The E Co. Chamber

Episode 4 - Designing for impact: The role of Theory of Change in climate finance

• E Co. • Season 2 • Episode 2

Share episode

In this latest episode, E Co. Founder and climate finance expert Dr Grant Ballard-Tremeer, and E Co. Senior consultant Ellie La Trobe-Hogan, discuss the importance of the Theory of Change in climate finance and development. Drawing on their experience at E Co., Grant and Ellie explore how the theory of change supports the creation of lasting, transformational impact by linking activities to outcomes.

They outline a seven-step process: situation analysis, problem tree, goal setting, results mapping, change mechanisms, supporting narrative, and evidence. The theory of change is essential for effective project design, communication, and adaptive management. It involves understanding current realities, setting clear goals, and addressing root causes.

The discussion highlights the importance of a collaborative, evidence-based approach to achieving sustainable development.



The E Co. chamber is a podcast run by the team at E Co. If you enjoyed this podcast, please share it with your friends and colleagues, and follow us on LinkedIn and Instagram. Also, make sure to stay tuned for our next episodes, which could focus on anything from climate finance flows to the rights of indigenous peoples, ultimately findings pathways towards a world sustainably transformed.

UNKNOWN:

Music playing

SPEAKER_01:

Hello and welcome to the Ecochamber, a podcast that takes you inside the world of climate finance and development. We'll be exploring the inner workings of this field and examining the echo chambers, the sometimes isolated and repetitive conversations that can arise within it. Through the insights and experiences of those of us working on the inside, we'll go behind the scenes, from project design and evaluation to training. We'll tackle the everyday challenges and opportunities and discuss the major trends shaping the sector. This podcast is brought to you by the team at ECO, an international consultancy specializing in low-carbon, climate-resilient development. So, let's introduce ourselves.

SPEAKER_00:

My name is Ellie. I'm a consultant at ECO, specialised in SIDS and the coastal and marine sector. I also provide capacity building support and training through our work at ECO.

SPEAKER_01:

And I'm Grant. I'm the founder of ECO and my job title is founder and visionary. I work on a number of consulting projects, but very much focused day to day on capacity building, training and supporting the consultant team here at ECO to do its work. In today's episode, we'll be discussing a fascinating topic, the theory of change and why it's important. We'll be covering why projects need a theory of change and also how to use a theory of change to create real, lasting, transformational change.

SPEAKER_00:

Hey, Grant, before we get going, I just want to say this topic that we're going to talk about today is, in my opinion, the most important tool that we use in our work at ECO. And for me, it literally explains all of project design in one nutshell.

SPEAKER_01:

Yeah, well, similar for me. I really love using theory of change now. It took me some time to adopt it and to learn how it works. But Ellie, tell me, why do you think it's so important?

SPEAKER_00:

Okay, so, you know, let's take our sector, right? We want to make the world more sustainable and, you know, harmonious, right? So how do we get there? You know, if we're currently looking at a future where climate systems are breaking down, where we have increased pressure of climate hazards, rising of sea levels, threatening coastal populations, increased lengths of heat waves, which are challenging our food systems and our water security. You know, how do we change that trajectory? You know, so when we take the theory of change, we're looking at, you know, how do we go from this trajectory, this reality that we're living right now to a future one? And so quite often we kind of think we know what we want to change. We come with an idea of what we think our project or our program or our interventions in our everyday life need to be to address those problems. And we kind of jump in and we say, this, this is what it is. This is what the world needs. But, you know, what we need to know, actually, what's going on, what's going on in the first place. And from that, really build the interventions that are going to address the roots of the problem so that we're really Really knowing what we're addressing through what we're doing in a concrete way to establish that future change that we want to see in the world. So in our case, you know, a world sustainably transformed. So this is where, for me, the theory of change comes in. It really forces us to look at what's going on and all of those problems and for us to really define and establish a hypothesis of how change will really come about and make us kind of concretely aware of why we're doing it. Yeah, well, while you were saying that, Ellie, I

SPEAKER_01:

was thinking without a theory of change, it's a bit like... New Year's resolution. Your project is a wish. It's a, I want to achieve this. And you said this, this is what the world needs. You have that idea. This year I'm going to do, going to get more fit. I'm going to eat better. I'm going to be a more friendly person. But how do you actually get there? And that links us back to that idea Well, why– if we just come up with some idea and say, okay, I'm going to do that, how do we know that that's going to produce the change? Maybe you can explain a bit to me just why– Why would we use the theory of change in the first place? How do you see that?

SPEAKER_00:

Yeah, I think there's a couple of reasons why we would bother to do it. I think one I alluded at a moment ago that we're kind of creating a hypothesis, a working theory of why change is going to come about. I also think this connects very much in communication as well, because when we're, particularly in our sector, I mean, maybe it's different when we're talking about our exercise and our health regimes. But in our sector, when we're working with a lot of stakeholders, you know, in climate adaptation, climate mitigation projects, using the theory of change allows us to articulate the thinking behind what we're doing. So we're using it as a not just a one way communication tool, but it becomes a two way dialogue within which stakeholders can input and to support the to support the support the theory because stakeholders know the reality much better than us doing desk-based research and using research papers. And then we obviously need to communicate to the funders or the people who are funding, financing the projects that we're working in, what's going to happen and the impact that we're striving to have. It also then supports then the log frame development and monitoring and evaluation and ways of adapting once the project or an intervention is actually put in place. So we're kind of saying, you know, okay, we thought this was going to happen, but maybe it doesn't, and maybe we need to modify some of our assumptions there. So it can be a real practical tool, communication theory and adaptive management.

SPEAKER_01:

Right. So you're emphasizing there the communication tool, the participatory approach to thinking through what the problem is.

SPEAKER_03:

I

SPEAKER_01:

guess people are doing two things. They're either just thinking about the outcome. So this is where we want to get to. And if you don't mind me going back to the New Year's resolution, you say, I want to be fitter this year. Okay, so this is the outcome side. But then often people bring the activity side of it. And for my New Year's resolution, it might be, I'll get up at half past five in the morning every day and go for a one hour run. All right. So that's the activity. When it comes to the work that we're doing, you might get focused in on training or adaptation in a type of agriculture or fishing community or something like that. It's the activity side of it. What we need to do. What we need in order to have an effective project is connect. The why we need to do the things and what we need to do. And some theory, it comes down to theory of if we do A, B and C, we will achieve success. Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Yeah. And I think that New Year's

SPEAKER_00:

resolution is a good one because perhaps my New Year's resolution is to get fitter. I want to get healthy. And what maybe what I do, what my activity is, I go and buy a book on healthy eating. But me buying a book on healthy eating doesn't necessarily result in me becoming fitter or healthier because I'm not a healthy person. Maybe I put it on the side of my book stand and I never read it or maybe I don't actually do the things that are in there. So I think even just defining it, putting down on paper, drawing it up, you know, it's making it explicit, those things that are implicit because obviously when we write down, okay, we're going to buy a health eating cookbook and watch some videos on lifestyle change, you know, But there's a lot missing in between that and actually living, being healthy or, you know, finding a healthier way of living. And so, yeah, I think the theory of change really helps us to articulate that. And I think there are a couple of other common issues in our sector, right? You know, in terms of... The theory of change being seen as just something that you have to do to get the money. you know, when we're talking GCF, they need a theory of change diagram. And so then it's seen as just a, you know, almost a tick box exercise, you know, and it ends up being just the activities that have been written down without the logical assumptions. Have you experienced that?

SPEAKER_01:

Yeah, especially when one does it right at the end of the whole process. So we've designed the whole project. We need a theory of change diagram. We need a narrative. Let's create that. So we take our project and we put it into a diagram. It's an exercise, a tick-box exercise. I think theory of change really needed Mm-hmm. It's theory. That's why the word theory is specifically there. So this is a collaborative tool for thinking through that, a way of communicating inside the project, outside the project. A way of checking the logic. Is there something missing? Do we have something that really makes sense? Do we have evidence that supports that link between all these activities we're doing and the results we're trying to achieve? So I think those are some of the whys as to the theory of change. It puts in place a rigor when it's used correctly. what I would say correctly, when you do it as a tool to work out how this project's going to produce the results that we're looking for, then it becomes something that is a powerful tool.

SPEAKER_00:

Well, you're teaching to the converted. I use it for everything. Home life, relational life, work life. If it needs a change, let's make a theory of change.

SPEAKER_01:

Yeah. It's... It's something that, well, I perhaps haven't quite absorbed it as much as you have, Ellie, not using it in many different elements, but the thought of where's the evidence for what I'm going to do to produce the results and then communicating it in a way to bring stakeholders around to build ownership of it.

SPEAKER_00:

Yeah, I think we're kind of leading into, you know, how to make a theory of change. And I do want to make the connection here with, yes, we're articulating all of those theorized steps to get to where we want to go, that future reality. But always coming back to our assumptions and our baseline, you know, just to bring back the New Year's resolution, you know, If I want to get fit and healthy, I'm assuming that I'm not fit and healthy. Perhaps I already am and it's something else going on. Maybe my energy levels are low and maybe it's actually not to do with losing weight or maybe it's a nutrient deficiency. It's like looking at all of those assumptions. So when we want to go into making a theory of change, where do we even start, Grant?

SPEAKER_01:

Well, we've got... seven-step process that perhaps we'll run through quickly now. The starting point is exactly addressing the question you've just raised. We call it situation analysis. There are different ways of viewing that. There are some tools we use. How do you go about doing a situation analysis when you're preparing a theory of change, Ellie?

SPEAKER_00:

Yeah, I mean, I guess for me, I rarely use the word situational analysis, actually. Essentially, you know, within any project or program that I've ever worked on, it's about looking at what's already there, the baseline and the problem. I would probably bring in here the development of a problem tree, which is a common technique that we use in our sector, in the development sector. Really, you know, whatever that... central core issue that we're trying to address so for example an unsustainable climate vulnerable world you know actually working out what why that is. So it's looking at all of those things that underpin that reality. It's the whys. And there's lots of whys, right? And I love a good why. So from a climate perspective, there's the climate hazards that are impacting in a certain way to a certain, I don't know, community or sector or livelihood or resource. And then you have all the other stuff, right? You have the vulnerabilities, you have the socioeconomic, baseline that you're going into or you're going to be working or the project's going to be working in. Or in the example of our health and fitness, what's all those stats of me, my body metrics, all of the nutrient levels that I have. And then I'd also include in here what quite often gets lumped into a barrier analysis as well. And I do think terminology gets us all confused sometimes because we have to do a theory of change, situational analysis. barrier analysis but for me i would distill it down to um what's the problem

SPEAKER_01:

yeah good i mean it's a good place to start maybe we should rename step one to something like current reality current reality reality analysis reality check where are we now what's the situation now the starting point is really to understand how the market works now yeah one of the amazing tools for doing that is the problem tree as you said you start with the presenting problem the presenting issue we then say why is it like this so it might be unsustainable um or it could be high levels of pollution, whatever that current reality is. Current reality is I'm not fit enough. So that's the New Year's resolution side of it. Where do we start? We need to understand that we ask why we look at root causes differently Ask why again, why again, until we get to the causing causes, the ultimate causes right at the bottom. And we also, using that problem tree approach, we also say, what are the consequences of each of these elements? So we go up and down the tree. That's why it's called a tree, because we have roots everywhere. of why that go down and we have roots of causes or result. If this happens, then this is what happens. They go up. So it looks a bit like a tree.

SPEAKER_00:

Yeah, I love that. I literally love it because The root causes are what's feeding that core problem, the reality, and what you're seeing above the surface are those visible impacts, whether it is a reduction in food production or an increase in injuries or fatalities or spread of disease or whatever those things that we're seeing that have alerted us to the fact that perhaps a change is needed. So what do we do once we've understood the current reality and the situation? Because there's quite a lot there. Potentially our problem spans and webs to all of the problems in the world because they're all intertwined. So what do we do? So

SPEAKER_01:

we spent a long time on the problems. Now we need to start looking at the solution. So we take our problem tree and work out what's sometimes called an objective tree. Objective because these are the objectives of what our project's trying to achieve. You could also call it a solution tree. You could call it a wished-for future, the sustainable future that we want. This is the change that we've brought about. So take a really simple idea with I want to get fitter. We envisage ourselves in the future. At the end of this year, I'm going to do the five kilometer race in this time. I've put in place some way of measuring, of saying, here I've achieved something. This is the... the future vision. So we formally have called step two results mapping, but perhaps that's also one that you'll disagree with the title. What would you like to call it, Ellie?

SPEAKER_00:

I'd like to call it goal setting, because I think we have to be really clear about what our goals, our objectives, and what the needed solutions to those problems that we've identified. And I also think through the process of step two, we get really, we have to get really clear about the boundaries of our project, you know, because we can't, we can't fix everything, you know?

SPEAKER_01:

Yeah. And the reason we've looked at those root causes is so that we can produce change to our identifying problem. So there is a particular problem. We've said, why? So again, let's just take fitness and, The problem is I'm not fit enough. I ran a 5K race. I took an hour and a half. Using the word run is probably not the right word in that case. I crawled at 5K. Oh, right. So now we want a future. I'm going to do that in 25 minutes by the end of the year. So I've got that goal set. Which I'm using the goal setting, working out what we want to do, where we want to achieve. What are the boundaries of this? Well, you need to set the boundaries of where we are. In order to do that, we need to think about the whys. The whys of the current reality. Why am I unfit at the moment? Yeah? So... Why is that? Well, I'm sitting behind my desk all the time. I'm not getting much exercise. I'm not eating well. And why is that, Grant? Yeah. Why is that? So you ask a why and a why and a why. So why am I sitting behind my desk all the time? Well, the work I'm doing is far too interesting. So I just sit there and spend all my time doing it, for example. So that's the... That's the why. And then you can ask why again. You know, probably Simon Sinek's five whys, where you ask why again and again and again until you're exhausted with them. Then we look at the goal. But the goal, it's more than just the goal, because in fact, each of those elements, I could say, well, I'm unfit because I'm sitting behind my desk all day, right? So I could have a goal around... the sitting behind my desk. I'm going to get a standing desk and every thousand seconds I'm going to move. I'm going to do some press-ups or pull-ups or some jumping jacks or burpees, right? Okay, maybe I'm going into a little bit too much detail, but essentially here I've got a goal at one of my whys, in one of my roots. And as we dig down into the roots, we can see what to change that can produce change

SPEAKER_03:

in

SPEAKER_01:

the presenting problem. So we dig down into it and look at the results all through the whole problem.

SPEAKER_00:

Yeah. And that can probably change the focus sometimes, you know, not to psychoanalyze, but, you know, if the root cause of that fitness of the sitting behind the desk is because, you know, there's avoidance tendencies of, you know, as a coping strategy, then there's perhaps another focus that could come in. And I do see that in the work we do in the climate sector that you sometimes come in thinking that you're kind of core problem and your key objective or goal, it actually changes slightly with the analysis that you do and the understanding of the situation and then actually really realizing that actually that problem's more important to be addressing.

SPEAKER_01:

Do you think, Ellie, we need to talk a little bit about the terminology that people are using in project design around this?

SPEAKER_03:

Make

SPEAKER_01:

me think of, you know, I want to talk about outcomes at some stage or outputs, activities. Do we need to talk about those?

SPEAKER_00:

Oh, 100% because that's fundamental to the project design. When we start to move from the objective tree into the theory of change itself, when we get very clear on our step three, our change mechanisms, for me that's when we have to start to get much clearer about how that activity, output, outcome, level, definition comes in. So how would you define those terms and maybe in relation to the change mechanisms of our step three and the sequencing of our step four?

SPEAKER_01:

So there are formal definitions. I don't remember them exactly now, but there are formal definitions you can look up. And if you think through them, you will see there's a real logic to them, activities being things that we do, outputs being concrete deliverables. And we often say outcomes are at the limit of the influence of the project. as a result of achieving a number of outputs, we will have an outcome. The outcome is at the boundary of influence. In other words, we deliver something concrete, output one. We deliver something concrete, output two. We deliver something concrete, output three. And we think, and that's where theory is starting to start coming in, that if we have output one and output two and output three, and certain things are assumed, there are assumptions because we can't control everything, we will get what we'll call an outcome. An outcome a result from all of these different outputs. So there's a logic to it. We're starting to get to something called a logical framework, and I guess we won't go into detail around that, but there's a logical structure there. But in fact, I'm not awfully interested in that when I'm thinking of a theory of change. And I think some organizations and some people get overly obsessed about whether it is an output, an outcome, an impact, or activity. When you think of theory of change, we're talking about what... And how will people engage with what the project is doing to achieve a result? Is that an overly complicated way of putting it? So we want to see whether we do A, B and C and D. I'm going to stand at my desk. I'm going to move every 16 minutes. I'm going to eat better. I'm going to go for a run. Mm-hmm. And all of these together has an outcome of improved fitness. So we've got a sort of diagram there of it, but there is a logic that is linking each of these different levels.

SPEAKER_00:

Yeah. Yeah, I really love that example. I think it really simplifies theory of change. But maybe just to put it in context of some of the climate funds that we work in, one way I like to think about the activities is... Actually, I find it really helpful to think about the budget because the activities have to be costed. So you're paying for an activity. So that could be, you know, you can cost train trainers in climate smart agriculture or you can cost and pay for, you know, purchasing early warning equipment. flood monitoring devices and then paying for, you know, putting in the flood monitoring devices has a cost to it. So these are all the kind of activities that then contribute to, you know, a last mile early warning system, for example.

SPEAKER_01:

Yeah. Well, a budget is the right place to start, really, because in fact, what goes into an activity, one level below activity, we don't often see it that way. are the inputs. There are certain inputs that come and the major input is money. So when we spend this money, we can do these activities. It's the foundation of it. So it's a good way of thinking of it.

SPEAKER_00:

Yeah, and I maybe like to take it one step further because I think when we're thinking of transformational change and creating paradigm shifts, which is a word we commonly associate with the Green Climate Fund, but ultimately it's integral across the whole of the climate change sector. To do that, we need to be addressing those root barriers which are holding a fixed reality and addressing them. So it's our activities that are going to address those barriers, sometimes the outputs as well. But I would argue that that connection of when we look at those, when we talk about barrier analysis as part of our problem tree, those particular barriers that we want to bring down for forever, ideally, through the project, that we're connecting the activities to those barriers directly.

SPEAKER_01:

Yeah. And that's what we're talking about when we talking about change mechanisms. We're looking at some mechanism through activities that produce a change. One good way of thinking about it is to describe how we want people to engage with the activities that make the outcomes or outputs more likely. What do we want people in our target group to be thinking or feeling or doing whilst they're involved in the project activities? Why do we do that? Because ultimately, we're looking for what you could call behavior change. We're looking for behavior to change, but ultimately, That really starts with people. So we wish them to start thinking about things differently. Do we want them to feel motivated to do something? That's the change mechanism. It can help to look at the different outcomes in turn. So we've got more than one outcome normally in a project. In our example from getting fitter, we may have just one overall outcome. But we take each single one and consider what will need to happen or how we want people to feel during the activities to trigger that outcome. It's just a useful frame because it's around the mechanism of change because we're starting to get to the theory of the change that we want to bring about.

SPEAKER_00:

Okay. Yeah, I mean, you've touched on that behavioural change, which can be at the grassroots level when we're talking about our sector. But it can also be at an institutional level. It can also be at a policy and regulatory level. So I think there's a number of different ways that we can think about creating that lasting change for the long run. Yeah.

SPEAKER_01:

When I first started doing Theory of Change, I'd been doing project design for a long time. And I realized that what we needed for increasingly for different funders was a theory of change. So I said, well, okay, I'll make a theory of change. And I saw these pretty pictures. And I put my activities together I drew a block, square block, rectangular block for my activity. I drew an arrow from that to my output. I drew an arrow from my output to my outcome. And I was working with a real expert in theories of change, and I sent the document to her. And the immediate response, which I was a bit annoyed with at the beginning, was, in your theory of change, there is no theory. What does that mean? It is a theory of change. I've drawn this diagram. What does that actually mean? And I came to realize that I was writing something Like, and I'm going to oversimplify this. I've got an example in front of me, which said, inform parents about climate impacts on education of children. So it might be water, food security, and how children are educated. And I drew a little arrow from that block to parents prioritize education. Yeah. And well, there's actually no theory there because I'm going to inform people and I expect some change to take place. From this, I learned that the theory is in the arrow. There's a little arrow that joins these two blocks. But the theory is sitting there in the arrow because it's how will informing parents about education mean? What do I expect? That parents will suddenly prioritize education? Well, maybe you can. There are some things when I am informed about them, I switch my behavior quickly. There are other things, and fitness falls into this category, I know I should change. Get fit. It's good for me. It's good for my life. It's good for my mental well-being and everything. But do I do it? Actually, yes. But generally when you look at the population, you will find that most people know about fitness and why you would do fitness, but they don't pursue those goals. So there's something more that is there. Information is not enough. Now I'm starting to think about the theory of the change that I'm trying to bring about.

SPEAKER_00:

Yeah, and I think we're starting to go from step five, which is our theory of change diagram, onwards to the supporting narrative through identifying document and supporting evidence. So it's step five, six, and seven. And what you were saying there made me think about the diagram itself, because we all know the major climate fund who has a rectangular format for the theory of change. And I've tried drawing Drawing theories of change in more detail. But the problem is with the diagram is it gets messy quite quickly. And, you know, we want we with our when we're developing project concepts, you know, we want something clear to communicate. So I think there is perhaps a gap, a need to support any form of diagram because there's limits with how much can be shown. in that with the step two, the supporting evidence of that theory, the arrows and even the arrows that we can't maybe draw because it's getting messy and confusing. And then the supportive narrative in step seven. How do you see it? Do you agree with that?

SPEAKER_01:

Yeah, absolutely. I like to make a diagram that perhaps doesn't include everything. It's not trying to be comprehensive. I find that when we try and make something completely comprehensive, there are lines everywhere and everything is all over the place. You can't really make head or tail You said right at the beginning, Ellie, this is a really good tool for working together with people and for communicating. So two of the whys for theory of change. And the diagram itself is just an illustration of what we're trying to achieve. That's why I was also saying I'm not so worried about what is an activity on output. I wouldn't put these at different levels and try and do that. What if one of my activities comes after this? outcome one two and three I've got an activity happening there in the future so I've got three activities achieving one output that output directly achieves the outcome that I'm looking for and that outcome is followed by activity number four and then you know that's the way you need the diagram because This is where you can start to see the virtuous circles of the project. As there is growing adoption of this change that we're looking for, it becomes more popular. There is more information available. We put an arrow around from the success of our initial adopters of change. We put an arrow around, we say, organize farmer schools, I think they're called, and feed that back into our loop so that laggards slower adopters of the change start to see that this is the way to produce change those that want to move with the pack will start to adopt those changes as well this is a virtuous loop as more people adopt this is how social change gets adopted so you take those I think we mentioned a little bit earlier Mm-hmm. going back to the theory of change diagram, you need a loop there. You need something early adopters adopt the change, draw an arrow around to say awareness grows. So we've got a virtuous circle here and we can create that. And then I like to put numbers next to each of the arrows to explain what the theory is behind that. Evidence shows that. research paper A, B, and C, or our pilot project showed that when there were three earlier adopters, then other people started to adopt the behavior that we're looking for. We can put a little number next to it, and in our narrative, we write the text which says, based on this publication from 2024 and our pilot project, here's the change that we expect to see as a result. And here's some theory in our diagram.

SPEAKER_00:

Yeah. So it's a really nice way to link the diagram back to the supportive narrative and the documenting evidence. One thing I do want to add, I know we've been talking a while about this because we're both a little bit enthusiastic, but the temporal aspect that you mentioned there, you know, that it's not just everything, all of those activities aren't necessarily happening at one time. All those outputs aren't necessarily also resulting at the same time. So So, you know, I think it's really important that emphasis of creating these virtuous cycles from what's being produced to how it's feeding back. And that is the self-sustaining, paradigm-shifting, sustainable future state that we're aiming for. And what it's done is it's addressed the vicious cycles that we have identified in our situational analysis in step one in the problem tree in what that's really going on. And there we have our paradigm shifting theory of change.

SPEAKER_01:

Yeah, absolutely. We've developed the evidence and the reasoning that goes into the narrative text to support the diagram. We explain why we believe each block that we've drawn in our diagram, if you're using blocks, will lead from one to the next. And we've made our assumptions explicit. That's where I think we need assumptions that... We will do activity X will lead to Y behavior change. So a farmer school training on climate-resilient agriculture will result in greater uptake of climate-resilient practices and technologies. We are assuming that in some cases. In some cases, we know that based on evidence. In some other cases, we're making that as an assumption. So that we put as step number six. And we write that into a supporting narrative. Yeah. So is there

SPEAKER_00:

anything that a theory of change can't do?

SPEAKER_01:

That's a good question. I'm not exactly sure. Healthy relationships. Yeah, it's a super multi-tool, isn't it? Because it captures many of the other tools that we talk about. Going back to the beginning, our step one, this current reality, we're using tools like Problem Tree. Step two, we're going through the solution, understanding the solution better. Yeah. Step three, we're digging into the change mechanisms and then we're starting to put them into a sequence, which is our step four. We sort of jumped a little bit past that one. And then we make a diagram. So that's our step five. Then we identify and document the supporting evidence. and prepare a supporting narrative. So any change that we want to make in any sphere, I think could be supported with this type of tool. It's the multi-tool of change.

SPEAKER_00:

Absolutely. Well, thanks Grant for this conversation today. I've had a great time. Thank you for joining me.

UNKNOWN:

Thank you.

SPEAKER_01:

It's been fun. Thank you, Ellie. Thank you very much for listening.