Skip to main content

University of Wisconsin-Madison
Organizational Change Consultants

University of Wisconsin-Madison
Organizational Change Consultants

SEER Process

On this page: Overview  |  Background  | SEER Applications

Overview

The SEER Process consists of four interlocking parts that help organizational change leaders and project teams better See their project within larger system dynamics, Enact informed and collaborative actions, Evaluate the success of interventions, and regularly Revisit goals, actions, and evaluation strategies.

It is meant to be an iterative process that increases change capacity over time by being more dynamically attuned to the systems and human connections in which change occurs. For example, instead of creating five-year strategic plans that are overly complicated, fail to evolve as organizations do, and often sit on the shelf until the next new administration starts the process over, we work teams to engage in cycles of change where in each cycle “sight” improves, support expands, and strategies mature, all in service to the larger, more long-term change goals.

SEER process diagram. A path going between the four principles of the process: to "see" is depicted with magnifying glass, to "enact" is depicted with a meeting graphic, to "evaluate" is depicted with a checklist, and "to revisit" is depicted with 2 arrows forming a circle

The four principles of the SEER Process are shown in a diagram that is like a journey and can be repeated. First, see your change goals within larger system and identify strategic actions. Next, enact on an informed and collaborative change strategy. Then, evaluate the success of your change strategy using systems lens. Lastly, revisit and revise change goals and strategies as incremental change occurs.

The SEER Framework is implemented through the SEER Process, which blends individual and organizational change activities. The process derives from literature on organizational theory (2,13,18,24), systems theory (20,25), network connectivity (3,11,12), and community and adult transformative learning (6,8,15,22), while purposefully and synergistically weaving in dialogic and diversity, equity, inclusion, and justice principles such as design justice (5), the theory of being (27), asset-based framing (19), appreciative inquiry (4), multi-contextualism (23,28), and cultural wealth (29).

Phase

Goals

Example Activities

See

Help change teams create team unity, explore (“see”) system and DEI dynamics, and learn to have productive and equitable dialogue.

  • Change teams better see and are more aware of their own identities and perceive their sphere of influence accurately.
  • Change teams see the organizational and diversity, equity, inclusion, and justice (DEIJ) dynamics surrounding their change problem and change goals.
  • Change teams see the need and power of constituent dialogue in advancing change goals.
  • Exploratory sessions with topics such as:
    • Team-building exercises
    • Force field analysis (present, desired future, barriers, & drivers)
    • Institutional constituent identification and dialogue preparation
    • Mental models exploration
    • Organizational structures and cultures
    • People and power
  • Engage in organizational constituent dialogue (collect information, inform change strategies, identify barriers and supports, etc.)

Enact

Systematically lead change projects through the development and implementation of a theory of change and strategic plan that is rooted in design justice principles and diverse constituent voices.

  • Rooted in the activities for the seeing stage, change teams develop and implement shorter-term strategic/action plans that pay close attention to organizational and DEIJ dynamics towards the advancement of their longer-term change goal(s).
  • Change teams engage in productive dialogue with organizational constituents in pursuit of desired change goals.
  • Select specific target and scope of strategic plan
  • Identify initial desired outcomes and change activities
  • Identify levers of change for specific situation
  • Develop a theory of change
  • Develop a strategic plan
  • Engage in organizational constituent dialogue
  • Implement strategic plan activities

Evaluate

Exam the relationship between proposed change activities and short to long-term outcomes to select an evaluation strategy that takes into account DEJI principles and that effectively demonstrates progress.

  • Change teams collect strategic data in a sustainable and equitable way to measure and understand the impact of their strategic actions.
  • Examine the relationship between proposed change activities and desired short-long-term outcomes
  • Develop a robust evaluation plan considering possible unintended behaviors and/or results
  • Collect and analyze evaluation data
  • Engage in organizational constituent dialogue

Revisit

Systematically work with change teams to review their progress and revisit prior activities to more fully “see” dynamics at work, and plan for the next iterative cycle of SEER.

  • Change teams deepen their organizational change capacity through revisiting the See, Enact, and Evaluate steps iteratively over time.
  • Review progress, debrief data collected, and discuss initial insights
  • Revisit phase 1 (SEEing sessions)
  • Revisit phases 2-3 and make changes to the Theory of Change, strategic plan, and evaluation plan (as needed)
  • Explore the potential for subsequent SEER Process iteration(s)
  • Engage in organizational constituent dialogue (share results, discuss the future)
  • Plan next year’s SEER Process implementation activities

Overview

See Phase

Help change teams create team unity, explore (“see”) system and DEI dynamics, and learn to have productive and equitable dialogue.

  • Change teams better see and are more aware of their own identities and perceive their sphere of influence accurately.
  • Change teams see the organizational and diversity, equity, inclusion, and justice (DEIJ) dynamics surrounding their change problem and change goals.
  • Change teams see the need and power of constituent dialogue in advancing change goals.
  • Exploratory sessions with topics such as:
    • Team-building exercises
    • Force field analysis (present, desired future, barriers, & drivers)
    • Institutional constituent identification and dialogue preparation
    • Mental models exploration
    • Organizational structures and cultures
    • People and power
  • Engage in organizational constituent dialogue (collect information, inform change strategies, identify barriers and supports, etc.)

Enact Phase

Systematically lead change projects through the development and implementation of a theory of change and strategic plan that is rooted in design justice principles and diverse constituent voices.

  • Rooted in the activities for the seeing stage, change teams develop and implement shorter-term strategic/action plans that pay close attention to organizational and DEIJ dynamics towards the advancement of their longer-term change goal(s).
  • Change teams engage in productive dialogue with organizational constituents in pursuit of desired change goals.
  • Select specific target and scope of strategic plan
  • Identify initial desired outcomes and change activities
  • Identify levers of change for specific situation
  • Develop a theory of change
  • Develop a strategic plan
  • Engage in organizational constituent dialogue
  • Implement strategic plan activities

Evaluate Phase

Exam the relationship between proposed change activities and short to long-term outcomes to select an evaluation strategy that takes into account DEJI principles and that effectively demonstrates progress.

  • Change teams collect strategic data in a sustainable and equitable way to measure and understand the impact of their strategic actions.
  • Examine the relationship between proposed change activities and desired short-long-term outcomes
  • Develop a robust evaluation plan considering possible unintended behaviors and/or results
  • Collect and analyze evaluation data
  • Engage in organizational constituent dialogue

Revisit Phase

Systematically work with change teams to review their progress and revisit prior activities to more fully “see” dynamics at work, and plan for the next iterative cycle of SEER.

  • Change teams deepen their organizational change capacity through revisiting the See, Enact, and Evaluate steps iteratively over time.
  • Review progress, debrief data collected, and discuss initial insights
  • Revisit phase 1 (SEEing sessions)
  • Revisit phases 2-3 and make changes to the Theory of Change, strategic plan, and evaluation plan (as needed)
  • Explore the potential for subsequent SEER Process iteration(s)
  • Engage in organizational constituent dialogue (share results, discuss the future)
  • Plan next year’s SEER Process implementation activities
  •  

Background of the SEER Process

The SEER Process blends individual and organizational change activities and derives from literature on organizational theory, systems theory, network connectivity, and community and adult transformative learning, while purposefully and synergistically weaving in dialogic and diversity, equity, inclusion, and justice principles such as design justice, the theory of being, asset-based framing, appreciative inquiry, multi-contextualism, and cultural wealth.

The SEER Process is informed by the Inclusive Professional Framework (IPF) developed by the National Change Initiative of the NSF Eddie Bernice Johnson INCLUDES Aspire Alliance, which has also been applied to STEM professional and disciplinary societies. The IPF centers the journey of building an equity mindset through the examination of identity and intercultural awareness and humility, and emphasizes cultivating trust and clear and transparent communication for the relational domains across campus roles and responsibilities. Through this individual effort, the IPF lens builds relational agency for organization change and expands change agents’ understanding of their sphere of influence.

In addition, the SEER Process builds on the prior success of the Aspire Summer Institute (ASI), an extensive week-long professional development program that helped teams of faculty and institutional leaders/staff to advance their own DEI mindsets and skills while also developing team-based action plans to implement DEI change activities on their campuses. The SEER process expands beyond the ASI by addressing the need for more sustained change guidance, greater depth of “sight” into the dynamics facing organizational DEI challenges, and further refinement and practice of dialogic principles. Thus, the SEER Process is meant to build upon prior success while improving the change capacity of STEM education constituents.

Beverly, S. P., Hill, L. B., & Gillian-Daniel, D. (2023). Advancing diversity, equity, and inclusion: Operationalizing the inclusive professional framework to develop STEM faculty. Paper session at the annual meeting of the American Education Research Association (Chicago).

Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2017). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership. John Wiley & Sons.

Burt, R. S. (2004). Structural holes and good ideas. American journal of sociology, 110(2), 349-399.

Coghlan, A. T., Preskill, H., & Tzavaras Catsambas, T. (2003). An overview of appreciative inquiry in evaluation. New directions for evaluation, 2003(100), 5-22.

Costanza-Chock, S. (2020). Design justice: Community-led practices to build the worlds we need. The MIT Press.

Cranton, P. (2016). Understanding and promoting transformative learning: A guide to theory and practice. Stylus Publishing.

Dukes, A. A., Gillian-Daniel, D. L., Greenler, R. McC., Parent, R. A., Bridgen, S., Esters, L. T., El-Sayed, J. & Hill, L.B. (2023) The Aspire Alliance inclusive professional framework for faculty—Implementing inclusive and holistic professional development that transcends multiple faculty roles. In S. Linder, C. Lee, & K. High (Eds.), The handbook of STEM faculty development: American Society for Engineering Education.

Foster-Fishman, P. G., Nowell, B., & Yang, H. (2007). Putting the system back into systems change: A framework for understanding and changing organizational and community systems. American journal of community psychology, 39, 197-215.

Gillian-Daniel, D. L., Greenler, R. McC. Bridgen, S. T., Dukes, A. A., & Hill, L. B. (2021). Inclusion in the classroom, lab and beyond: Transferable skills via an Inclusive Professional Framework for Faculty. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning. 53(5), 48-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/00091383.2021.1963158

Gillian-Daniel, D. L., Troxel, W. G., & Bridgen, S. (2021). Promoting an equity mindset through the inclusive professional framework for faculty. The Department Chair, 32(2).

Halpern, D. (2005). Social capital. Polity.

Kadushin, C. (2012). Understanding social networks: Theories, concepts, and findings. Oxford University Press.

Kezar, A. (2018). How colleges change: Understanding, leading, and enacting change. Routledge.

Knezz, S., Gillian-Daniel, D. L., Calderón, C. I., Dukes, A., Greenler, R., & Macias, L. (2022). Improving gender diversity in STEM through an inclusive professional framework. In CohenMiller, A., Hinton-Smith, T., Mazanderani, F.H., & Samuel, N. (eds), Leading change in gender and diversity in higher education from margins to mainstream. New York: Routledge.

Knowles, M. S., Holton III, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2014). The adult learner: The definitive classic in adult education and human resource development. Routledge.

Leibnitz, G. M., Gillian-Daniel, D. L., Greenler, R. M. C. C., Campbell-Montalvo, R., Metcalf, H., Segarra, V. A., … & Sims, E. L. (2022). The inclusive professional framework for societies: Changing mental models to promote diverse, equitable, and inclusive STEM systems change. Frontiers in Sociology, 6, 784399.

Lewin, K. (1951). Field Theory in social science: Selected theoretical papers. New York: Harper & Row.

Manning, K. (2017). Organizational theory in higher education. Routledge.

Mathie, A., & Cunningham, G. (2005). Who is driving development? Reflections on the transformative potential of asset-based community development. Canadian Journal of Development Studies/Revue canadienne d’études du développement, 26(1), 175-186.

Meadows, D. H. (2008). Thinking in systems: A primer. Chelsea Green Publishing.

Merriam, S. B., & Bierema, L. L. (2013). Adult learning: Linking theory and practice. John Wiley & Sons.

Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. Jossey-Bass.

Moore, M. Z. (2022). Fostering a sense of belonging using a multicontext approach. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 24(3), 703-720.

Scott, W. R., & Davis, G. F. (2015). Organizations and organizing: Rational, natural and open systems perspectives. Routledge.

Senge, P. M. (2006). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. Broadway Business.

Swanson, D. J., & Creed, A. S. (2014). Sharpening the focus of force field analysis. Journal of change management, 14(1), 28-47.

Watt, S.K., Mahatmya, D., Mohebali, M., & Martin-Stanley, C.R. (eds.) (2022). The theory of being. Routledge.

Weissmann, G. S., Ibarra, R. A., Howland-Davis, M., & Lammey, M. V. (2019). The multicontext path to redefining how we access and think about diversity, equity, and inclusion in STEM. Journal of Geoscience Education, 67(4), 320-329.

Yosso*, T. J. (2005). Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of community cultural wealth. Race ethnicity and education, 8(1), 69-91.

SEER APPLICATIONS

Interested in our services?

You can reach out to either Dr. Lucas Hill (lhill6@wisc.edu) or Dr. Evangeline Su (esu6@wisc.edu) to set up an initial meeting to explore how we can best serve your needs. We look forward to hearing from you soon!