Friday 10 February 2012

the price of everything and the value of nothing?

SROI is a great tool but if it is used when an organisation isn't ready it could spell disaster.

The famous Oscar Wilde quote above comes to mind when looking at the rapid adoption of Social Return On Investment.  SROI is a great tool for displaying value if you work in a field such as employment support, business support or homelessness where there is a direct monetary value in what you do or plenty of evidence of the savings achieved that you can use as "proxies".  But what if your results provide social impact that does not generate a saving for the public purse or create income for a community?  Is the difference those Social Enterprises make somehow less important?

Some social enterprises I have worked with deliver real value to their beneficiaries or community yet the work involved in trying to monetise the impact would bankrupt organisations that are struggling to survive.  Proxies i.e. exising research or work that establishes an accepted average (for example, the amount it typically costs the government to get someone into work) are a means of saving your organisation from time intensive or costly work that would have to be repeated each time a piece of work is delivered but, again, some organisations deliver outcomes for which no proxies exist.

I fear that there is a danger in the drive toward SROI that Social Enterprises that can easily monetise the outcomes or impacts of their work will be deemed as providing more "value" than those whose impact is less tangible.  Is the Social Enterprise train heading into a landscape where only monetary value matters?  Isn't this why we created an alternative economy in the first place, because the "non-profitable" activities that create a sense of place, of wellbeing and of humanity matter just as much as those that generate fiscal wealth?

When considering Social Impact it is important that we remember to include those measures that are not easily monetised so we do not lose the real value.

So, Social Enterprise members and managers, what is the point of this rant?
What is clear is that you will need to engage with the idea of Social Return on Investment if your social impact is your product, or if you want to justify your existence to certain stakeholders.   My advice is that before you enter into the SROI process you double check what is important to your organisation.  What are your aims and objectives?  What would success look like to you?  You can always measure both internal success and SROI measures for external parties - stakeholders, customers, whoever.  Get your own strategic goals in place before you start SROI.  But if you fail to understand what is important to you, there is a risk you could become SROI led in the way that some of the third sector became funding led and suffered mission drift in the past.

Along with the Wilde quote, I also find this Cree proverb relevant. I will leave you to interpret it how you see fit: "Only when the last tree has died and the last river been poisoned and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money".

If you are embarking on an SROI or social impact measurement process and you need consultancy, training or support, get in touch.  I charge reasonable rates and have 8 years direct experience of developing social impact measures.

3 comments:

  1. Hi Nathan

    Interesting post.

    A few comments:

    SROI is about value not (just) money changing hands. The point is actually to value those things that tend to get missed and bring into an account of value those outcomes that actually affect service users, their families and other groups.

    One of the principles of SROI is "value the things that matter". This means that you would not be able to do an SROI to an assurable standard (see www.thesroinetwork.org for more information on this) without valuing those outcomes that matter, whether they are easy or hard to measure and value.

    SROI is about the value that is important to those groups that are affected by a project, process or business. So being SROI led (as long as it is true SROI against the seven principles) will make you MORE value led. Surely this is what social enterprise is all about?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Jenni
      It's great to talk about the subject as so few people challange, but just nod wisely at the Emperor's new clothes.

      I am not suggesting that SROI doesn't have its uses. I think it is a really great tool but it is only one of the means of displaying social impact because it can only deal with outcomes that are monetised. I am warning against its wholesale adoption as the "only way" to recognise value. One issue I would highlight is the reliance on financial proxies.

      It's in SROI Principle 3 "Value the things that matter": "Use financial proxies for indicators in order to include the values of those excluded from markets in same terms as used in markets."

      The problem I have come up against with clients is where financial proxies do not exist. Using SROI, those who can only find proxies for 50% of their outcomes or impact would only be able to report a 50% Return in comparison to an organisation for whom 100% of outcomes have proxies available. So the SROI method might fail them when it comes to attracting external investment if the SROI measure is used as a deciding factor.

      As an example, if we were talking about the difference that community based therapies make in terms of wellbeing: Anecdotal evidence may suggest that in one instance an indivdual was able to start working again as a result of treatments. Leaving aside arguments from clinicians that no clinical trials show this is possible therefore the individual is wrong in attributing it to the treatments, we could develop an easy SROI calculation based on the increase in income, reduction in drawdown of benefits etc but this is a one-off case. For other users the difference could be nil. There are no reliable proxies. Without research there will not be any. And who will pay for that? The practitioners cannot afford to. The other danger would be that the focus shifts away from general wellbeing and into areas such as work-readiness that are SROI friendly. Do you get where I'm coming from?

      This is why I always work through the "story", mapping activity, outputs, outcomes and impacts to understand the social impact before considering whether it is possible to display SROI.

      Delete
  2. Hi Nathan

    Thanks for your reply but just to be absolutely clear- the hypothetical "SROI" you describe does not meet principles. SROIs that do meet principles will not drift in this way since their focus is on understanding and valuing the material changes that occur (those that are relevant and significant to stakeholders) whether or not these are considered easy to measure and value.

    Lots of people are now doing what they call SROI but not adhering to principles. I would highly recommend that those that do adhere to principles should get their work assured to ward against this kind of bad practice.

    Practice on valuing outcomes is developing all the time. The SROI Network just ran a masterclass on the subject (more dates available see http://www.thesroinetwork.org/training/other-training ) and has also further developed the VOIS database (Values, Outcomes, Indicators, Stakeholders) with a launch happening this week at our international conference. Follow #atimeforsocialvalue

    But the point of valuation is to better understand relative importance of an outcome to the relevant stakeholder group (the one actually affected by it). Many approaches to "social impact measurement" do not value outcomes and hence miss out on this piece of accountability and chance to improve what do what they do. Incidentally, a lot of approaches skip other SROI principles too, so it is always worth looking at these when assessing how complete they are. For example does the approach advocate developing theory of change informed by stakeholders' input on what changes, or is this a task for an analyst or the deliverer alone.

    Lastly just looking at the ratio will never be a way to decide between projects. I used to do capital project appraisal in industry and I can assure you that the Board of a FTSE 100 company that I was advising on their internal investment decisions would never have just used a ratio. If they don't then why on earth does anyone think we can just look at a ratio in this sector?

    ReplyDelete