A Democratization of Evaluation

With the larger proliferation of social ventures in recent years, the question of the effectiveness of organizations social impact has become more important to understand and work with. In any given social venture or corporation concerned with their own social impact in the world, the evaluation process must be expanded to include this social component, if said organization plans on having any measure of continued success. A firm cannot simply state what their intentions are for a social impact, implement this and leave it there without consistent monitoring. For a corporation or social venture that has established itself as beneficial to society, those stakeholders expect a social good as an output just as much as higher profit margins and stock price increases. 

But how exactly does one go about measuring what we could call a social impact? With a return on investment of actual currency, this impact can be easily measured and determined to be ideal or lacking. In a non-profit, evaluation data is a key component of an organization staying afloat with funding and, ideally, understanding how to better serve their clients. But how does one measure an impact of an organization that incorporates both of these ideas, such as a B Corporation or social venture, where both aspects are of equal importance, but difficult to measure. Geoff Mulgan details some of these struggles in “Measuring Social Value”, which puts an emphasis on the difficulties of placing evaluation measures on something as subjective as positive social value. It’s such an intangible concept that can be so difficult to harness in numbers, and with so many different ideas of what a “positive social impact” or what would be ideal for such, it is nearly impossible to set up any sort of standardization measures for a venture. 

But have we as innovators taken the time to really understand for what it is that we would be creating a venture? Is the social aspect of a social venture not intended to serve a group of people who need something? Should we not go to the people themselves, those who feel the effects of these ventures, to get their evaluation? It’s understandable that a social venture should be interested in its money returns, and certain data measures that are necessary for improvement within the organization, but when did the evaluation process become so calculating and robotic in the ways that Mulgan talks about in his essay. If we want to be innovative, our evaluation must be innovated as well. 

That’s why I am suggesting a more personal approach to evaluation focused on asking the people themselves what they think and how their lives have improved or otherwise. Surely there is already a qualitative survey component to most of these processes, and this would not be a silver bullet for quantifying social impact, but a more personal touch can make all the difference. Consider a community being served by a social venture; have a member of that community serve as an employee of the organization and collect other members’ feelings about the program or venture. Better yet, have a person come and talk to the community and gauge their feelings. Don’t make it seem like data collection, make it seem like a casual visit, and base survey questions around the context of a kind of casual visit. The importance here is hearing what the people have to say about how the venture is affecting them; what is the point of this so called beneficial venture if the people it affects do not have an equal, if not the loudest, voice in the evaluation process.