Perspectives on social impact measurement and non-profit organisations

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.

Advancing Performance Measurement Theory by Focusing on Subjects: Lessons from the Measurement of Social Value

“…new research published by those authors who had previous work cited by the majority of included articles, e.g. Barman, 2016;Polonsky et al 2016). Finally, we presented our initial findings at two academic conferences and consulted with academics active in the SVM field to ensure that all major publications had been included.…”

“…The findings of this review suggest that a primary concern in SVM is to capture how subjects are involved and contribute to the creation and expression of social value (Benjamin and Campbell 2015;Denny and Seddon 2014;Nguyen et al 2015;Polonsky et al 2016). Conversely, traditional underlying assumptions in PMM research are that measurement systems are mechanisms for quantifying action and enhancing efficiency and effectiveness (Neely et al 2005, p. 80).…”

Moving on from Scaling Up: Further Progress in Developing Social Impact Measurement in the Third Sector

“…Of the remaining 15 articles, seven appear in journals dedicated to the voluntary/non-profit sector (Arvidson et al, 2013Arvidson & Lyon, 2014;Mook et al, 2015;Owen et al, 2015;Walk et al, 2015;Bretos & Marcuello, 2016) while five come from a variety of journals in business and management (Rath & Schuyt, 2014;Hall et al, 2015;Slater & Aiken, 2015;Polonsky et al, 2016;Serrano-Cinca et al, 2016). Of these, it is worth noting that Hall et al (2015) is perhaps incorrectly categorised, since it is explicitly focused on accounting aspects and even includes the word "accounting" in the title of the paper.…”

Are foundations assessing their impact? Concepts, methods and barriers to social impact assessment in Italian foundations

“…The contested nature of social impact affects the different approaches of its evaluation (Arvidson et al, 2013;Dey and Gibbon, 2017;Polonsky et al, 2016;Polonsky and Grau, 2011). Scholars have debated several methods to explore the contribution of nonprofit organizations in responding to needs in the nonprofit management literature, the social entrepreneurship literature and the programme evaluation literature (Bagnoli & Megali, 2009;Epstein & Klerman, 2012;Leeuw & Vaessen, 2009;Kroeger & Weber, 2014;Grieco et al, 2015).…”

“…If we turn to the methods used for assessing foundations, few more information is available. Both qualitative and quantitative evaluations have been run, according to foundations' managers, although the emphasis is on quantitative tools such as the SROI (Polonsky et al, 2016). However, few foundations operate systematically to measure their own performance.…”