term? How will it work in practice? How do I create a space that can hold difference?

Today we host peer-learning programs and we also partner with people who want to create them around a niche topic like ‘women leading around climate and nature in Canada’. We also train people how to do it themselves.

You can find out how we support and partner with people who want to create or participate in peer-learning for systems change here.

Impact

The groups themselves were transformed by the process. As participants said:

“I felt really validated and supported by a group of smart empathic people who really listened and reflected back, and valued me, without trying to fix but providing those invaluable perspectives.”

“I got so much from listening deeply to my peers during the generative discussion component of my Peer Input Session. I’ve been able to action resonant aspects of what I heard immediately and reflect more deeply on perspectives that I hadn’t considered. The buddy catch up has also been great for building new relationships.”

“I really enjoyed the process, it has unlocked something that was stuck in my brain and I can now see how I can act and move forward on my challenge. I didn’t really understand exactly how it could be valuable at the beginning of the course but now I do!”

Spin-offs

What’s been cool about The Sanctuary for four years, is that we’ve seen spin offs emerge from our Alumni. There have been too many to list, but a few we loved to see included:

• Marcus Jenal’s Systemic Insight Circle
• Save the Children in London and Inspiring Communities In Nova Scotia meeting to share frameworks and models
• Charlene Gagnon who leads the TESS partnership on Human Trafficking, has launched an internal peer learning program for her partners.
• Our Australia/ New Zealand group still connects. As Seanna Davidson said in a recent call with us “ We are still getting together. We have a WhatsApp group that continues to be a bright space for us. It’s organic, it comes and goes, but it had a real grounding place for us. It was established as a result of our cohort. It’s been a special space for us.”

How can I learn how to?

We have just launched a new ‘Build your own peer learning program. How to create excellent virtual peer learning programs for systems change with step by step training — from our 4 years experience. There are EarlyBird before Sept 15 https://tinyurl.com/7pnt2tyf

We also offer two bespoke services:

• We partner with you to create intimate, inspiring and well structured peer-learning Cohorts that build trust and generate new ideas.
• We teach your team how to create one yourselves, with a one day training course for you and your core team.

Other courses we’re launching this Fall:

Masterclass in systems practice

Small Cohorts, 7 months, international group

Basic theory through to key frameworks & mapping tools

EarlyBird before Sept 10

tinyurl.com/hfc7dyye

In the Thick of it — For Systems Leaders 2 years into their work

Dive directly into practice with others who get it

Small cohorts, 7 months

EarlyBird before Sept 10

tinyurl.com/8mjp46h7

Keen to launch or participate in peer-learning? Get in touch rachel@systemsanctuary.com

Peer-learning as a strategy for systems change was originally published in Refuge for systems leaders on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

As the field of systems change grows and emerges, we want to support the capacity of ecosystem level work to decenter dominant systems and engage communities who are seeking equity and justice.

In our experience, action around this needs to be built into the foundations of any ecosystem building activity. How do we do this well?

Where does your interest in working across difference come from?

When I co-founded the Girls Action Foundation in 2002, we set out to create the opportunity for all girls to have access to spaces that addressed empowerment and justice in their lives. The dominant way girls were seen in terms of policy and discourse, was based on dominant white, middle class norms.

We knew that this was problematic and that girls who grew up in poverty, girls who were racialized, Indigenous or who were differently situated based on sexual identities or abilities had different experiences, challenges and strengths around being a ‘girl’.

We were working for systemic change — addressing issues related to culture, violence, health, poverty and discrimination. Our question became — “how would we build a network that would be relevant in terms of its reach across Canada and be relevant to the diverse contexts and communities?”

What did you do?

We used a network model and complexity approaches to scale our work and build communities of influence.

We convened our network and offered trainings, retreats and leadership programs — both nationally and regionally. All of these convenings brought together people from diverse communities and the issues they brought to the network were reflective of that.

When I say diverse — I mean diverse in terms of region; including northern, rural, urban — coast to coast to coast; and diversity in terms of social location including being racialized, Indigenous, francophone, economically marginalized, LGBTQ2+ etc. We had to create a space where people could show up and be able to participate.

How did working across difference play out in your network?

I can give you an example, in the context of facilitating a workshop about unpacking challenges and experiences that girls deal with: An urban young black woman in conversation with a white francophone from rural northern Canada — is sharing her experiences about racism. The Francophone has lived life as a minority francophone and faced discrimination, exclusion and bullying of her own — but she is unable to acknowledge racism and feels attacked.

Or — communities working around the sexual exploitation of girls and young women — negotiating very different approaches and politics. One — young women who work with communities and advocate for harm reduction and decriminalization. The other — a woman who advocates for abolishing sex trade.

The exchange is challenging and emotions are high. When we come together to support social change — these political positions or lived experiences can often lead to divisiveness and rupture. Facilitating this kind of conversation and holding the space for diverse experiences as we worked towards collaborative action- required the capacity to create conditions to work across difference. We were always pushed to our learning edges in every gathering.

We did this over 10 years.

What strategies helped you work across difference?

One size did not fit all

We scaled out our approach to creating spaces for girls and young women and we scaled deep. We shared min specs on what were the essential how to’s and approaches for success, but we knew that initiatives needed to be context specific, grown from and rooted in communities. In the end, the ways in which work was being done was very different based on the community in which it was embedded.

Leadership that reflected our network

90% of our network came from racialized, Indigenous, economically marginalized, LGBTQ2+ communities. The board, staff and the leadership reflected our network — we built out the organization to be intentionally representative of diverse communities and experiences. People who designed and facilitated our process were also representative of the communities we were engaging.

Time spent on outreach

We spent a lot of time doing outreach and building relationships to get past the usual suspects and mainstream organizations. We had a full time outreach coordinator who worked to engage communities and people who were not on the radar. We prioritized participation from diverse communities and we subsidized participants who faced economic barriers to participation.

Anti-oppression training for all

We always started our gatherings with an anti-oppression training so all participants were aware of their social location and had literacy and capacity to show up and understand privilege, power and hold space for challenge in conversation. It was important to do this groundwork, so participants had shared language and understanding of how racism, colonization, sexism, heteronormativity, ableism are rooted in the systems and structures we are working to shift. It was never perfect and there was always room to do more.

Facilitation team who were trained

Facilitators had to be highly skilled at holding a conversation across difference. We had a strong facilitation team who were trained in anti-oppression and anit-racist work and could watch for and facilitate through potentially harmful exchanges that might occur. This required an ability to name the power dynamics in the room, to thoughtfully call out harmful exchanges and to name when racism, or discrimination was in play. Skilled facilitation would allow the room to learn from the exchange and move forward.

We had regular team debriefs to be sure that we were capturing learning, acknowledging and addressing missteps, paying attention to the energy of the group and responding to undercurrents.

Diverse cultural and change practices

We used arts based and embodiment practices as a way for people to connect; for example we worked with theatre, dance and hands on activities. We always brought diverse cultural practices into the space by inviting network members to lead workshops and share their practices and expertise.

Being aware of trauma

We had to get good at being self-aware of and understanding individual and collective trauma, so we weren’t recreating trauma. We had to be able to recognize and draw the connection between individual experiences of trauma and the systemic experience of structural violence. A large part of this work is reframing internalized violence (racism, sexism etc) into an understanding about how systems and cultures create and maintain the conditions for this violence.

We all have trauma to heal. And when you are addressing and working with young women who have experienced systemic or sexualized violence, we have a collective responsibility to recognize and hold space for this reality and at the same time, to not rip open wounds and retraumatize people.

This meant that we needed to create the conditions for people to show up human, for good design and facilitation that included space for many different forms of expression and healing practice. It also meant that we held boundaries and did not inappropriately try to be therapists or make assumptions about what people needed. We had to have appropriate supports on hand for any sort of personal follow up people might require.

Our network supported collaboration that moved to action, but we couldn’t get to action without grounding ourselves in the lived experiences of our communities and members. And we had to think about what language we were using. To reflect on- are we alienating people? Do people have access to the support they need if we get into difficult subjects? Can people show up as human beings?

Collaboration & shifting resources

We collaborated with network members to create projects where they led the work and leveraged our ability to access funds. We supported their leadership and learning where appropriate and did our best to support their capacity to resource their work. We also collaborated with network members to build knowledge tools based on what was emerging in the network.

One example, an Indigenous organization that had been part of the network for a long time — came to us and said they wanted to partner. They were having a hard time getting funding because they were seen as too radical. So they collaborated with us to access funds. They led the project and we were the back end infrastructure and the interface with the funder.

Our role became to get resources for the work, to support from behind and then to get out of the way, to amplify and shine light on the work coming from the young women leading and the community.

Always reflecting and learning

We were constantly de-briefing, learning and adapting because everything was a learning moment. Our aim was to create a space where all participants could lead and share learning with other communities. We made mistakes but we took the learning and kept going.

We held these annual gatherings for more than 10 years and built a network of 300 organizations across Canada.

How does your experience in feminist organizing influence the way you think about working across difference?

We have a lot to learn from the feminist movement. The feminist movement has been in the trenches of this work for over 30 years with a commitment to centering people with lived experience in creating solutions. Like other community based work, it’s a wealth of learning and practice that can support emerging fields like systems change and social innovation.

Using intersectional frames

A feminist approach is intersectional and is aligned with systems thinking in so many ways. Both approaches value ‘feminine’ or relational leadership, diversity, bring a holistic perspective and see interconnectivity between issues.

Intersectionality means that we recognize that people do not experience systems in the same way. It is not just a question of equality between men and women. Peoples’ experiences are informed by intersecting and interlocking identities including race, class, Indigenous identities, sexual identity and ability. (Many) feminist practices have always been systemic as it has worked to undo the roots of white, patriarchal and capitalist dominance. This approach recognizes that people experience systems and structures in very different ways based on their histories, cultures, identities. In systems work, we pay attention to the intersections and in between spaces to identify opportunities for change. In these ways, feminist practice and systems practice are resonant.

For girls, the dominant narratives have been created around the experience of white middle class girls. This dominance is mirrored in policies, systems, programs, the media; who is valued and who is invisible. Systems discriminate against racialized girls, poor girls, Indigenous girls. Feminist intersectionality recognizes difference and nuance in experience and centers the voices and experiences of those marginalized by our systems to inform action and ways forward.

Locating yourself in the system

One of the biggest things I have learned is that you have to show up with some social and political awareness, know where you come from and know your privileges and challenges to the point where you can share honestly and not get defensive.

As a white, educated, cisgendered woman, I have access to privileges. I also grew up with a young single mom who faced economic insecurity, violence, discrimination and stigma. This also shapes me and is part of my story.

Locating ourselves in the systems we are working to shift and the ongoing pursuit of self awareness is a steady learning process. I have learned to be OK with being uncomfortable with my own edges as well willing to do the work and embrace the learning.

Shifting power

Systems change requires shifting power and resource flows. We often see interventions attempting to address dominant powers directly by trying to engage from the centre of the system, for example, policy advocacy aimed at changing policy makers’ decisions. Feminist practice offers a lens of analysis to locate and understand dominant cultures and structures and to intentionally center the margins. Feminism also offers tools to analyse power, which is often the elephant in the room, especially around a systems change initiative.

A feminist or critical power analysis will trace the connections between the individual experience to broad social, political and cultural structures and systems. This approach offers a lens to challenge individualistic notions of success and failure and to understand the construction of power, domination and oppression in systems.

Feminist learning about working across difference

The feminist movement has spent a long time working out identity politics and the destruction that can fall out from here. The second wave of feminism is well known for achieving important women’s rights on a number of fronts that helped to get women out of the domestic and into the public spheres. However, it was predominantly in service of white educated women and it left many women out. Women who are differently situated by race, class and sexual identities who have also been working to advance equity have had to fight hard to be heard in dominant spaces. In my experience as a young activist, I saw, many times, the ways in which racism, identity politics and infighting undermined important work.

Our work at Girls Action Foundation was inspired by a desire to do things differently. We were practicing (attempting, failing, learning) how to work across difference. We tried to create space to practice moving past these limits to discover how to be in solidarity and allyship across diverse locations and to build from this place. This required us to do the deep healing work individually and then collectively, and to practice compassion and to hold each other accountable as we found our way forward.

There’s so much amazing work that’s been done to create the conditions to move forward together.

Feminist leaders and particularly young feminist leaders are trailblazing here. Creating new narratives and influencing culture, facilitating healing in their communities, shifting conversations from the idea of the individual to truly understanding and acting collectively to shift systems.

What dynamics do you see happening in the fields of social innovation, systems change and social justice now?

It is well known that the emerging systems change field is dominantly white, western and academic. Systems change practice values convening diverse actors in the system to help make sense of the system but in my experience, there is still a lack of capacity to effectively work across difference in the systems change field. While there has been a lot of focus on working across sectors and paying attention to what it means to work with the so-called ‘bad guy’ or ‘enemy’, there is a lack of capacity to think about and to take good action on issues of race, class and systemic exclusion, especially when these overlap. There is a real need to centre issues of equity and to have conversations about how to address the system level blind spots in the work.

In our work at the Sanctuary, we hear a lot of systems leaders grappling with issues of power and inclusion in their work. Here are some of the patterns we see:

Relationships over accountability

In systems change, it is often said “relationships are everything”. Building relationships is an important systems leadership capacity. Taking the time to create connection, trust and depth required to truly collaborate towards change is very challenging in a dominant culture that is working at a high pressure fast pace.

When we work toward systems change — we need to get very transparent about resources, and access to power in order to actually shift power. Systems change practice often lacks the ‘know how’ to analyze power and bring this into the conversations that are convened for systems work. Oftentimes, systems spaces defer to ‘relationship building’ — which is important and necessary — but when this approach lacks power analysis, it risks reproducing power structures that maintain the status quo. Worse yet is when this work lacks accountability to the communities it is working in service of.

Lack of real listening

When the dominant center is challenged by and can’t hear people from the margins, they can become defensive and people are hurt. What is sometimes missed is that marginalized communities that have been invisibilized, are just trying to be heard. And because maybe they’re not performing in the dominant norms that are familiar to people in power or because they challenge the status quo, it is easy for people in power to get offended and for these perspectives to be dismissed. The cycle continues, marginalized voices are silenced, the gap widens and division grows. From my perspective, people with lived experience and people who are located on the margins are critical actors in ecosystems. People on the front lines of harmful systems have the perspective for how to change them. They should be at the centre of systems change work.

Token ‘superstars’

Community organizers — leaders — who are doing movement and systems change work in the margins are everywhere. There are people who have been doing this work for years and may not be invited into emerging ecosystem level work. People in very different places, who have a ton of experience to bear on systems change work, but may not call it that.

Sometimes, there are a few superstars who stand out, get asked to every event, and can code switch and perform to ‘fit in’. Sometimes, they are brought into initiatives and tokenized and this recreates harmful situations. Often we hear their experiences of burn out from being invited to speak everywhere. Saying no becomes an important strategy to get their work done.

In the end, the systems change or innovation space can choose to dismiss people who are living the harms of the system and to decide who gets invited and who doesn’t.

Opportunities for sharing and weaving

In social justice fields there can be a tripping point around identity politics, where there can be a competition for who’s the most oppressed or the most ‘woke’. There is also a sense of exclusion and a feeling that practices that community have been doing forever — are appropriated and packaged and sold back at a highest cost. Or that community has been doing this work for a long time and will continue — regardless of the systems change field.

But there are ecosystem initiatives, frameworks and financial resources that come from systems change that can serve community efforts and at the same time — there is a lot of learning and leadership from community that can contribute to collective systems change efforts.

Our work with Girls Action was rooted in feminist, asset based community change and popular education approaches, but we benefited from complexity theory and systems tools that were emerging. These approaches informed how we did our work, built our network and helped us to be successful. There’s lots to learn by connecting these fields of practice and these system actors. I think we need each other to achieve the systems change we are all seeking. We are all actors in the systems we are hoping to change.

What do we need now?

There is huge opportunity for these fields of practice to learn from each other and to center systems leaders working from community and traditionally marginalized spaces.

At The Systems Sanctuary we are trying to work in a way where we don’t simply value the expert teacher. We want to create the conditions where practitioners are experts and can start from where they are already doing this work and exchange and learn together from there.

We see a need for a place where people who are traditionally marginalized by dominant systems — and who are doing systems change work can just be together with others who just get it. Where they can connect, they don’t have to perform for the dominant systems and translate all their experiences, where they can draw strength and learn from each other and build the learning together.

We also see a need to support people in the system change fields to work with their power and privilege, to support shifting resources and power and to decenter from dominant cultures and actors.

Our next steps

Interrogating Whiteness

We launched Interrogating Whiteness for systems leaders in the fall of 2019 — a virtual program and a deep dive for systems practitioners the thick of de-centering whiteness & decolonizing practices. We will offer again in the fall of 2020.

Sanctuary Learning Labs

We are collaborating with Be The Peace Institute in Nova Scotia Canada to pilot a gender equity systems change learning ecosystem. We will convene a cohort of ecosystem actors who are working to end domestic violence. The learning lab will bring together a gender and systems lens to build capacity for systems leadership and facilitate collective learning across the ecosystem.

An exploration into the practice of ‘Bridging’

In our work at The Systems Sanctuary, we see a pattern with two kinds of ‘bridgers’ in and around the field of systems change practice that relate to the issue of diversity, equity and inclusion: 1) Institutional Bridgers who are working in dominant systems group and are trying to ‘bridge’ across difference and specifically with communities marginalized by our current systems and 2) Community Bridgers who are working in context of marginalized spaces, identities and communities and act as a ‘bridge’ across communities and to places of existing power and influence across the incumbent system

We believe that building a deeper understanding of the nature, challenges and opportunities faced by these bridge builders will help us support the fields’ capacity to decenter dominant systems and engage communities who are seeking equity and justice. We will be launching peer-learning Cohorts, one for each of these groups, to host a peer-learning process designed to share inquiry, key learning and practices.

This will be a chance to dive into the most significant pain points experienced by participants, so we can develop new strategies of support that create the highest impact.

The first one starts this Fall. Find out more here.

Sharing what we learn

By documenting what we learn through these inquiries and processes, we will be able to share these insights back to the field of practice so they can be shared widely. They can be used to inform our collective strategy about how to strengthen the ecosystem of systems change practitioners. Stay tuned for publications on Interrogating Whiteness, Feminist Systems Change and Inquiry into the Role of Bridging.

If any of this resonates with you, please get in touch:

tatiana@systemsanctuary.com and rachel@systemsanctuary.com

Let’s unpack that idea about ‘working across difference’ in systems change was originally published in Refuge for systems leaders on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

If you knew that recovering from burnout takes months to years, would you change the way you work?

by Rachel Sinha and Tatiana Fraser

If you knew that recovering from burnout takes months to years, would you change the way you work?

Personal sacrifice, overwork, undermined leadership, aggressive competition and unwanted sexual attention. Sound familiar? Women who work in male-dominated professions know all too well the games they are immersed in, and the nuances to the well-trodden headlines.

Women in senior leadership positions who have navigated toxic work environments and invested years in their careers have much to lose by disrupting the status quo or speaking out.

We hear over and over again, ‘I thought it was just me.’ Far too many stories have gone untold.

We are launching The Systems Sisterhood: Male Dominated Industries, a place where powerful personal stories of women leaders can be shared. We hope to see collective patterns and identify the subtleties that are the opportunities for change, and offer a wider framework through which to understand an all too common experience.

We’ve come a long way, with educational interventions designed to teach girls that they can grow up and become programmers and scientists and to love math. Tremendous efforts to increase representation of women in male dominated fields and resources poured into diversity and inclusion, programs to support women in the science, technology, engineering fields…..

And yet, we still face a significant gap in representation, and especially in the senior leadership and C-suite roles.

This Sisterhood is a place to go deep, to shine light on the dark and invisible truths, to set aside ‘I’m fine’ for once.

An interview with Ginny

Ginny Cullen, a leader in the Engineering profession, saw our offerings and approached us to run a program for women in leadership positions.

Here are some of her personal insights on why this is so badly needed:

Can you tell us about your career and experience stepping away for your work — and what inspired you to reach out to the Sanctuary?

It was my interest in systems thinking and systems change work that led me to the Sanctuary. I attended a webinar that Tatiana gave on how systems thinking is infused with feminine principles and I realized that this perspective was missing in the corporate world. To me, it was an explanation as to why it was often difficult to try and shift existing systems of work into more collaborative structures — if the feminine principles were not valued at the same level as the new structure, then progress would be slow.

I spent 18 years working in the engineering consulting industry and for the most part had very positive experiences. I worked with supportive co-workers, many of them very much aware of the importance of diversity and inclusion within collaborative work environments where connection and respectful communication were upheld.

However, when I stepped away to take a break and assess what I wanted to do next, I had a wakeup call to how much fatigue I was carrying. It was a gradual process, but after about 2 months my energy levels faded so that I could do nothing but read and sleep — this lasted for almost 5 months. It was the most humbling period of my life. I had to completely surrender and trust that if I got enough rest I would eventually feel better. The level of fatigue surprised me and it caused me to reevaluate how I had been working. I also had to assess how the work environment can harbor invisible resistance that can wear you down over time.

When I started speaking to friends of mine who work in similar leadership roles within similar industries, I was concerned at the similarities in the experiences between us as well as the reluctance and fear to share our experiences with wider audiences.

What are some of the challenges you see women navigating in male dominated industries?

Women have to fit into a workplace that was designed in their absence. They often hold back parts of themselves to play by the rules of a system that favours competition over cooperation and self-promotion over success of the team. Working in this way can lead to unfulfillment, lack of motivation and exhaustion due to the necessity of wearing a professional costume — which acts as a barrier to authenticity.

The impact of high stress professions with unreasonable workloads and highly competitive work environments is burnout. Burnout looks different for every individual but always impacts work productivity and physical and/or mental health. The stories of burnout are not being shared widely enough, nor are the unreasonable expectations (often self imposed) that lead to working in an unsustainable way.

Why do you think these issues are still invisible and not discussed?

Both men and women who are brilliant supporters and advocates for women in their organizations are not aware of biases that can undermine female leaders.

This can look like subverting formal lines of communication to try and ‘smooth over issues’ that a growing leader is coming up against. This type of response undermines leadership and creates additional challenges. These challenges manifest as team members resistant to carry out tasks or provide support or backlash from difficult decisions including hiring or firing and promotions.

We need to identify the subtle shifts that women can take action on to strengthen resilience for the hidden resistance that is felt in an outdated work environment. We can’t do this without sharing lived experiences and identifying both the obvious and invisible barriers that stand in the way of working with ease.

Like other systems of inequity — these barriers and challenges are often internalized by women and men. This means that they are normalized, and typically operate in the shadows without being questioned. How else do you see this playing out?

Women in executive roles are often making horizontal moves between organizations to negotiate fair pay and to get promotions. This has a negative effect on the organizations they leave. We need to understand what is standing in the way of women being promoted within organizations as well as articulate the impact to organizations for not promoting within.

There are also gender related expectations that set women up to take on tasks that aren’t strategic or aligned with their career trajectory — like organizing the summer BBQ. Men typically only take on tasks they know will get them ahead while women take on tasks nobody is doing to help out.

Statistically women do the lion’s share of domestic work and often make sacrifices and choices to support family life, including taking on the load of the emotional work at work and at home. Beyond burnout, what other impacts are these invisible barriers and inauthentic ways of working having on women in the workplace?

Women in these professions are often delaying having a family until their mid to late thirties and then are having difficulty conceiving. Many are having to turn to the private medical system to get help with fertility issues. Women are having to work hard to get ahead in their 20’s and 30’s, taking on more than their share of work to prove themselves. Then when they start trying to have a family, and they can’t, another layer of shame shows up. This time, the shame is about not being enough of a woman.

We also see women ‘dropping out’ to have families — and making decisions to support their partners’ career while they take care of the children’s needs and domestic fronts, because the burden of carrying it all simply becomes too much.

Some reflections from us

“Having it all” is an impossible balance that sets women up for disappointment — and can have negative impacts on their health, their spirits, personal and professional lives in devastating ways.

We want to succeed, we have proven we can make it in a working world designed by men, we have the smarts and capacity. But outdated leadership styles perpetuate hierarchies and power instead of collaboration that promotes fairness and shared workloads. There are unanswered questions about the cultures and systems that persist in these fields of work.

If we want to create the conditions where both women and men can thrive, we need to shine light on these issues and find new ways forward.

We are looking forward to surfacing patterns and themes with a diverse cohort of women in the coming months — and to make sense together about how to connect the personal and internalized experiences into collective understanding and action.

Questions as we launch the program

Some of the questions that will guide this reflection include:

• How can we begin to shine light on the unconscious behaviours and communication that undermine developing female leaders?
• What if we could go to work and know that our co-workers have our backs and see our success as a collective achievement?
• What would happen if we could redirect energy that is being used to play defense into creative pursuits and development of those around us?
• How can we find a different way of working that doesn’t require us to sprint and then collapse at the finish line?
• How can we build rest and recovery practices into our work lives so that we can find sustainable modes of operating?

Our solution

The Systems Sisterhood — Male Dominated Industries is a place to find camaraderie and leadership support for women leaders (identified and gender diverse) in traditionally male dominated fields.

This program has been designed for women who have been navigating their professional careers for some time. These women will have gained a high level of success and at the same time, have faced systemic obstacles and barriers that feel like glass ceilings, limitations and isolation.

Despite attempts to make more room for women in professions such as accountancy, law, engineering, tech and media, the culture and demands make it very difficult for women who have worked hard to succeed, to actually thrive.

Hosted in small groups on zoom, this program will be an intimate place to go deep and to identify ways past the limitations we face.

We will illuminate our personal experiences and the connections to the systemic nature of the challenges we share, we will introduce systems change frameworks to help participants see paths forward. We will explore these barriers and start to think collectively about what we can do to shift outdated power structures and cultures towards new creativity, new freedom and a new way of being.

This is an invitation to a Cohort with people who understand and immediately ‘get it’.

You will find a brave space where you can be honest.

You will be validated.

You will make great friends with other senior women leaders.

You will leave with frameworks that help you have bold conversations.

We interview every applicant and curate special groups of up to 9 participants from different locations and industries.

You can find out more and sign up here.

New program for Women in Male Dominated Industries was originally published in Refuge for systems leaders on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

An interview with Tanya Birl-Torres

By Rachel Sinha and Tatiana Fraser

What imagery or thought comes to mind when you hear that phrase “lead from the back?”

Is it taking a back seat? Is it a passive kind of leadership, or perhaps a strong and confident presence?

As part of The System Sanctuary we have been convening a cohort of 25 women from the US, UK, Australia and Canada for a collective inquiry into emerging leadership for systems change.

We are exploring themes that cut across gender, justice, transitions and systems change. One thread that shows up in our exchanges is reflections on power. We’re asking questions like “How do can we draw on different ways of knowing in our leadership, relationships and experiences of transitions?”, “In what ways can we redefine power?” “How does embodiment and reflective practice strengthen our efforts for systemic change?”

We invited Tanya Birl Torres of So Humanity to explore this theme during our Systems Sisterhood program for ‘women of systems change amid life transition’.

What has driven your exploration into embodiment?

I have spent 15 years performing on Broadway and traveling the world as an actor, dancer, choreographer and movement director. My career ushered in a lot of success, but with this external success also came a creative void or longing to connect deeper to myself and those around me beyond the confines of the performing arts.

Also, we are taught often as theater dancers to be in our body and to leave the speaking to someone else. You’re meant to take the supporting role — allow the music to lead, you’re the interpreter.

I was left with questions like “What was it about the performance that moved people?” “How did the show impact your life, and why?”

I was aching to move beyond recognition and deeper into relationship with my creativity and those whom my creativity (or presence) affected.

As a woman of color, I am learning to own and reclaim ownership of my body, a right that my ancestors didn’t have. I work at the intersections of social justice, race in America, spirituality and the arts. In that often heady context of systems thinking, I have learned to interpret what is happening through my body. My work has also been through this process, to open up my throat so my body and my experience can speak authentically. Say what I do know. My embodiment practice has helped me to do that.

You talk about “The role of embodiment is to make systems visible”, can you say more about that?

I recently spent some time in Boston at the Social Presencing Theater. I was drawn to the work of Otto Scharmer and Arawana Hayashi (former dancer/choreographer). It’s a theory which beautifully invites us to lead from the future as it emerges.

I immediately saw this theory and recognized it as the process adage in musical theater. It spoke to me in dance, movement, and metaphor and I was intrigued to learn more about it from an embodied point of view.

As a dancer, I have always lead with a sense of spatial awareness. My individual body in space and in relation to others. There is a multidimensional awareness of how I exist in space. This is the same for all of us. Social Presencing Theater breaks it down into 3 bodies or 3 systems of awareness:

Earth body: where life comes from and returns to

Individual body: our physical systems

Social body: a skin that surrounds all of us

This third body is fascinating in that our individual awareness of the back of our own bodies connects us (like invisible antennas) to this social skin. The very invisible systems that we are so passionate about changing and affecting with our work is now able to become visible or at lease sensed when we tap into this spacial awareness.

Can you say more about the back body?

We are often told to think about how we move through the world with the front of the body. But instead, I’d like you to picture an ancient Egyptian Queen perched on her throne. Her arms resting on the arms of her majestic seat. She leads by leaning back. With quiet confidence. Back body strong, front body open and soft. The nape of her neck extended as if light was shooting out from the crown of her head.

The women in my family all lead in this way. In a challenging situation, I don’t need words, my presence says what needs to be said. This is rooted in a groundedness. A feminine energy that has been passed down to me.

Sheryl Sandberg talked famously about how women should ‘lean in’, but Michelle Obama in a brilliant interview recently with Oprah quipped ‘it doesn’t always work that way.’ If you read her book Becoming, she clearly decided to allow her back body to lead and be the anchor for her family as they went through a huge transformation. To me leaning in is singular, leaning back is collective. It’s about connecting to others’ wisdom.

In our Sisterhood sessions participants talked about how in a tense moment, we needed to have the audacity to keep the front soft, to stay vulnerable and to do that having a strong back ensures the safety of the room. The group shared stories of how as facilitators their job was often to hold the silence long enough for the next thing to come forward. That they had learned naturally to stand in a particular way but had never had a way to describe it before.

One said: “By leading from the back the message says ‘actually this is immovable’. I see what’s going on and I’m not speaking about it, but I’m demonstrating the power in the room.” The back body can be a useful tool where we find ourselves in very difficult conversations as a way to use the body to stay in the moment and not flee.

What I am coming to learn about back body leadership is that it is a remembering of what women do best. Brene Brown talked about having a strong back, soft front. A strong back signifies a quiet holding power. A power that will secure the safety of a space and of others at all costs while modeling what true presence and openness look like.

I feel like I’m living the ultimate metaphor at the moment as a pregnant mother. My front is literally soft, but my back has to be strong.

It’s worth acknowledging that it is really scary to be owning the presence we have ourselves. As women, we are trained not to do that. Women standing in their power can be seen as a national threat.

Tell us more about the concept of embodiment

The purpose of embodiment is to feel and not to escape to the head where most us in western society feel more comfortable.

There is a safety, a wisdom and an innate knowing in the body that the mind cannot rationalize.

Our desire for comfort at all costs has kept a lot of society from uncomfortable conversations, dialogues or seeking the deeper change that we know is needed within ourselves.

Embodiment practices are tools which allow each of us to stay present in this deeply personal and transformational work of systems change.

This was a notion that resonated deeply with many of the participants in the Sisterhood. As one said “I’m fascinated by the knowledge our body holds. Too often we listen to it looking for sickness or pain, but not for what else it has to say to us.”

How is this connected to yoga?

In the lineage of yoga and the energy centers of the body known as the chakras, the fifth chakra vishuddha is the gateway to truth, communication, and creativity. It is housed in the throat.

When the front of the throat is overly exercised, a need to dominate with voice and opinion is often embodied. When there is a healthy balance of the back of the throat, representing deep listening, a softer yet effective way of leadership is able to emerge. Leadership that listens with whole being and takes action not out of a need to dominate or react, but one that leads by purpose and example.

This is the type of leader that I am becoming, in my work, as a parent, in genuine relationships and in how I show up in community.