To this day, a great variety of tools, frameworks and best practices, aiming to measure the social impact of organisations, have been developed and used in practice. This variety reflects the fact that there is no perfect measurement tool and that there are still a lot of challenges to be faced by organisations that want to measure their social impact successfully.
The challenges with impact measurement can be categorised into three different areas: Measurement limitations, limitations of an organisation’s resource base and limitations arising from the external environment. The problems presented here will be discussed in more detail in part 2.3 of the literature review.
The present dissertation has two objectives. Firstly, it aims at reviewing existing impact
measurement tools and frameworks. Secondly, it aims at proposing a new framework that
synthesises and extends the existing social impact measurement practices.
This study aims to aid third sector organisations to improve their performance
measurement, which would contribute to a better resource allocation in the social economy
and at the same time support organisational development and the transformation towards
sustainable business models. In short, this research is intended to facilitate social change.
Table of Contents
Chapter 1: Introduction
1.1 Background
1.2 Problem statement and research objective
1.3 Structure
Chapter 2: Literature review
2.1 Social value creation
2.2 The importance of measuring social impact
2.3 Current limitations of social impact measurement
2.4 An overview of existing tools and frameworks
Chapter 3: Evaluation and comparison of existing tools and frameworks
3.1 Description and evaluation
3.1.1 Balanced Scorecard
3.1.2 Base of the Pyramid Impact Assessment Framework
3.1.3 Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (CEA)
3.1.4 Practical Quality Assurance System for Small Organizations (PQASSO)
3.1.5 Prove It! Toolkit
3.1.6 Social Accounting and Audit (SAA)
3.1.7 Social IMPact measurement for Local Economies (SIMPLE)
3.1.8 Social Return on Investment (SROI)
3.1.9 Wellbeing Valuation
3.2 Comparison and main findings
Chapter 4: Synthesis and extension of existing frameworks
4.1 Objective
4.2 Description of a blended framework for social impact measurement
4.3 Discussion
Chapter 5: Limitations
Chapter 6: Conclusion
Research Objectives and Key Topics
This dissertation aims to evaluate the diverse landscape of existing social impact measurement tools and frameworks. Its primary research objective is to review these methodologies and propose a synthetic, blended framework that addresses current limitations—such as the lack of standardization and difficulties in reporting to external stakeholders—while facilitating organizational development, resource allocation, and social change.
- Theoretical conceptualization of social value creation versus economic value.
- Comprehensive analysis of the challenges in quantifying and measuring social impact.
- Critical evaluation of nine prominent tools and frameworks, ranging from the Balanced Scorecard to SROI and Wellbeing Valuation.
- Development of a holistic, blended framework integrating internal learning with external reporting standards.
Excerpt from the Book
Current limitations of social impact measurement
Although many tools and frameworks have been developed in recent years, along with an increased focus on social impact measurement, substantial constraints on social impact measurement still exist. The limitations and challenges of measuring social impact are multifaceted. This section outlines these diverse limitations by grouping them into three categories, as summarised in Figure 3. First, general issues that surface from difficulties in defining and gauging social impact are presented. The second category is comprised of limitations that result from organisations’ internal capabilities. Finally, pressures from organisations’ remote and near environment, that may negatively influence the measurement of social impact, are outlined.
As outlined in section 2.1, to date, there is no consensus in academia and industry about the definition of social value creation (Clark et al. 2004; Maas & Liket 2011; Clifford et al. 2013; Lautermann 2013). The deficiency of a clear and generally accepted definition of social impact impedes the adoption and the development of measurement tools and frameworks (Maas & Liket 2011).
The lack of a common definition is accompanied by a diverse vocabulary. This plurality of terminologies poses an additional obstacle to comparability (Clifford et al. 2013). So far, there are no uniform calculation processes and measurement units (Nicholls 2009). Additionally, Nicholls (2007) highlights the need for shared principles for social impact reporting, similar to the established international accounting principles in the private sector. New ways of measurement can only achieve their potential benefit if the new standards and principles are shared (Nicholls 2007). However, the level of diffusion of a particular standard is not necessarily a reliable indicator of increasing social impact, and the legitimacy of an organisation is not a direct reflection of the level of regulatory compliance (Nicholls 2010).
Summary of Chapters
Chapter 1: Introduction: This chapter introduces the background of social economy organizations, the necessity for performance measurement, and the research objectives of the dissertation.
Chapter 2: Literature review: This section explores the conceptual definitions of social value, the importance of impact measurement, and existing limitations in the field.
Chapter 3: Evaluation and comparison of existing tools and frameworks: This chapter provides a detailed analysis and evaluation of nine specific measurement tools, categorizing them and highlighting their advantages and disadvantages.
Chapter 4: Synthesis and extension of existing frameworks: This section proposes a new, blended framework for social impact measurement designed to combine the strengths of existing practices.
Chapter 5: Limitations: This chapter reflects on the scope and constraints of the research presented in this dissertation.
Chapter 6: Conclusion: This chapter summarizes the research findings and suggests future directions for the developed framework.
Keywords
Social Impact Measurement, Social Value Creation, Social Enterprises, Performance Measurement, Framework Evaluation, Impact Quantification, Resource Allocation, Stakeholder Engagement, Social Return on Investment, Balanced Scorecard, Accountability, Social Innovation, Sustainability, Organizational Learning, Causality
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this research?
This work fundamentally explores the challenge of measuring social impact in the third sector. It investigates why organizations struggle to track their performance and how they can improve resource allocation by effectively utilizing existing measurement tools.
What are the primary thematic areas covered?
The dissertation covers the conceptual divide between economic and social value, the critical barriers to accurate measurement, the comparative analysis of nine specific frameworks, and the design of an integrated, blended approach for the future.
What is the main objective of this study?
The goal is twofold: first, to conduct a comprehensive critical review of available impact measurement tools, and second, to propose a synthesized framework that bridges the gap between internal organizational learning and external reporting requirements.
Which scientific methods are employed?
The dissertation utilizes qualitative secondary research, including the synthesis of academic literature, practitioner reports, and organizational documentation to classify and evaluate various social impact frameworks.
What does the main body of the work address?
The main body examines the "how-to" of impact measurement, detailed evaluations of tools like SROI and the Balanced Scorecard, and the logical steps involved in moving toward a standard-based, blended framework for the sector.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
The work is defined by terms such as Social Impact Measurement, Social Value Creation, Accountability, and Framework Evaluation, reflecting its practical and theoretical utility for social entrepreneurs.
How does this dissertation address the "deadweight" problem?
The author discusses deadweight—the outcomes that would have occurred without the intervention—as a key hurdle for causality. The proposed blended framework explicitly incorporates estimates of deadweight, attribution, and displacement to enhance accuracy.
What distinguishes the proposed "blended framework"?
Unlike singular tools that often focus either on internal management or external reporting, the blended framework proposed in Chapter 4 aims to unify both perspectives by incorporating standardized external valuation with organization-specific internal monitoring.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Tobias Flam (Autor:in), 2014, Social Impact Measurement. An evaluation and synthesis of existing tools and frameworks, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/429021
