Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Competing Discourses of Impact Measurement: Insights from the Field of Impact Investment

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Social Impact Measurement for a Sustainable Future

Abstract

The diversity of social impact measurement approaches creates confusion for organisations on the purpose and rationale for measuring social impact. This chapter draws on insights from the field of impact investment to unpack how impact investors explain their rationale for engaging in impact measurement practices. Using discourse analysis, the chapter explores the competing discourses of impact measurement forwarded by impact investment funds in the United Kingdom. The analysis examines the ways in which impact investors justify and explain their use of impact measurement practices on their websites and in their annual report and impact reports. It highlights the need for organisations to appreciate the multi-disciplinary nature of impact measurement as they strive to address the Sustainability Development Goals [Relevant SDGs: SDG17: Partnerships for the Goals].

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    https://www.goodfinance.org.uk/investors-advisors

References

  • André, K., Cho, C. H., & Laine, M. (2018). Reference Points for Measuring Social Performance: Case Study of a Social Business Venture. Journal of Business Venturing, 33(5), 660–678.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Antadze, N., & Westley, F. R. (2012). Impact Metrics for Social Innovation: Barriers or Bridges to Radical Change? Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 3(2), 133–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arvidson, M., & Lyon, F. (2014). Social Impact Measurement and Non-profit Organisations: Compliance, Resistance, and Promotion. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 25(4), 869–886.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bagnoli, L., & Megali, C. (2009). Measuring Performance in Nonprofit Organizations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 40(1), 149–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balogun, J., Jacobs, C., Jarzabkowski, P., Mantere, S., & Vaara, E. (2014). Placing Strategy Discourse in Context: Sociomateriality, Sensemaking, and Power. Journal of Management Studies, 51(2), 175–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barraket, J., & Yousefpour, N. (2013). Evaluation and Social Impact Measurement Amongst Small to Medium Social Enterprises: Process, Purpose and Value. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 72(4), 447–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benjamin, L. M. (2012). Nonprofit Organisations and Outcome Measurement: From Tracking Program Activities to Focusing on Frontline Work. American Journal of Evaluation, 33(3), 431–447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benjamin, L. M., & Misra, K. (2006). Doing Good Work: Implications of Performance Accountability for Practice in the Nonprofit Sector. International Journal of Rural Management, 2(2), 147–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calderini, M., Chiodo, V., & Michelucci, F. V. (2018). The Social Impact Investment Race: Toward an Interpretative Framework. European Business Review, 30(1), 66–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D., Lambright, K., & Bronstein, L. (2012). In the Eyes of the Beholders: Feedback Motivations and Practices Among Nonprofit Providers and Their Funders. Public Performance and Management Review, 36(1), 7–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carman, J. G. (2007). Evaluation Practice Among Community-Based Organisations: Research into the Reality. American Journal of Evaluation, 28(1), 60–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ebrahim, A., & Rangan, V. K. (2014). What Impact? California Management Review, 56(3), 118–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fairclough, N. (2013). Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Garcia-Meca, E., & Martinez-Ferrero, J. (2021). Is SDG Reporting Substantial or Symbolic? An Examination of Controversial and Environmentally Sensitive Industries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 298, Online First. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0959652621010003

  • Gasper, D. (2000). Evaluating the ‘Logical Framework Approach’ Towards Learning-Oriented Development Evaluation. Public Administration and Development, 20(1), 17–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Global Impact Investing Network (2020). The State of Impact Measurement and Management Practice, Second Edition. https://thegiin.org/research/publication/imm-survey-second-edition.

  • Grimes, M. (2010). Strategic Sensemaking Within Funding Relationships: The Effects of Performance Measurement on Organisational Identity in the Social Sector. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 34(4), 763–783.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hatch, M. J., & Schultz, M. (2002). The Dynamics of Organisational Identity. Human Relations, 55(8), 989–1018.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, N., & Westrup, C. (2012). Power/knowledge and Impact Assessment: Creating New Spaces for Expertise in International Development. New Technology, Work and Employment, 27(1), 9–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hazenberg, R., Seddon, F., & Denny, S. (2014). Intermediary Perceptions of Investment Readiness in the UK Social Investment Market. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 26(3), 846–871.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hehenberger, L., Mair, J., and Metz, A. (2019). The Assembly of a Field Ideology: An Idea-centric Perspective on Systemic Power in Impact Investing. Academy of Management Journal, 62(6), 1672–1704.

    Google Scholar 

  • Höchstädter, A. K., & Scheck, B. (2015). What’s in a Name: An Analysis of Impact Investing Understandings by Academics and Practitioners. Journal of Business Ethics, 132(2), 449–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hwang, H., & Powell, W. W. (2009). The Rationalization of Charity: The Influences of Professionalism in the Nonprofit Sector. Administrative Science Quarterly, 54(2), 268–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jäger, U. P., & Rothe, M. D. (2013). Multidimensional Assessment of Poverty Alleviation in a Developing Country: A Case Study on Economic Interventions. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 23(4), 511–528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kah, S., & Akenroye, T. (2020). Evaluation of Social Impact Measurement Tools And Techniques: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Social Enterprise Journal,16(4), 381–402.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, C., & Nowell, B. (2015). A Framework for Assessing the Performance of Nonprofit Organisations. American Journal of Evaluation, 36(3), 299–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liket, K. C., Rey-Garcia, M., & Maas, K. E. H. (2014). Why Aren’t Evaluations Working and What to Do About It: A Framework for Negotiating Meaningful Evaluation in Nonprofits. American Journal of Evaluation, 35(2), 171–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maas, K., & Liket, K. (2011). Social Impact Measurement: Classification of Methods. In Environmental Management Accounting and Supply Chain Management (pp. 171–202). Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Mayhew, F. (2012). Aligning for Impact: The Influence of the Funder–fundee Relationship on Evaluation Utilization. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 23(2), 193–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Molecke, G., & Pinkse, J. (2017). Accountability for Social Impact: A Bricolage Perspective on Impact Measurement in Social Enterprises. Journal of Business Venturing, 32(5), 550–568.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mouchamps, H. (2014). Weighing Elephants with Kitchen Scales: The Relevance Of Traditional Performance Measurement Tools for Social Enterprises. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 63(6), 727–745.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newcomer, K., Baradei, L. E., & Garcia, S. (2013). Expectations and capacity of performance measurement in NGOs in the development context. Public Administration and Development, 33(1), 62–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicholls, A. (2009). ‘We do good things, don’t we?’: ‘Blended Value Accounting’ in Social Entrepreneurship. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 34(6–7), 755–769.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicholls, A. (2010). The Institutionalization of Social Investment: The Interplay of Investment Logics and Investor Rationalities. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 1(1), 70–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ormiston, J. (2019). Blending Practice Worlds: Impact Assessment as a Transdisciplinary Practice. Business Ethics: A European Review, 28(4), 423–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ormiston, J., & Castellas, E. (2019). Measuring Impact in Social Entrepreneurship: Developing a Research Agenda for the ‘practice turn’ in Impact Assessment. In A Research Agenda for Social Entrepreneurship. Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ormiston, J., Charlton, K., Donald, M. S., & Seymour, R. G. (2015). Overcoming the Challenges of Impact Investing: Insights from Leading Investors. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 6(3), 352–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ormiston, J., & Thompson, N. A. (2021). Viewing Entrepreneurship “in motion”: Exploring Current Uses and Future Possibilities of Video-based Entrepreneurship Research. Journal of Small Business Management, 59(5), 976–1011.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramus, T., & Vaccaro, A. (2017). Stakeholders Matter: How Social Enterprises Address Mission Drift. Journal of Business Ethics, 143(2), 307–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rawhouser, H., Cummings, M., & Newbert, S. L. (2019). Social Impact Measurement: Current Approaches and Future Directions for Social Entrepreneurship Research. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 43(1), 82–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruff, K., & Olsen, S. (2018). The Need for Analysts in Social Impact Measurement: How Evaluators Can Help. American Journal of Evaluation, 39(3), 402–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sareen, S., & Haarstad, H. (2020). Legitimacy and Accountability in the Governance of Sustainable Energy Transitions. Global Transitions, 2, 47–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sawhill, J. C., & Williamson, D. (2001). Mission Impossible?: Measuring Success in Nonprofit Organisations. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 11(3), 371–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, S. G., & Lane, V. R. (2000). A Stakeholder Approach to Organisational Identity. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 43–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, B. R., & Stevens, C. E. (2010). Different Types of Social Entrepreneurship: The Role of Geography and Embeddedness on the Measurement and Scaling of Social Value. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 22(6), 575–598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suddaby, R., Bitektine, A., & Haack, P. (2017). Legitimacy. Academy of Management Annals, 11(1), 451–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomson, D. E. (2010). Exploring the Role of Funders’ Performance Reporting Mandates in Nonprofit Performance Measurement. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 39(4), 611–629.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Willems, J., Boenigk, S., & Jegers, M. (2014). Seven Trade-offs in Measuring Nonprofit Performance and Effectiveness. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 25(6), 1648–1670.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wodak, R., & Meyer, M. (Eds.). (2009). Methods for Critical Discourse Analysis. Sage.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands

    Jarrod Ormiston

Authors
  1. Jarrod Ormiston
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jarrod Ormiston .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Social Innovation and Impact, University of Northampton, Northampton, UK

    Richard Hazenberg  & Claire Paterson-Young  & 

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Ormiston, J. (2022). Competing Discourses of Impact Measurement: Insights from the Field of Impact Investment. In: Hazenberg, R., Paterson-Young, C. (eds) Social Impact Measurement for a Sustainable Future. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-83152-3_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation