Sarah Osman
I like to think of August as the beginning of a new year. We have six months of good data on what we’ve been working on, and we can take July to rest, reflect and think about what’s next.
So far this year, I’ve worked with five different teams on projects ranging from social protection to making nightlife safer. A large portion of my work involves supporting teams in understanding how they can pragmatically apply a social and behavioural science lens to their work. Having always been drawn to psychology and understanding how people are ‘put together’, it still comes as a surprise to me when I encounter people who haven’t really engaged with concepts like understanding behavioural barriers, systems thinking, applying a behavioural design lens or even the socio-ecological model. Because I look at everything through a behavioural science lens, I can’t process how people work without it.
One of my greatest joys is turning the sceptics (there are always a few, and they are important!) to at least accept the value of psychology in doing their work, even if they don’t become behavioural science evangelists. I’ve found that any work process could benefit from asking at least these central questions:
I believe this line of thinking will remain important even with increased technological advances and greater incorporation of AI. Indeed, one can argue that as AI helps us to unlock our creativity and accelerate our productivity, we will be in an even better position to understand the people we are producing products and services for.
Since I’ll be taking July off from publishing a blog, I wanted to share some insights from the skills assessment I launched earlier this year—and give you some things to reflect on before the second half of 2025.
Since its launch earlier this year, over 60 professionals have assessed their skills. The data shows that 77% scored 54% or less. This shows that while they are on the right track, the majority were not confident in their ability to independently apply many of the central social and behavioural science skills such as:
The assessment was not promoted extensively, and even so, a significant number wanted to know how they scored. Another interesting insight was the diversity of sectors that the respondents work in—cutting across the private, public and social impact sectors. The private sector made up the largest portion of assessment takers (75%), followed by the social impact sector (20%) and the public sector (5%).
Professionals consistently score highest in behavioural determinant analysis—the foundational skill of understanding why people behave as they do. This suggests our field is moving beyond the “awareness equals behaviour change” fallacy that continues to plague us.
Many respondents demonstrated solid understanding of socio-ecological frameworks. This systems thinking is exactly what is needed, moving us beyond individual-level interventions towards understanding the broader drivers of behaviour.
However, significant gaps emerge in two critical areas: measurement and evaluation, and the integration of AI tools into practice.
The lowest scores consistently appeared in monitoring and evaluation competencies. Unlike traditional metrics, behaviour change requires nuanced measurement approaches that can capture intermediate outcomes, unintended consequences, and the intricate pathways through which interventions create impact. I know from experience that most professionals are not familiar with important frameworks such as Intervention Mapping, which offer clear and actionable guidelines on how to measure behaviour change. This is an area where skills could be greatly improved.
Perhaps not surprisingly, there was a consistent weakness in AI integration skills. Whilst this might seem less urgent than measurement gaps, I’d argue it represents our field’s biggest strategic vulnerability.
Like every other sector, AI tools are rapidly transforming how we design, implement and evaluate social and behavioural interventions. Yet our assessment data suggests most practitioners are woefully unprepared. How do we maintain the human-centred, culturally sensitive approach that defines good application of social and behavioural science, whilst leveraging technologies that can dramatically enhance our effectiveness?
The good news is that knowing where we stand is the first step towards improvement. The professionals who completed this assessment are already ahead of their peers simply by acknowledging that skills can be measured and developed systematically.
But we need to move beyond individual initiative towards sector-wide capacity building. This means:
Want to see where your skills stand? Take the Designing for Change assessment (you can start with the FREE version!) and join the growing community of practitioners committed to evidence-based professional development.