.png)
5 Ways to Change Systems: Lessons for Social Entrepreneurs
Imagine you start an organisation to help children from low-income families access education. You provide learning materials, arrange tuition and support students who are struggling.
Some children improve. But many others continue to struggle because they have to work after school, their parents cannot afford transport, or their schools lack teachers.
You are helping children, but the conditions that make education difficult remain unchanged.
What if the problem is not just the children’s access to learning materials? What if the system itself needs to change?
This is an important question for social entrepreneurs.
Sometimes, the challenge is not a lack of solutions. It is that the system keeps producing the same problems, even when people are working hard to solve them.
First, What Is a System?
A system is a set of interconnected elements that work together and influence one another to produce a particular outcome.
Think about the education system. It includes students, teachers, parents, schools, government departments, funding, policies, examinations and social expectations. These elements interact with one another to shape how education works.
Similarly, unemployment is connected to education, skills, employers, economic conditions, social networks and public policy. We cannot fully understand it by looking at an unemployed person alone.
So, what is system change?
System change means changing the underlying structures, relationships, rules or assumptions that shape how a system operates and the outcomes it produces.
Instead of repeatedly addressing the symptoms of a problem, we try to change the conditions that keep producing it.
This does not mean that direct services, such as tuition or food distribution, are unimportant.
They can meet urgent needs. But if we want lasting change, we may also need to influence the wider system.
What Can Social Entrepreneurs Learn from System Thinking?
Donella H. Meadows was an environmental scientist and systems thinker who explored how complex systems work and where interventions can create significant change.
The five approaches below are selected from her framework and adapted for social entrepreneurs. They are not five separate steps or a fixed formula. They are different ways of thinking about where an intervention might create change.
1. Change the Information Flow
Sometimes, a system does not change because the people making decisions cannot see what is happening—or because the people experiencing the problem cannot make their experiences heard.
Information flow refers to who has access to information, who receives it, and when they receive it.
Consider a village where farmers regularly lose income because of unpredictable market prices. Farmers may not know the prices offered in nearby markets, while traders have better access to that information.
A social enterprise could develop a simple system that shares local market prices with farmers through mobile messages or a community-based information network.The enterprise is not necessarily changing the market itself. But it is changing who has access to information, potentially improving farmers’ bargaining power and decisions.
The same principle applies to healthcare, education and public services. When citizens can access information about entitlements, service quality or available opportunities, they may be better equipped to question decisions and demand improvements.
The lesson: Before building a new service, ask whether people already have the information they need to act differently.
2. Change the Rules of the System
Rules shape what people can and cannot do. They include formal laws and policies, but also organisational procedures, eligibility criteria, incentives and informal expectations.
Sometimes, people are willing to change, but the rules make it difficult.
Imagine a group of women who produce food products from their homes. They have the skills and customers, but they struggle to grow their enterprise because local market spaces are allocated through processes that exclude small producers.
A social enterprise could help them improve their products and find customers. That would be useful.
But it could also work with local authorities, market associations and community groups to create fairer access to market spaces for small producers.
The second approach attempts to change the conditions under which many enterprises operate, rather than helping one group navigate the existing system.
For social entrepreneurs, rules can be found at many levels: government regulations, school procedures, procurement policies, lending criteria and even the way an organisation distributes responsibilities internally.
The lesson: When people repeatedly encounter the same barrier, ask whether the rules themselves are creating it.
3. Change the Goal of the System
A system tends to organise its activities around the outcomes it is designed to achieve. Changing that goal can change how the entire system behaves.
Consider a waste-management system that measures success mainly by the amount of waste collected and transported away.
Under this goal, collecting more waste may appear to be progress.
But what if the goal changes from collecting more waste to reducing the amount of waste generated and increasing reuse and recycling?
The priorities could change significantly. Local authorities, businesses and communities might invest more in waste prevention, repair, reuse, segregation and recycling instead of focusing primarily on collection and disposal.
A social enterprise working in waste management could support this shift by helping businesses redesign packaging, organising reuse systems or connecting discarded materials with producers who can use them.
The intervention is no longer limited to managing waste after it is created. It seeks to change what the system is trying to achieve.
This distinction matters in social entrepreneurship, too. An organisation focused only on the number of people trained may overlook whether those people actually find work. One focused on the number of loans disbursed may overlook whether borrowers improve their financial well-being.
The lesson: Ask what the system is measuring as success—and whether that is the outcome society actually needs.
4. Change the Mindset Behind the System
Some systems continue to produce the same outcomes because people share assumptions about how the world works.
These assumptions can become so familiar that we rarely question them.
For example, a community may believe that young people must leave their villages to find meaningful careers. Families encourage migration, educational institutions prepare students for jobs elsewhere, and local businesses struggle to attract young talent.
A social entrepreneur might respond by creating a rural entrepreneurship programme that helps young people develop enterprises using local resources, knowledge and markets.
But the deeper opportunity is to challenge the assumption that a meaningful career must begin by leaving one's community.
If young people, families, educational institutions and local governments begin to see rural areas as places where viable careers can be created, their choices and investments may change.
Changing a mindset is difficult. A campaign alone may not be enough. People may need to see credible examples, experience alternatives and participate in creating a different reality.
The lesson: Sometimes, the most important question is not “How do we solve this problem?” but “What do we collectively believe that keeps this problem in place?”
5. Enable People to Organise and Create Their Own Solutions
Social entrepreneurs often begin by identifying a problem and building an organisation to solve it. But what if the most effective intervention is to help people organise themselves to address the problem?
Self-organisation refers to the ability of people or elements within a system to develop new structures, relationships and ways of working.
Consider small farmers who struggle to access markets individually. One enterprise could buy their produce and sell it on their behalf. This might improve their incomes, but the farmers could remain dependent on that intermediary.
An alternative is to help farmers establish a producer collective or cooperative that enables them to aggregate produce, negotiate prices, share infrastructure and make collective decisions.
The intervention does more than improve market access. It helps farmers develop the capacity to organise, make decisions and influence the conditions under which they operate.
Of course, collectives and cooperatives do not automatically become democratic or effective. They need good governance, accountability and sustained participation. But they can create opportunities for people to influence a system rather than simply receive services from it.
The lesson: Sometimes, the most valuable thing an entrepreneur can create is not a service, but the conditions for people to organise and act together.
These five approaches are not mutually exclusive. In practice, they can reinforce one another. For social entrepreneurs, the starting point is to look beyond the immediate problem and understand the relationships, rules and assumptions that keep producing it.
☕ Coffee Break Question
Think about a social problem in your community that has existed for years.
Are people repeatedly trying to solve its symptoms, or is someone questioning the system that keeps producing the problem?
💡 One Idea to Take Home
You do not always need to build a bigger organisation or deliver more services to create greater impact.
Sometimes, you need to change the information people receive, the rules they follow, the goals they pursue, the assumptions they hold or their ability to organise themselves.
Don't just ask how to solve a problem. Ask what needs to change for the problem to stop reproducing itself.
Further Reading
Meadows, D. H. (1999). Leverage Points: Places to Intervene in a System. The Sustainability Institute.
Read the original essay through The Donella Meadows Project.
Comments