IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/srbeha/v42y2025i1p111-122.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Complementarity of Programme Logic and Critical Systems Heuristics: Critical Systems Practice for the Evaluation of Emergency Relief in Australia

Author

Listed:
  • Patrick McKenna

Abstract

The research aim was to improve the outcomes of Australia's Emergency Relief programme by applying the multiperspective multimethodological critical systems thinking and practice. Emergency Relief was designed as a short‐term intervention to assist people facing a financial crisis; however, it was evident and considered problematic that many beneficiaries had an ongoing reliance on the programme. The application of programme logic, the prevailing best practice approach to social services design and evaluation in Australia, demonstrated its strength by revealing opportunities to improve service delivery models through staff training, referral systems, colocation and case management. The application of critical systems heuristics revealed that unintended adverse consequences could result from ‘payment by outcomes’ commissioning and welfare conditionality. The research makes a methodological contribution to systems and evaluation literature by demonstrating the complementarity of programme logic and critical systems heuristics, and the strength in the multiperspective multimethodological approach of critical systems thinking and practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Patrick McKenna, 2025. "The Complementarity of Programme Logic and Critical Systems Heuristics: Critical Systems Practice for the Evaluation of Emergency Relief in Australia," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(1), pages 111-122, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:srbeha:v:42:y:2025:i:1:p:111-122
    DOI: 10.1002/sres.3114
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.3114
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/sres.3114?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:srbeha:v:42:y:2025:i:1:p:111-122. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/1092-7026 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.