A critical, integrative review on evaluating systems change and transformation, Part One: 2011–2021

Emily Gates et al.

Evaluation2025https://doi.org/10.1177/13563890251363232article
AJG 2ABDC B
Weight
0.41

Abstract

Calls for evaluating systems change and transformation in multiple fields present an opportunity to explore cross-field patterns. This article reports on part one of a critical, integrative review of academic and gray literature published between 2011 and 2021 (n = 102) within five areas: evaluation, health, organizational change, sustainability, and philanthropy. Questions address key definitions, how a systemic approach differs from traditional social problem-solving, leverage points to influence change, and implications for evaluation. Four findings include (1) limited normative debate about change and transformation; (2) conventional and systemic approaches contrasted as binary paths; (3) 10 shared leverage areas with the least attention on power and resources; and (4) an expanded role for evaluation that presents challenges and opportunities. Review results provide support for shifts underway within the evaluation field, including funders working in deeper collaborations, evaluators expanding their skill sets, and intermediary agencies facilitating transdisciplinary exchanges.

2 citations

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/13563890251363232

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{emily2025,
  title        = {{A critical, integrative review on evaluating systems change and transformation, Part One: 2011–2021}},
  author       = {Emily Gates et al.},
  journal      = {Evaluation},
  year         = {2025},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/13563890251363232},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

A critical, integrative review on evaluating systems change and transformation, Part One: 2011–2021

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.41

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.25 × 0.4 = 0.10
M · momentum0.55 × 0.15 = 0.08
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.