7 improvements to collective impact, plus a name change.

The model isn't failing, the fragmentation of the system and the faceless egos behind the bureaucracies are.

As a bureaucrat in the NSW Government, I was convinced collective impact was the silver bullet to resolve the wicked problems such as poverty, homelessness, mental illness, addiction, and violence. My frame was informed by the impact I witnessed when I was working in London and we integrated health and social care services for people with a mental illness.

Integrating the health and social model led to a 60% reduction in suicide rates and showed how working together was the answer to the complex world of mental illness.

Coming to Australia in 2001 and working as Director of Mental Health on the south coast of NSW I was concerned to witness a fragmented system. Primary care was the responsibility of the Australian Government and secondary health care the remit of the State Government. Most psychiatrists operated in the private sector and opting into the public health system on their own terms.

Integrating the health and social model led to a 60% reduction in suicide rates...

And then of course there was a chasm between the in-patient wards and community services. This was felt most keenly by the person trying to navigate access to hospital and trying to navigate into the community with the right supports on discharge. It wasn't uncommon for a patient's discharge plan to be nothing more than a cab charge, even when they were homeless.

The police were often refused access to a bed for a person in crisis, even when that person was known to the system. A fragmented system is a failed system.

So, when I learned about collective impact, I embraced the model with both hands. In partnership with social entrepreneurs and innovators we created The Collective NSW despite the efforts of senior bureaucrats to quash an approach that was going to challenge the status quo. Some great initiatives were born from that initiative, but the potential was not realised because those in power and authority wanted to keep the status quo in place.

The day I realised I was in the wrong game was when a senior bureaucrat admonished me for suggesting the role of the department was to end homelessness. He made it clear our role was simply to provide social housing. Confused at why ending homelessness would not be our mission it dawned on me that eliminating homelessness would eliminate the need for his department, his role in authority and his well paid job.

The day I realised I was in the wrong game was when a senior bureaucrat admonished me for suggesting the role of the department was to end homelessness. He made it clear our role was simply to provide social housing.

Time has passed and I have observed with interest the emergence of collective impact in Australia. With a handful of exceptions, I have to say that the model has failed and failed spectacularly. The data on homelessness, suicide, domestic violence, out of home care, child deaths and addiction are flatlining and worsening in some cases. We are failing.

Shiny websites, annual reports, conference talks and social media chatter creates the glitter that fools many investors to continue to fund this growing industry.

A new industry of expensive backbone, co-design and social innovation agencies is sucking valuable resources away from the front line. Many actors in the space are slow to act and some are deliberately placing brakes on progress to sustain the status quo. Shiny websites, annual reports, conference talks and social media chatter creates the glitter that fools many investors to continue to fund this growing industry.

Collective Impact can work, but the actors are failing the movement. It is time to re-boot and refresh this way of working. And to do that we need a process that does the following:

1.       Start with the data and map the current system. The system is designed perfectly to create the outcomes experienced by the system. The whole system must be mapped and linked to the health, social and economic results.

2.      Anchor in commitment and relationship. Leaders need to cede power and authority to the community and the front line who are willing to come together to create systemic change.

3.      Understand the wisdom is in the community. Change should be guided by community once they have had the opportunity to be engaged, to express what is important for their community and understand the science behind responses to “wicked problems”.

4.     Commit to the shared value goals of improved outcomes coupled with a reduction in the cost-of-service delivery. It is possible to improve health, social and economic outcomes whilst reducing the cost of services to taxpayers.

5.      Get clear that the redesign of the whole system will mean closure of some services, expansion or integration of others and development of new services. This means accepting that funding will be recalibrated, and each department must fight against their instinct to negotiate for a bigger piece of the pie.

6.     Be data driven, ensure all decision are made based on data, information, and knowledge. Ego driven decisions must be left behind.

7.     Be adaptive to the information and pivot as required. We all have great ideas, but if those ideas fail to deliver outcomes, they should be adapted or discarded.

Collective impact sounds like an action against community. To impact a community feels like violating that community. Maybe it is time for a new term? One that puts the power, authority, and responsibility back into community where it belongs.

I know many working outside of government understand the fragmentation that occurs due to the organisational structure of each bureaucracy is failing people. Even within the same government, getting more than one department to work in concert with another is hard to achieve. Admittedly there are great examples where it has worked well, but my recent experience in the child protection system has left me frustrated.

So my call is not to discard collective impact as such, but maybe it’s time to give it another name and create a methodology that is community led and leads to real systemic change, in spite of the forces that wish to retain the status quo (and their salaries).