No abstract

No abstract

Purpose – Acknowledgement of the social impact created by organisations has become an increasingly frequent discussion among practitioners. The importance of such value creation cannot be understated, yet in an increasingly competitive funding environment, the need to articulate “true” value is paramount. The purpose of this paper is to examine how Australian and US managers of non-profit organisations (NPOs) and foundations view the measurement of the social impact of NPOs. Design/methodology/approach – The paper includes 19 in-depth interviews of non-profit professionals in the USA and Australia. Respondents included non-profit managers, foundation managers and consultants in both countries. Findings – The in-depth interviews found that in both countries respondents generally agreed that objective measures of impact are desirable, but recognised the difficulties in developing objective assessment frameworks enabling comparisons across the non-profit sector. These difficulties, as well as the implications for developing assessments of social value for NPOs, are discussed. This paper demonstrates that there is an opportunity to reposition reporting expectations. The NPO sector can pool together and build on each other’s strengths and market their outcomes as a collective entity. A sector-wide approach provides potential for much needed within-sector mentoring and will showcase the rich and varied outcomes generated by NPOs. Originality/value – This research compares viewpoints in two Western countries, thus offering at least an exploratory examination of social impact assessment from an international perspective. Additionally, this research shows commonalities in terms of what is valued and what is most difficult for non-profits when determining social impact.

No abstract

Purpose – This paper aims to identify models of best practice and examines the manner in which such social partnerships attract new partners and scale-up their solutions. Social responsibility initiatives that incorporate multiple sectors have the capacity to challenge unsustainable practice and pave the way for model solutions towards the societal problems we face globally. Design/methodology/approach – Comparisons of three Australian case studies were analysed. These cases were purposefully selected as they all represented relationships that demonstrated social partnerships characteristics, and they had all attracted acclaim by their peers. They differed in terms of their societal problems and relationship duration. Semi-structured interviews were held with managers and employees from each social partnership, where they discussed all aspects of the partnership lifecycle from pre-collaborative conditions through to outcomes. In total, 50 semi-structured interviews were held with members of the private, nonprofit and public sectors. Findings – Social partnerships pool skills, knowledge and finance across sectors, concentrating on specific societal issues of mutual concern. Resultant successful initiatives act as catalysts in soliciting further support. Three primary pathways exist for successful social partnerships that wish to evolve: expansion, replication and refinement. Focused attention and resources, through the formation of social responsibility clusters, can lead to sustainable solutions. Practical implications – There are many organisations wishing to move on from philanthropic exchange towards more meaningful integrated relationships. This paper highlights the value of both within sector and cross-sector collaboration to achieve organisational outcomes. It provides some insight into the entry points for both nonprofit organisations as well as small- to medium-sized private sector organisations that would otherwise consider social investment in large-scale societal problems beyond their reach. Originality/value – Social partnerships within the Australian context are under-represented; this paper addresses this by examining three best practice exemplars. The rationale for incorporating new partners and sharing success is discussed and supported by a model of social responsibility cluster formation.