The Spiral: Systems MEL in Action
Stay adaptive and aligned throughout implementation
The Spiral supports the adaptive, iterative nature of Systems MEL in practice. It’s especially useful during implementation—when teams need to reflect, adjust, and stay responsive to emerging patterns and shifting contexts.
Each loop helps revisit direction, boundaries, roles, and strategy—keeping your work aligned with long-term purpose in dynamic systems.
01
The Spiral’s Purpose
What grounds the Spiral
Throughout this adaptive cycle, teams stay anchored in:
Purpose
aligned to your Strategic Intent.
Scope
through defined System Boundaries.
Role
based on your Spheres of Control, Influence, and Interest.
More:
Spiral Focal Areas
How the Spiral Shifts MEL from Compliance to Learning
Traditional MEL often emphasizes reporting and compliance. Internally, this can mean tracking indicators against a logframe; externally, it usually takes the form of midterm or final reviews. While these processes provide accountability, they are static snapshots and rarely support day-to-day adaptation.
The Spiral, by contrast, is a continuous, team-driven learning process. It helps initiatives observe Domains of Change, surface signals, and adjust strategies in real time—building adaptive capacity rather than only reporting progress.
Importantly, the Spiral doesn’t replace conventional reviews. It complements them. Insights generated through Spiral learning can feed into external evaluations, making midterm reviews or final assessments more grounded. The Spiral can also be complemented with external systems-informed evaluation methods which benefit from the kind of ongoing evidence the Spiral generates.
Entering the Spiral: Finding Your Starting Point
Your project’s structure shapes how and when you engage with the Spiral. Some teams begin here after a structured design phase with clear orientation; others arrive with framing still evolving—especially in compressed or adaptive contexts. Regardless of your starting point, the Spiral offers a way to stay responsive during implementation—looping through observation, reflection, and adjustment as the system shifts.
How the Spiral Works: Cycles of Learning and Adaptation
There is no “first step”— the Spiral adapts to your context. For example:
You might begin at Surface Patterns mid‑implementation—when unexpected behaviors or signals emerge as you track Domains of Change and other shifts in the system.
Or move into Revisit System Boundaries if new shocks or tensions suggest your scope or role needs reframing.
Revisit Review Direction at the start of a new phase or when you need to reconnect with purpose.
When insights challenge strategy or outcomes stall, you dive into Shift Course for recalibration.
Cultivate Coherence helps ensure that, as you adapt, changes are understood and shared across actors.
02
Review Direction: The Strategic Intent
Defining Review Direction
Review Direction is about revisiting your Strategic Intent—the deeper purpose guiding your work—and confirming that it remains relevant and compelling. In systems-change work, direction is not a single decision but a continuing practice. As you move through implementation, absorb shocks, scale interventions, or bring new partners on board, this cycle keeps the initiative focused on long-term transformation rather than short-term outputs.
This goes beyond tweaking activities or metrics; it is about preserving alignment with the purpose, scale, and agency the work demands. In food systems, for example, it may require shifting from merely boosting yields to cultivating resilient dryland livelihoods, or from disseminating technologies to catalyzing governance reform.
Why Review Direction Matters in Food Systems
Stay Purpose-Oriented
Anchoring to your Strategic Intent reminds teams they’re driving systems change—not just implementing activities. For example, is your real goal resilience, equity, or stewardship?
Focus on Transformative Change
Guides teams to track shifts in domains like power dynamics, decision-making, or ecological practices—not just training delivered or hectares covered.
Ensure Strategic Coherence
Aligns MEL systems with your vision, helping teams connect dots between indicators, learning questions, and adaptive decisions.
When and How to Use Review Direction
Review Direction is especially valuable at the start of implementation—when you’re turning plans into action—and whenever your team faces strategic crossroads or uncertainty. These moments call for pausing to reconnect with your deeper purpose:
Use this cycle to re-anchor when:
Launching the implementation phase after a design or proposal process.
Adapting to external shocks (e.g., droughts, price spikes, political shifts).
Transitioning to a new phase (e.g., scale-up, extension, exit strategy).
Onboarding new stakeholders, staff, or partners.
Shifting from technical delivery to deeper systems engagement (e.g., governance, equity).
Core Questions: Reconnecting with Your Strategic Intent
Use these during moments of strategic reflection—such as design workshops, learning reviews, planning retreats, or onboarding sessions. They help ensure your work remains aligned with long-term transformation as implementation unfolds.
Does our Strategic Intent still reflect our shared vision for systemic change?
Are our current activities meaningfully contributing to that purpose?
What does transformation look like under this Strategic Intent (e.g., equity, resilience, stewardship)?
Whose perspectives are shaping this vision—and are historically marginalized voices included?
MEL Practices: Reconnecting MEL with Your Shared Vision
To stay grounded in purpose during implementation, your MEL system should periodically revisit your Strategic Intent. These practices help ensure daily decisions, learning cycles, and accountability mechanisms reflect your deeper transformation goals:
Refresh Your Theory of Change
Revisit and update your ToC or system narrative to reflect evolving long-term goals—like equity in decision-making, resilience to climate shocks, or stewardship of local ecosystems.
Refine Learning Questions
Focus on prompts that surface systemic shifts—not just implementation progress.
E.g., How is our work contributing to more equitable decision-making in food systems?
Realign Indicators
Choose metrics that reflect meaningful progress toward your Strategic Intent, not just outputs. E.g., track changes in community governance or local agency, rather than just workshop counts.
If revisiting the Strategic Intent points toward expanding or shifting its scope, this should be treated as an adaptive moment, requiring dialogue with donors and stakeholders to recalibrate expectations and commitments.
in action:
A Pivot Toward System Stewardship in the Kenya Drylands and Peru's Coffee Sector
More:
See the System, Rethink the Path
Linked Content
How-to-Sheet: Defining Your Strategic Intent
03
Revisit System Boundaries: Evolving Focus
Revisiting System Boundaries
Revisit System Boundaries invites teams to pause and re‑examine the system in which your initiative operates. In dynamic systems—particularly food systems—conditions evolve: actors gain or lose influence, institutions shift, and feedback loops that once enabled change may now resist it. This spiral area helps you reassess system boundaries and revisit your spheres of control, influence, and interest, ensuring your MEL approach remains grounded in current realities rather than outdated assumptions.
Rescoping is not about reacting to isolated events; it keeps you anchored in the system’s evolving reality—whether driven by shocks, growth, or power shifts. In food systems, this might mean expanding into new regions, responding to the rise of new governance actors, or acknowledging that your initiative’s sphere of influence has grown and now needs to be exercised more intentionally.
Why Revisiting Boundaries Matters in Food Systems
Stay Context‑aware
Detect shifts in policy, climate, markets, and social dynamics.
E.g. a subsidy is removed, rainfall patterns change, or staple food prices spike.
Reposition Strategically
Adapt strategy and spheres as actors gain or lose power or new risks emerge.
E.g. a new buyers’ alliance reshapes market leverage, or a land-use conflict intensifies.
Keep Strategy Relevant
Ensure MEL and interventions reflect today’s dynamics, not yesterday’s assumptions.
E.g. focusing only on yields while communities face migration pressures, or continuing outdated training when youth are moving into digital agriculture.
When and How to Revisit System Boundaries
Revisit System Boundaries is especially useful early in implementation—particularly for compressed or donor-driven projects where design was rapid or partial. It also becomes critical when the system begins to shift.
Use this spiral area when:
After political, climatic, or market changes e.g. a change in government that affect the initiative’s context.
When new actors or alliances emerge.If activities stall or produce unexpected outcomes.
Before entering a new phase or geography.
Core Questions: Reassessing Focus in a Changing System
Use these during MEL reviews, strategy sessions, or early implementation workshops to assess whether your boundaries, actors, and spheres still reflect the system’s current realities.
Have new actors or power dynamics emerged in the system?
Are there new feedback loops shaping behavior or incentives?
Does the initiative system boundaries still make sense, or are key dynamics missing?
Have our spheres of control, influence, or interest shifted?
Are our MEL priorities (e.g. indicators, learning questions) still aligned with what matters most now?
Has our influence expanded or contracted in ways that require strategic adjustment?
MEL Practices: Rescoping Boundaries to Stay Aligned
Update or deepen system maps to reflect new actors, institutions, or dynamics.
Revisit stakeholder or power–interest analyses to clarify who now holds influence or legitimacy.
Reassess leverage points—identify where small shifts could yield large effects.
Adjust spheres of control, influence, and interest to focus on what you can meaningfully shift.
(If already defined) update signals of change—adapt indicators or qualitative markers to new domains or dynamics, or begin sketching early signals if starting fresh.
in action:
Navigating a Shifting System in Kenya Drylands
Power Mapping for Inclusive Engagement in Peru’s Coffee Sector
Rescoping Boundaries for Strategic Influence in Peru’s Coffee Sector
Systems Mapping in Indonesia’s Siak Regency
04
Surface Patterns: Systemic Shifts
Defining Surface Patterns
Surface Patterns invites you to observe and interpret the signals of systemic change—especially those that emerge between milestones or beyond traditional indicators. This spiral area helps you detect new behaviors, norms, tensions, and ripple effects, which often precede visible outcomes. By doing so, it strengthens your ability to learn in real time, not just report after the fact.
This isn’t about collecting anecdotes. It’s about using diverse data to surface early signs of transformation—then making sense of those signals to inform timely strategy and adaptation.
In food systems, this might mean using systems-informed indicators or signals of change—for example, noticing who speaks in meetings, how decisions are made, or which innovations are spreading peer-to-peer. These are clues that traditional metrics might miss, but they can be tracked systematically to inform adaptation.
Why Surface Patterns Matter in Food Systems
Reveal “Invisible” Dynamics
Captures early shifts in trust, leadership, or decision-making that traditional MEL often overlooks.
E.g., women beginning to speak in cooperative meetings, or new alliances forming between producer groups and buyers.
Enable Real-Time Learning
Provides early signals that help teams course-correct as change unfolds.
E.g., detecting water-use conflicts around new irrigation schemes before they escalate into larger disputes.
Deepen interpretation
Add context to numeric indicators, explaining why outcomes are—or are not—materialising.
E.g., yield gains that look strong on paper may be explained by improved farmer collaboration or greater trust in extension services, not just by input use.
Note
For examples of signals and how to track them, see:
Understanding – Signals of Change
When and How to Use Surface Patterns
Surface Patterns is a core part of adaptive MEL during implementation. Use it consistently to stay attuned to how change is actually unfolding—especially in complex or fast-shifting systems. It becomes particularly valuable when:
You’re hearing stories or seeing signs of change that don’t show up in formal data.
New strategies, pilots, or partnerships are rolling out and you want to observe initial responses.
Your MEL feels disconnected from lived experience or frontline dynamics.
You’re approaching a learning review, reflection session, or decision-making moment and want to bring real-time insights into the conversation.
This practice isn’t just for reflection—it strengthens your ability to learn and adapt as the system evolves.
Core Questions: Surfacing What’s Emerging
Photo: UNDP Liberia
Use these sample questions during regular check-ins (e.g. quarterly), reflection and learning sessions to help teams spot emerging patterns and sense their significance.
What early signals of change are emerging, even informally?
Are new behaviours, practices, or norms visible among key actors?
Have new relationships, roles, or alliances formed?
Are unexpected dynamics—like tensions, innovations, or resistance—taking shape?
What do these patterns reveal about how the system is evolving?
MEL Practices: Tracking What Traditional Tools Miss
Outcome Journals or Signals Logs
Document qualitative observations and stories over time.
Ripple‑effects Mapping
Visualise unintended consequences and influence flows.
Observation Grids
Track behavioral and relational patterns across domains like power, trust, or innovation.
Triangulate Signals of Change with Indicators
Use qualitative insights to enrich or challenge quantitative data.
Using Domains of Change as a Lens
Domains of Change (DoCs) can help organize the signals observed through Surface Patterns. They offer six lenses—mindsets, behaviors, relationships, institutions, resource flows, and power dynamics—that highlight how shifts connect across areas. For instance, noticing who speaks in meetings may reflect both a power shift and a relationship shift.
For step-by-step guidance, see: [LINK TO: How-to Sheet: Domains of Change Observation Grid].
in action:
Surfacing Early Change in Kenya Drylands
Making Intangible Shifts Visible in Peru’s Coffee Sector
More:
Tracking Change in Motion: Traditional MEL vs. Surface Pattern Tracking
deeper learning:
Understanding Signals of Change
05
Shift Course: Adaptive Strategy
Defining Shift Course
Shift Course challenges you to translate insight into action. In complex systems, plans that once fit may soon misalign as realities shift. Shift Course is intentional adaptive management—not reactive improvisation, but deliberate, timely, evidence-informed recalibration rooted in local wisdom and emergent signals. In food systems, this might mean adjusting partnerships, reallocating resources, or redesigning interventions to respond to evolving conditions or unintended outcomes.
Why Shift Course Matters in Food Systems
Facilitates Timely Adjustments
Helps teams respond when planned strategies don’t deliver as expected.
E.g., if a farmer-training program boosts yields but fails to reduce charcoal reliance, pivot by coupling training with alternative livelihood options.
Keeps Strategy Agile
Ensures approaches remain in step with shifting climate, political, or social contexts.
E.g., when a change in government alters agricultural subsidies, reframe engagement strategies to maintain influence.
Anchors Decisions in Reality
Grounds action in current conditions—not outdated assumptions.
E.g., if food prices surge or a subsidy is removed, adapt market engagement strategies instead of relying on outdated projections.
When and How to Shift Course
Use this spiral area when:
New learning challenges your existing plans or reveals unintended outcomes.
Early signals suggest misalignment or ineffectiveness.
System dynamics shift (e.g., political changes, climate shocks, power realignments).
Preparing for a new implementation phase or strategic pivot.
Core Questions: Enabling Adaptive Management
These questions help teams focus reflection sessions, learning reviews, or strategy meetings on meaningful adaptation:
What insights or signals challenge our current approach?
Have key assumptions changed—and how should we respond?
What is no longer working—and what must shift?
Are we still aligned with our Strategic Intent and contribution pathways?
What adaptations are already emerging—and how can we support them?
What do teams and partners need to respond effectively?
MEL Practices: Turning Learning into Strategy
Pause‑and‑reflect Sessions
Structured time for teams and communities to process findings.
Collective Sense‑making
Cross‑stakeholder discussions to interpret signals and define next steps.
After‑action Reviews
Rapid reflection after key events or pivots.
Update Indicators and Learning Questions to reflect new priorities.
in action:
Learning that Shifted Strategy in Kenya Drylands
Pivoting from National Bottlenecks to Local Energy in Peru’s Coffee Sector
Learning in the Borderlands (Karamoja Cluster)
Linked Content
How-to-Sheet: Collective Sensemaking
06
Cultivate Coherence: Alignment Across Levels
Defining Cultivate Coherence
Cultivate Coherence emphasizes the importance of engaging a broad range of stakeholders—not just formal partners—in building shared understanding and driving aligned action. In systems change, coordination alone is insufficient; what’s required is a deep sense of shared intention, mutual understanding, and collective movement across sectors and system levels. This focus area supports inclusive ownership of evolving strategies, ensuring that diverse groups are not only informed but also actively invested in the changes.
This becomes especially critical after a Shift Course—when strategic adjustments are made in response to learning. Cultivate Coherence helps ensure that such adaptations are clearly communicated, quickly integrated, and broadly understood. It fosters system-wide alignment, allowing a wider set of actors to take ownership and move forward together with purpose and clarity.
In food systems, this could involve aligning local practices with national policies, bridging donor expectations with community priorities, or using on-the-ground lessons to influence national and regional policies.
Why Cultivate Coherence Matters in Food Systems
Supports Collective Adaptation
Ensures system actors align around course corrections—so learning leads to collective action, not fragmentation.
E.g., when drought prompts a strategy shift, creating alignment among farmers, local governments, buyers, and donors so responses move in the same direction.
Bridges Levels
Links grassroots insights with regional and national strategies, ensuring coherence and continuity as initiatives scale and evolve.
E.g., lessons from farmer cooperatives influencing national food security policies, while national commitments reinforce local adaptation efforts.
Builds Trust and Ownership
Helps stakeholders see themselves in the change journey—not just as recipients, but as co-creators.
E.g., convening inclusive forums where communities, market actors, and policymakers shape strategies together, building legitimacy and shared commitment.
Ultimately, it builds momentum for change.
When and How to Use Cultivate Coherence
Use this spiral area when:
Strategic pivots are underway and require broad alignment.
Fragmentation or misalignment among actors is becoming a risk.
Projects span multiple geographies or governance levels.
You’re entering a new phase, partnership, or scale-up that requires recommitment to a shared vision.
Core Questions: Weaving the System Together
Use these during multi-actor reviews, joint strategy sessions, or governance platform meetings:
Are we still aligned in purpose and direction across levels and actors?
Is a system change narrative emerging that we all relate to and are motivated by?
Are stakeholders aligned around the course corrections we’ve made?
Are we sharing insights in ways that create shared understanding?
Where are gaps emerging between practice, policy, or discourse—and how can we close them?
MEL Practices: Building Shared Alignment
Joint Sensemaking Forums
Bring together community members, government officials, donors, and private sector actors to reflect on shared learning and emerging strategies.
Learning Briefs
Produce clear, accessible briefs that distill insights across levels—ensuring alignment from grassroots experiences to national priorities.
Participatory MEL for Trust and Alignment
Engage stakeholders in the design, interpretation, and application of MEL processes—fostering shared ownership, mutual accountability, and strategic coherence.
Co-Designed Reflection Forums
Create inclusive learning environments—developed collaboratively with stakeholders—to interpret signals, reassess priorities, and coordinate adaptive responses.
in action:
Cultivating Coherence in Kenya Drylands
Aligning Across Levels Through Sensemaking in Peru’s Coffee Sector
CoAmana’s Market Systems Pilot
Linked Content
How-to-Sheet: Collective Sensemaking
Implemented by:
United Nations
Development Programme
FUNDED BY:
MEL 360 is part of the Systems, Monitoring, Learning and Evaluation initiative (SMLE) of UNDP funded by the Gates Foundation.
CONTACT US AT:
WEBSITE DESIGNED IN 2025 BY RAFA POLONI FOR UNDP