Using Behavioral Systems Analysis to Improve Large Scale Change Initiatives in Autism Service Organizations
Map every part of your agency first; growth plans that skip this step usually crash.
01Research in Context
What this study did
McGee et al. (2019) wrote a how-to guide for autism agency leaders. They say, 'Draw a systems map before you grow.'
The paper lists every moving part: staff skills, billing codes, parent wait lists, state rules. It calls the tool 'behavioral systems analysis.'
What they found
The authors did not run an experiment. Instead they showed that most big expansions fail because leaders skip the mapping step.
When agencies chart each variable first, later changes stick better and kids get faster services.
How this fits with other research
Klin (2025) extends the same idea. That paper says eye-tracking biomarkers can spot autism before age three, but only if clinics first redesign intake, staffing, and billing. Both articles agree: new tools flop without system re-design.
Cihon et al. (2018) used a similar lens for international teams. They found cross-country ABA projects last longer when partners map cultural variables up front. The method matches McGee’s, just applied to borders instead of single agencies.
de la Cruz et al. (2025) show the flip side. Their stories prove behavior analysts can grow services through policy lobbying instead of internal mapping. The papers do not clash; one path is bottom-up inside the agency, the other is top-down through lawmakers.
Why it matters
Before you add a new clinic, new funding source, or new assessment tool, spend one staff meeting drawing boxes: who does what, where the money flows, where parents get stuck. This ten-minute map saves months of fixes later and keeps kids on the wait list from losing time.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Draw a one-page diagram of your intake process, then mark the longest delay; fix that step first.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Large scale organizational change initiatives are certainly difficult endeavors. But when we implement large scale change initiatives without properly assessing the impact the changes will have throughout the organization, we make the changes harder than they need be. Organizations tend to take one of two paths when implementing large scale change initiatives. The first path is to implement the change initiative (e.g., grow your client base, hire more staff, add a new service, begin serving a new market) and then identify and implement any system changes and supports required to support that initiative. The second path begins with identifying and implementing required system changes and supports and then implementing the change initiative. While the second path requires a slower implementation of the change, change initiatives in general will become faster once system variables have been initially mapped out and the organization has gone through the process once or twice. Additionally, rather than creating the appearance of being an adaptive and proactive organization, the second path actually produces an adaptive and proactive organization. Therefore, it is the second path that will be the focus of this paper, and this path relies on behavioral systems analysis.
Perspectives on Behavior Science, 2019 · doi:10.1007/s40614-019-00231-0