The objective of the event was to bring together a regional group with an active professional interest in social impact measurement to discuss current developments in the sector, to understand different perspectives and challenges, and explore ways of working together. The participants came from varied backgrounds and included academics and researchers from LJMU, regional consultants and practitioners, public, private and third sector organisations, and representatives from sector bodies.

The event was chaired by Lucy Day, Social Impact Project Manager at LJMU and Ruth Whateley, SIAA Manager. The afternoon comprised of presentations from Jeremy Nicholls, SIAA Chairman and CEO of The SROI Network, Dr Hannah Timpson and Gayle Whelan from LJMU Centre for Public Health, and Joe Hemington, Assistant CEO of Merseyside Expanding Horizons. These presentations were then followed by an open workshop session.

Jeremy Nicholls got the event rolling with a big question: “Why are we here and why is social impact analysis on the agenda?” to which participants responded with suggestions such as the economic crisis, increasing demand from organisations, and  policy changes such as the UK Social Value Act. Jeremy then provided an insight in to developments in social impact analysis on a national and international scale. He explained how organisations are starting to put social value at the start of their decision making processes, that boards and members should become involved in the impact agenda, and that greater information sharing between organisations is required. He concluded that social impact is a growing journey and that SIAA exists to help get this journey right.

Dr Hannah Timpson and Gayle Whelan presented their research in to mapping community assets in the Wirral using a Social Return on Investment (SROI) approach. Their presentation provided a practical case study of the application of a social impact analysis method. The aim of the research was to map assets, value and impact in a community to help understand where strengths lie within the community and support commissioning decisions. Their research demonstrated how the use of SROI assisted in helping them understand the social value of a range of projects for communities, individuals and the Wirral as a whole.

Joe Hemington then shared his experiences of social impact analysis through Merseyside Expanding Horizons, a voluntary sector organisation promoting social inclusion through partnerships. Joe discussed the challenge of reporting your findings once a social impact analysis had been conducted. He explained the difficulties in deciding how you should report your findings, and who you should be reporting them to. Key points were raised around how social impact reporting can help improve the accountability of an organisation, and also demonstrate how diverse small charities and organisations can be.

The afternoon then concluded with an open workshop session, where participants suggested topics they would like to discuss in more detail. Topics covered the cost vs benefits of measuring social impact, the reliability of SROI as a method, how far should standardisation go, and how do you share knowledge and best practice regionally. The small group discussions provided the opportunity to work through ideas, ask advice, and share knowledge.

The event highlighted the real value in bringing together participants from a range of backgrounds and sectors in order to discuss social impact at a regional scale. We hope to continue the discussions and increase the opportunities for knowledge sharing by supporting further events and meetings in the North West.

The objective of the two-day conference was to discuss the situation of NGOs in China and to provide practical guidance for civil society organizations. The  participants came from various regions including Shanghai, Hong Kong, Beijing and Hangshou and were covering a broad spectrum of themes including environmental protection, health and poverty.

Regarding the legal circumstances, in 1988 the first legal status for non-governmental organizations had been established, and since then further laws have been introduced to clarify the work of NGOs in China. Even though the role of these approximately 500 thousand civil society organizations is becoming more seen and appreciated by the public and accepted by the state, their daily work is often at times characterized by bureaucratic hurdles and funding issues.

In the light of this growing importance on the one hand, and challenges in the practical work on the other hand, the staff and volunteers of these organizations are working on their missions.

One central part of the workshop was on impact analysis. Andreas Rickert, Phineo CEO and one of SIAA’s trustees, covered the topic by explaining the background, definitions, aims and approaches of impact analysis. According to the feedback from the participants, the exercises in break-out groups have been of specific value to them. Each group worked out a IOOI (input-output-outcome-impact) logical model for one concrete project presented by a group member, and building on that they developed indicators for the analyses of the desired outcomes.

In the spirit of the workshop, the participants are eager to continue networking and knowledge exchange on a national as well as international level.

As a member of The Social a young professionals network in London and the Manager of the Social Impact Analysts Association (SIAA) I’m always keen to discover how much students and graduates know about this field and whether they would ever consider it as a career option. This curiosity led to SIAA and The Social running an exploratory event ‘Social Impact: The new sexy phrase of the social sector’ in London on March 21^st. It was an informal discussion event with four young professionals sharing their experiences of how we can seek to analyse and understand the social impact or social value of an organisation.

So briefly what is social impact? My general definition is the social effects or changes that happen as a result of an activity, project, programme or policy. The ‘impact’ can be positive or negative, intended or unintended, or a combination of these. Having said this, the event showed that there are as yet no clear definitions and universally agreed terms. Evaluators, investors, economists, accountants, charity workers, social entrepreneurs and mainstream entrepreneurs will all use different jargon. Although the confusion around jargon is frustrating, as with many complex social phenomena there are often no clear answers.

What was clear from the event was that all the guest speakers had one thing in common, an underlying passion and commitment to the use of evidence and research to help all kinds of organisations to make better strategic decisions to create greater positive social impact. All the speakers admirably took a two hour grilling from our attendees. Highlights included Natasha Malpani from Big Society Capital shared insights from the world’s first ever social investment bank looking to get more private investment in social inventions. Sian Whyte from Citizen’s Advice explained to us how they are trying to assess the entire social value of their work with volunteers, users and staff. Harry Hoare discussed the work of Social Finance in developing some of the first Social Impact Bonds for a range of interventions including re-offending. Kireon Kirkland from Nominet Trust talked about what appropriate and proportionate evaluation could look like for start-ups.

Each speaker came from a different background, including the social sciences, politics and science. However all seemed to have a clear interest in both the technical aspects of analysing social impact, through quantitative and qualitative approaches, and understanding social impact to communicate and make change. For this reason I would define all of the speakers as social impact analysts (although they might prefer to label themselves in a different ways!). It was a fascinating room to be in, with a very different atmosphere from many of the events I went to as a student which had an isolated focus on just charity sector or academic perspectives on specific social or environmental issues.

Through SIAA I have seen that this is a quickly developing area with more organisations starting to staff social impact analysts (or similarly named job roles) and the development of more university-level and short training courses. With this in mind I see social impact analysis as a key driver towards developing more socially responsible organisations in the private, public and charity sector. The view that you can only do good through the charity sector is becoming outdated with the scaling of old and new social enterprises and a developing social investment market. Even the recent boycott of Starbucks for not paying their taxes shows that there is movement within society towards more socially responsible business.

We all know just having the right motivations and a good heart doesn’t always lead to positive change. For example my own experiences volunteering overseas showed me that good intentions just aren’t enough, inventions have to be appropriate, context dependent and evidence driven. Asking questions, collecting the evidence and communicating it to leaders of organisations is the role of the social impact analyst.

So the take home message, if you’re looking for a socially responsible career with a research focus…. perhaps consider this one?

SIAA is piloting Start Social Impact is a programme aiming to provide entry level information and opportunities for all those with a professional interest in social impact analysis. Find out more and sign up to their newsletter here or get in touch via hello@siaassociation.org.

The Social is part of the Student Hubs network and organisational members of SIAA.

by Mary Rose Cook, Uscreates

‘How are you defining ethics?’ I was asked this at a recent event, where I was presenting learning on the ethical challenges of achieving social impact within our work at Uscreates.  It was an obvious question and yet one that I still hadn’t fully prepared for.  When the topic is so subjective, it is difficult to give a definitive answer.  But for me, the ethics of social impact boils down to best practice: ensuring all involved in and affected by a project have been considered, communicated with and collaborated with.

When it comes to measuring social impact, the way in which the impact has been achieved is just as important as what has been achieved.  Currently, social impact measurement tends to focus on calculating the people reached, the behaviours changed and the ROI, so it is easy to overlook some important questions:

• Has the desired impact of the project been achieved without causing negative impact elsewhere?
• Who is ultimately responsible for the positive and/or negative impact of the work, and who will be accountable for its effects in the future?
• What were the advantages and disadvantages of intervening in one area to create social impact, rather than another?
• Have expectations been managed – were those involved able to anticipate the outcomes?

These questions are crucial in the analysis of social impact and must be considered. If they are not, a narrow focus on achieving the impact could lead to the use of inappropriate methods.

For example, I was recently sent a project brief to increase GP registrations in a small city.  There was a target number of registrations to achieve, and a time frame to do so.  One way to hit this number would be to use the budget available to take a team to the areas where registration was low and incentivise people to join (through vouchers or cash).  It would have hit the targets, and in terms of measurement, would look very positive.  Figures could have been attributed to it, such as cost savings from the possible reduction in A&E attendances.

This approach may have quickly provided some measurable results, but the ethics would be questionable.  Would those involved be more likely to use the GP as a result, and therefore have improved health and use A&E less?  Would they understand the reasoning behind the work, or would further resources need to be spent to raise awareness of health services available?  Would they use the vouchers/cash on scratch cards, junk food, alcohol or cigarettes? What would the implications be if they did?

I am currently exploring the role of ethics in achieving social impact.  My investigation has so far led me to look at the ethics of collaborative approaches to achieve social impact; the ethical stance of foundations to achieve social impact on behalf of corporates; and the dialogue CSR opens between business and society.  Ethical social impact analysis is the next area I will explore, and I would like to hear your ideas.

How do you define ethical practice in social impact? What are some of the issues you have faced? And what are the key barriers and motivators of ethical conduct?

Mary is the co-founder and managing director of Uscreates. You can contact her at Mary(a)uscreates.com or on twitter @CookMary