How can Finland better respond to complexity in education, governance, and innovation? Systemic learning that engages multiple levels, time horizons, and sectors offers a promising path for addressing today’s complex societal challenges. This article explores what systemic learning might be in practice in Finland. ChatGPT was used in editing the author’s notes from the event and checking the language of the article because the author is not a native speaker.

Systemic learning occurs across multiple levels of action, over extended time horizons, and involving diverse actors. This type of learning can be understood as a practice of learning together through continuous reflection and co-inquiry in situations that face high uncertainty. Its focus is beyond acquiring new knowledge or skills but rather cultivating the deeper capacities that help us examine how we think, interact, and organize around complex problems. Tammeaid (2023) conceptualises systemic learning as a meta-skill that is rooted in an enabling capacity for shared sense-making, dialogical practice that together might lead to long-term institutional transformation.

Ison (2017) uses the concept of second-order learning to elaborate on systemic learning which enables individuals and organisations to reflect on and shift their own processes of learning and problem-solving. This type of learning goes beyond addressing surface-level issues and engages with the deeper structures and assumptions that shape those issues. Ison (2017) highlights that second-order learning unfolds not only within organisations but between them, enabling greater collaborative adaptation across systems.

The ”Learning Finland? – Systemic Challenges and Opportunities” event organised by SCiO Finland was on 6.5.2025 at the Aalto University in Otaniemi. The event connected a group of about 20 people who represented research, business, and policy. The event hosted speakers from the OECD, Open University UK, International Baccalaureate organisation, and Finnish systems practitioners. The key topic of the event was how Finland could strengthen its capacity for systemic learning.

I am the coordinator of the innovation management and ecosystems thematic team at Laurea University of Applied Sciences and for me the event offered an opportunity to explore how systemic learning could be applied in practice. Our team at Laurea focuses on how ecosystems might develop the needed innovation capabilities which could help tackle societal challenges. I enjoyed the event in terms of it offering a space for exchanging ideas between Finnish and international actors.

Building Public Sector Innovation Capacity through Systemic Learning

Piret Tõnurist (2025) of the OECD was the first speaker in the event. She focused on OECD’s work which highlighted different ways how government might employ systemic learning. Based on international and Finnish cases she highlighted the need to operate over silos by employing experimental approaches to support iterative development, reflection, and sense-making. According to her innovation should not be viewed as an isolated activity but rather the conditions which enable systemic learning. This can be done by developing both policy and the operational capabilities.

Tõnurist (2025) stated that systemic learning is not a competency in itself but could rather be developed in the contexts of foresight, budgeting, institutional collaboration in addition to the knowhow of public servants. She gave examples of cross-ministerial collaboration and shared learning processes in the context of OECD-assisted anticipatory innovation governance pilots in Finland regarding carbon neutrality and child well-being. She emphasized that innovation in such contexts is not about tackling a technical task rather it requires relational and cultural shifts within the institutions so that they might embrace uncertainty and enable learning through experimentation.

Tõnurist (2025) also highlighted the need for investing in individual competencies such as futures literacy, systems thinking, and collaborative skills. Systemic learning cannot be outsourced to specialised units alone but for it to be successful must be embedded across all facets of government. She noted that systemic learning should be supported with the right kind of leadership that gives permission to experiment, tolerates ambiguity, and rewards curiosity rather than control for actions and results. As Finland continues to experiment with mission-oriented governance, its next frontier may lie in nurturing the human capabilities that sustain long-term transformation (Seppälä 2024).

A Praxis of Co for Systemic Change

Emeritus Professor Ray Ison (2025) from Open University, UK used his presentation to challenge the conventional ways of learning and governing by questioning dominant assumptions of control, measurement, and target-setting. He emphasized that systemic learning emerges through collective action, mutual reflection, and co-designed solutions that are shaped by the very processes of engagement (Ison 2025). Ison (2025) stressed the need for a shift from traditional, isolated approaches to learning and governing toward more dynamic, co-inquiry-based practices where systemic learning is embedded within action and collaboration.

The next speaker in the event, Tim Logan (2025) from Good Impact Labs, brought this idea to life through his practical experience with the International Baccalaureate’s Festival of Hope. This activity seeks to enhance the participation of young people globally in shaping what matters to them and using that to develop their own learning journeys. Logan (2025) mentioned the values of the festival – emergence, learning, enabling conditions and space for innovation – as principles which help enable systemic learning. The festival is a prime example of reimagining education not only as one-directional instruction but also collaborative inquiry and co-creation.

Both Ison and Logan highlighted key enablers of systemic learning such as value-based dialogues, collaboration and open-ended exploration. These types of activities help enable all types of physical, digital, relational and institutional spaces which hold complexity rather than reducing it. Systemic learning is underpinned by dealing with uncertainty which requires people to explore questions and situations together rather than seeking the correct answers. This type of learning is not only for adapting to changing situations but also driving cultural change through collaboration.

Multi-Level Learning in Practice

SCiO Finland’s Janne J. Korhonen (2025) introduced a conceptual model that links systemic learning to four interconnected levels and timeframes. According to conceptual model the first of them is short-term work systems which operate at 1–2-year timeframes, the second is whole organisations that have timeframes of 2–10 years, the third is macrosocial systems which change at 10–50-year timeframes, and fourth and final civilisational or planetary systems where change happens in 50+ year timeframes. Systemic learning at each level is very different and requires specific types of learning and leadership. Korhonen (2025) stated that systemic learning does not occur at a single level and timeframe but for learning to be successful, it should operate at each of them and connect them together.

In particular, he encouraged institutions to pay more attention to how short-term planning interacts with deeper, longer-term purpose-setting. Without the ability to align operational practices with societal transformation, learning risks becoming fragmented or reactive. Finland’s strong institutional trust and educational foundations offer unique opportunities for cultivating multi-level learning, but only if actors are willing to move beyond isolated interventions and begin asking: what kind of systems are we ultimately shaping through our learning? (Korhonen 2025.)

In his presentation Kari Mikkelä (2025) grounded these ideas in the concrete experience of Urban Mill, a long-term innovation platform in Otaniemi. He described how Urban Mill supports learning on three levels: a platform level with tools and spaces for experimentation; a community level where multidisciplinary actors collaborate; and an ecosystem level where shared agendas and sustained partnerships drive systemic change. From hosting local hackathons to coordinating international projects, Urban Mill exemplified how environments can be intentionally designed to support long-term learning. The evolution of Urban Mill itself from a space-as-a-platform model to a thematic programme orchestrator mirrors the shift toward ecosystemic thinking. (Mikkelä 2025.)

Conclusion

Participating in this event offered a valuable opportunity to reflect on how Finland could develop its systemic learning capabilities. The presentations underlined the importance of learning across multiple time horizons and organisational levels—from youth-led initiatives to civilisational systems. What united all contributions was a commitment to learning not just within systems but about and across them. This calls for new types of roles, relationships, and infrastructures that allow reflection, experimentation, and shared responsibility.

These approaches are still emerging but increasingly vital in our complex world, and they are actively being developed and applied at Laurea UAS and in other progressive institutions. Systemic learning is not just a framework but rather a practice. It requires courage to experiment, humility to listen, and openness to think beyond what is already known.

References

• Ison, R. 2017. Systems Practice: How to Act in Situations of Uncertainty and Complexity in a Climate-Change World. 2nd ed. London: Springer.
• Ison, R. 2025. Why Finland seems well placed to enact systemic governance? Presentation at ”Learning Finland? – Systemic Challenges and Opportunities”, Aalto University 6.5.2025.
• Korhonen, J.J. 2025. Vector Multi-Paradigmatism (VMP). Presentation at ”Learning Finland? – Systemic Challenges and Opportunities”, Aalto University 6.5.2025.
• Logan, T. 2025. How to Co-create Learning Spaces? Presentation at ”Learning Finland? – Systemic Challenges and Opportunities”, Aalto University 6.5.2025.
• Mikkelä, K. 2025. Urban Mill Innovation Platform. Presentation at ”Learning Finland? – Systemic Challenges and Opportunities”, Aalto University 6.5.2025.
• Seppälä, M. 2024. Inside OECD’s Mission-Oriented Innovation Policy Approach. Laurea Journal. Available: https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi-fe2024112897498
• Tammeaid, M. 2023. Public Sector Leadership Meta-Skills: Responding to Complexity and Uncertainty with Reflective Practice and Systemic Learning. Acta Wasaensia 507. Doctoral dissertation. University of Vaasa, School of Management, Social and Health Management. Available: https://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-395-080-1
• Tõnurist, P. 2025. Public sector innovation capacity: what influences public officials’ ability to learn, innovate and adapt to change? Presentation at ”Learning Finland? – Systemic Challenges and Opportunities”, Aalto University 6.5.2025.

ChatGPT was used in editing the author’s notes from the event and checking the language of the article because the author is not a native speaker.