Will there be a PIEs 3?

The short, simple, answer is: probably not. At least, not at this time.

But let's go a little further, beyond the simple.

It took four to five years, from the first publications that suggested the term PIE in 2010 to the first settled version in some detail, which we now call 'PIEs 1' - the 'classic' version (HERE).

But even then, by the time that PIEs 1 was becoming established and widespread, there were reasons to look beyond, with new issues coming into view, and others just not well enough covered (HERE).

Although it has some weaknesses (HERE), the PIEs 2 formulation, which came out of that revision, is more comprehensive and yet also allows more focus on clear practical details. But there are two or three areas that are still under-represented.


The activities and skills in both out-reach and its counterpart, in-reach, are not well specified here, though both are clearly relevant to the work of, for example, Housing First services (HERE) .  Many workers clearly do find the material on this site useful, but they have to rummage around for insights more specific to their work. It would be useful to bring together all the examples and observations most relevant to those who work in other people's environments - those that they must work with, but cannot much control (HERE).

There is more scope to address user involvement in PIEs 2, but the language of the revised framework is still largely the language of services, of managers and professionals. At a time when when co-production is becoming  a central theme for service development, a version of the PIE approach and framework couched more in the language and concerns of service's 'users' (HERE) would be helpful.

Most significant of all, there are growing calls for more sweeping system change in commissioning, both in practice and even in the mindset that has driven commissioning practice (HERE). Addressing such concerns more clearly could have a more widespread beneficial impact.


All together, these would suggest the need for a re-worked version of both the Pizazz-on-paper and the PIE Abacus, or 'Pizazz-on-screen' (HERE), using a language and criteria more suited to services' users. We might possibly want another specifically for out-reach/in-reach and general needs housing; and similarly a revised and more customised versions (possibly two or more) of the Pizazz Handbook.

In the pages linked to here, we will also explore the case for and against a new PIEs 3 (HERE);  and if there were to be such a revised version - or simply a customised version of the Handbook - what issues we might want to focus and re-focus on (HERE).






Further background reading/listening/viewing

PIElink pages


Is the PIE evolving? (summary):  HERE

'PIEs 1' - the 'classic' version (HERE).

A very brief future of PIEs (video): (HERE).

Ambition and modesty: (HERE),

The PIEs 2 formulation : HERE

Outreach, in-reach and pathways : (HERE).

Rigidity and system change: (HERE).

The case for and against a new PIEs 3 (HERE);

'PIEs 3' - in detail :   HERE.


Library items

(Please note: you will need to be registered and logged in, to access items from the members' Library.)

Pizazz and the PIE Abacus; the work we now have to do for ourselves: HERE

Learning and Enquiry, and the cycles of practice-based learning: HERE



Car, Bus, Tram or Unicorn: my car is a 'Psychologically Informed Environment: HERE

Louise Simonsen on the work of Street Buddies: HERE

The Big Issue HERE

PIEs and 'psychologically informed business environments': HERE

Autism awareness in homelessness: HERE


User involvement

The language of lived experience: HERE

Service users' PIEs assessments: HERE

User involvement in the PIE Abacus: coming soon

The democracy of pidgin: HERE


PIEs in general needs housing

At Home? A study of mental health issues arising in housing: HERE

Visual methods and home-making (Leonie Boland, OT):  HERE

Public health and social housing: a natural alliance?: HERE