The first objective was to provide an overview of all activities that were employed during the course of a research project to develop a relapse prevention intervention for interdisciplinary pain treatment programs. The second objective was to examine how co-design may contribute to stakeholder involvement, generation of relevant insights and ideas, and incorporation of stakeholder input into the intervention design.

In their landmark 1959 report often referenced in leadership theory, social psychologists John R. P. French and Bertram Raven pinpointed five bases of power: Legitimate: when people perceive that your rank in a formal hierarchy—e.g., manager, CEO, or president—gives you the right to “prescribe” their behavior Reward: when people perceive your ability to distribute rewards for completed tasks or met goals Coercive: when people perceive your ability to distribute punishments and disincentives (the opposite of reward power) Expert: when people perceive your special knowledge or expertise, which causes them to defer to your expertise Referent: when people feel “oneness” with you or a desire to be like you, leading to their respect and admiration of you Referent power is considered the most potent because it doesn’t require that a leader micromanage, use coercion, or reward to influence others. People follow a leader with referent power based on who the leader is and how they behave. According to French and Raven, referent power has the broadest range of influence of any power, allowing it to be leveraged on a large scale.

The new toolkit crosses local, central and international government action. It has many of the elements of the previous framework but also covers new ground. The most obvious is that we have changed the horizontal axis to better reflect the way government works in practice. This has meant including a number of new areas namely, influencing, engaging, designing, developing, resourcing, delivering and controlling (or managing). The vertical axis still follows the same logic from ‘softer’ more collaborative power at the top, down to more formal government power at the bottom of the axis. The update includes many familiar things from nudging behaviour to convening power and also adds new areas like deliberative approaches such as citizen juries. This is the framework for Policy Lab's new Government as a System toolkit. The new Government as a System toolkit framework. When looking across the whole system, it now has 56 distinct actions. Of course this isn’t an exhaustive set of options, you could create more and more detail as there is always more complexity and nuance that can be found in government. Importantly, we want policymakers to be considering how multiple levers are used together to address complex problems.

There are ways that we can overcome the unknown, the uncertain, and the ambiguous to help people feel more confident. The following behavioural insights are all practical examples of how to follow the four guiding stars of navigating uncertainty. Transparency Consistency Managing expectations Social proof

This is a map of subcultures within an organization (it's called a fitness landscape). It's built from stories told by the people in the organization. What can you do with it? Understand where the culture(s) are and request changes by saying I want “More stories like these...“ and “Fewer like those...“ Dave Snowden and The Cynefin Company (formerly Cognitive Edge) are offering impactful ways to visualize culture, and communicate direction in a manner that is customized to where each subculture is now and where their next best step is. Watch this video until 48:48 for more on the science and method (Link at 44:33) https://lnkd.in/emuAzp6E Stories collected using The Cynefin Co's Sensemaker tool.

It explores the toolbox of the behavioral manager as Samuel answers ten questions from Henrik related to organizational behavior change.

An Inclusion Nudge is a design based on insights from behavioural and social sciences to steer the unconscious mind to change behaviour in direction of inclusiveness by targeting the behavioural drivers, judgment and choice processes, and perceptions.

In this chapter we explore three approaches to ensuring that an effective intervention does lead to impact: they are scaling, dissemination, and knowledge translation. Each pathway can increase your impact - i.e., desired behaviour and societal change - but approach this goal from different directions and with emphasis on different activities and outputs. We will introduce you to the three approaches before deep diving into when and how to apply each approach.

On the whole, however, these behavioral interventions have been somewhat underwhelming, exposing an inherent brittleness that comes from three common “errors of projection” in current behavioral design methodology: projected stability, which insufficiently plans for the fact that interventions often function within inherently unstable systems; projected persistence, which neglects to account for changes in those system conditions over time; and projected value, which assumes that definitions of success are universally shared across contexts. Borrowing from strategic design and futures thinking, a new proposed strategic foresight model—behavioral planning—can help practitioners better address these system-level, anticipatory, and contextual weaknesses by more systematically identifying potential forces that may impact behavioral interventions before they have been implemented. Behavioral planning will help designers more effectively elicit signals indicating the emergence of forces that may deform behavioral interventions in emergent COVID-19 contexts, and promote “roughly right” directional solutions at earlier stages in solution development to better address system shifts.

I propose a four-stage model below that balances an understanding that each part is essential with the need to break it down into units of work that can be spread across internal teams and external vendors when necessary. But be warned: each handoff increases the potential for loss, particularly when there is an incomplete understanding of the adjoining stages. A tightly integrated process managed by people who understand the end-to-end process will always have the greatest likelihood of creating meaningful behavior change; that we can name the parts should not detract from the need for a whole. Behavioral Strategy: the defining of a desired behavioral outcome, with population, motivation, limitations, behavior, and measurement all clearly demarcated. Plain version: figuring out what “works” and “worth doing” mean in behavioral terms by collaborating with stakeholders. Behavioral Insights: the discovery of observations about the pressures that create current behaviors, both quantitative and qualitative. Plain version: figure out why people would want to do the behavior and why they aren’t already by talking to them individually and observing their behavior at scale. Behavioral Design: the design of proposed interventions, based on behavioral insights, that may create the pre-defined behavioral outcome. Plain version: design products, processes, etc. to make the behavior more likely. Behavioral Impact Evaluation: the piloting (often but not always using randomized controlled trials) of behavioral interventions to evaluate to what extent they modify the existing rates of the pre-defined behavioral outcomes. Plain version: figure out whether the products, processes, etc. actually make the behavior more likely. Behavioral Science: combining all four of those processes. Plain version: behavior as an outcome, science as a process.

I - Intended Behavior N - Non-targeted Audiences C - Compensatory Behaviors A - Additional Behaviors S - Signalling E - Emotional Impact

Costing is the process of data collection and analysis for estimating the cost of a health intervention. High-quality cost data on SBC are critical not only for developing budgets, planning, and assessing program proposals, but can also feed into advocacy, program prioritization, and agenda setting. To better serve these data needs, these guidelines aim to increase the quantity and quality of SBC costing information. By encouraging cost analysts to use a standardized approach based on widely accepted methodological principles, we expect the SBC Costing Guidelines to result in well-designed studies that measure cost at the outset, to allow assessment of cost-effectiveness and benefit-cost ratios1 for SBC programming. Such analyses could also potentially help advocates for SBC to better make the case for greater investment in SBC programming.2 These guidelines lay out a consistent set of methodological principles that reflect best practice and that can underpin any SBC costing effort.

summary of key points of book

Key Points: Behaviour modelling training (BMT) is a popular training intervention which focuses on changing behaviours on the job. BMT improves trainees’ knowledge, skills, and desired actions on the job You can design BMT to work even better, for example by describing both the “what” and the “why” of the new behaviors trainees learn

Fortunately, it’s possible to “hack” this problem. Drawing on the behavioral-change literature and on our experiences working with dozens of global companies, including DBS, Southeast Asia’s biggest bank, we’ve devised a practical way to break bad habits that squelch innovation and to develop new ones that inspire it. Like most hacks, our approach isn’t expensive, though it does take time and energy. It involves setting up interventions we call BEANs, shorthand for behavior enablers, artifacts, and nudges. Behavior enablers are tools or processes that make it easier for people to do something different. Artifacts—things you can see and touch—support the new behavior. And nudges, a tactic drawn from behavioral science, promote change through indirect suggestion and reinforcement. Though the acronym may sound a bit glib, we’ve found that it’s simple and memorable in a way that’s useful for organizations trying to develop better habits.

types of people re: org change

Currently Available Costing and Economic Evaluation Products The Business Case for Investing in Social and Behavior Change (report) new Guidelines for Costing Social and Behavior Change Interventions (report) new The Added Value of Costing Social and Behavior Change Interventions (brief) new Social and Behavior Change Business Case and Costing Webinar Generating Evidence to Inform Integrated Social and Behavior Change Programming in Nigeria Making the Business Case for Social and Behavior Change Programming (activity brief)

I’m often asked for my top tips for managing Human Risk. Over the next five weeks, I’m going to reveal the Five Rules of Human Risk, beginning, appropriately enough with the first: Rule 1: Human Risk can be managed but not eliminated On the face of it, this is a statement of the blindingly obvious. Yet it is fundamentally important; if we really want to manage Human Risk, then we need to accept that we can’t control every aspect of human decision-making. No matter how hard we try.

This publication, designed as an open resource for grantees and the wider conservation and social justice movements, showcases the issues often faced by those in both sectors. It includes an overview of behavior change theories, a compilation of successful behavior change campaigns, lessons learned, and tools for planning new initiatives.

"This is the question that Todd Rogers and I explore in our paper, “Persistence: How Treatment Effects Persist After Interventions Stop”, published in Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences. We propose a framework for understanding how and when interventions may lead to persistent behavior change. Specifically, we identify four “pathways”, or features of interventions, that may explain why some interventions are successful at generating persistent behavior changes. These pathways include (1) habit formation, (2) changing what or how people think, (3) changing future costs, and (4) external reinforcement"