No description available.

No description available.

The dissertation at hand presents the findings that have emerged from the research intervention in a case study, Gpi Group, conducted with a general objective to propose an approach that would assist an organisation in developing tailored indicators for social impact measurement. Three studies administered within the framework of this interventionist research pursue the aim: i) to explore conditions informing the substantive-symbolic adoption of sustainability agenda; ii) to reveal factors that hinder calculative practices from ensuring accountability of technology companies in the healthcare system; and iii) given the restricted direct stakeholder engagement, to design an approach or methodological tool for the impact measurement indicators. The research has been conducted in the interventionist research tradition, whereby the researcher collaborates with organisational members to solve real-world problems and contribute to scientific knowledge. In this work, the identified problem pertains to the limitations of conventional indicators in measuring implications arising from the Gpi Group’s operations that are borne by final beneficiaries. The company offers a wide range of technological solutions and health booking services for the healthcare sector. However, despite the considerable importance of final beneficiaries, namely medical professionals and patients, they remain underrepresented in materiality, which has motivated this research. The first chapter outlines emerging nuances, power dynamics, and internal tensions when the organisation decides to commit to the sustainability agenda and formalise corresponding standards. By triangulating data from corporate documents, interviews, and survey, and further interpreting them through the lens of Bourdieu’s field theory, it has been revealed that substantive-symbolic adoption of sustainability standards depends on the power dynamics that enable a shared meaning of sustainability and accordingly shape individuals’ habitus. The second chapter explores whether existing calculative practices for impact can ensure the accountability of technology companies operating in the healthcare sector. By identifying commonly used indicators from extant scientific research and non-academic reports and further critically scrutinising them with organisational members of the case study, a limited practical validity of calculative practices is revealed for technology companies. Pragmatic constructivism applied to the interview analysis points to the topoi mismatch and insufficient addressing of a practical validity condition across all dimensions of the actor’s reality construction, which led to the abstract and theoretical indicators. The third chapter describes in detail the indicator-building approach for social impact measurement and the process of integrating derived indicators into Gpi Group’s materiality assessment. Materiality, which is a highly contested concept in the literature, has been examined from a pragmatic stance in this chapter. The application of this approach to the organisational setting, where it is prohibited to involve final beneficiaries by virtue of regulations and ethical concerns, has enabled deriving 21 indicators composing four major materiality topics.

In the remarkable developments that have occurred recently in all sectors of society, e.g. environmental, social, and governance (ESG) integration, responsible investing, social entrepreneurship, and strategic philanthropy, the measurement of extra-financial (or non- financial or external) information remains a key issue. While 'making a difference' is the goal of such developments, no integrated externality measurement framework (IEMF) has been proposed, recognized as a reasonable candidate, or adopted by practitioners. The overall objective of this thesis is to develop such an IEMF which would facilitate meaningful measurements and interpretations of the 'quantum of difference' (e.g. in the context of ESG information) and applications thereof towards resource allocation strategies. The aim is not so much to develop some putative 'perfectly accurate model of reality' but an epistemic framework which would serve as a communicative and organizational anchor. The overall objective derives to five research imperatives, which are responded to by five core chapters in the thesis. The following key findings emerge: Finding 1. The ESG metric landscape exists in a patchwork. In particular, while social impact metrics have proliferated recently, they constitute an incoherent domain of its own, separate from the environmental and governance metric literatures. In devising an IEMF, the key challenges include aggregating disparate metrics and disaggregating causalities. Once such a framework has been devised and adopted by practitioners, one can innovate various resource allocation strategies. Finding 2. The attitudes and approaches toward measurement and metrics can broadly be typologized as being fetishistic, positivistic, cynical, and pragmatic. Taking the pragmatic stance allows us to ascribe an appropriate epistemic status to metrics and calibrates the philosophical proclivity of the culminating IEMF. Finding 3. A geography of philanthropic governance exists. In particular, there are variegated similarities and differences in the perceptions and usage of ecosocial metrics. Significant overlaps in the domain and geographic foci of giving signify the feasibility of meaningful comparison, competition and collaboration among such organizations with metrics at the centrepiece. Finding 4. While best practice benchmarks in the usage of metrics in driving positive tangible changes are rare, a highly innovative integrated rural development program known as Saemaul Undong serves as a solid example. It is possible to maximize the efficiency in resource-deployment, induce participation and competition, and scale a parochial initiative to a national level through the usage of performance metrics. Finding 5. Calibrating appropriate philosophical stance, aggregating widely disparate measuranda, disaggregating casual attribution are among the key challenges towards developing an IEMF. Identifying and adopting appropriate formalisms facilitate addressing such challenges. For adoption in practice, however, one must factor in human expertise and judgements when making resource deployment decisions along with the numbers calculated through such a framework. The findings above constitute a series of 'firsts' of the kind in each relevant bodies of literature, paving the way for further explorations.

Social enterprises (SEs) are businesses managed by entrepreneurs who seek to improve society, and they represent an important trend in social change work. However, there is little empirical knowledge about which blended value accounting (BVA) methods are used by SE managers, and whether the use of BVA is perceived by SE managers as a critical success factor. Blended value accounting is a conceptual framework for measuring combined social and financial outcomes in SEs, and some believe that the use of BVA may be a critical success factor for SEs. This research was based on Covin and Slevin's conceptualization of entrepreneurial orientation. The main research question was whether the use of BVA methods was correlated with SE success from the perception of the SE managers. Surveys were sent to 3,682 SE managers in North America, the United Kingdom, Asia, and Africa (n = 280). Data were analyzed using multiple regression, with the dependent variable SE success, and the independent variables: the use of BVA method, number of employees, length of time in business, economic sector, and country of registration. Findings indicated no statistically significant correlation between the use of BVA method and SE success, though most SE managers, 73% of 280 respondents, were using BVA methods for other reasons, including complying with state laws. The BVA method B-Impact Rating System was used by 59% of survey respondents who used any method of BVA. These findings suggest that SE managers should select a BVA method that is inexpensive to implement, aligns with industry standards, and provides them with management information. Supporting agencies should create a global registry of SEs, report on the social change impact they create through their businesses, and encourage all businesses to adopt the social-change orientation of SEs.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Boston University / PLEASE NOTE: Boston University Libraries did not receive an Authorization To Manage form for this thesis or dissertation. It is therefore not openly accessible, though it may be available by request. If you are the author or principal advisor of this work and would like to request open access for it, please contact us at open-help@bu.edu. Thank you. / The purposes of this study were to describe the relationship of sociodemographic and biomedical characteristics to health perceptions among individuals with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and to identify which functional measures are associated with one's health perceptions. Data were extracted on 395 individuals with classical or definite RA for a secondary data analysis. These data had been collected between 1978 and 1982 using the Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales (AIMS), a reliable and valid self-administered questionnaire on health status. Sociodemographic information included age, sex, current marital status, occupation, income, and engagement in a productive role. Biomedical data included a respondent's disease duration, disease severity, and comorbid conditions. A dependent variable which classified health perceptions (HP) was constructed from two AIMS questions concerning self-assessed current health and belief in the ability to resist illness. Using subjects' sociodemographic characteristics and biomedical indicators as determinants of health perception classifications (HPC), repondents were grouped into nodes through a recursive partitioning technique (CART). Income, disease activity, current marital status, age, and comorbidity were identified by CART as important and interactive determinants of HPC. In the second phase of analysis, differences in function between HP groups on the nine AIMS scales were explored using subjects' self-assigned HP groups, while controlling for sociodemographic and biomedical characteristics and their potential interactive effects as they had been identified by the CART algorithm. Analysis of these differences demonstrated that the explanatory sociodemographic and biomedical variables used in this study both explained and masked significant differences between HP groups on certain functional measures. Finally, the analysis determined which functional measures were most associated with self-assigned HP using a stepwise logistic regression model. Anxiety, physical activity and household activity formed an overall explanatory model of HP. Physical activity and depression were associated with current health perceptions. Perceived resistance to illness was related to subjects' levels of anxiety and household activity. / 2031-01-01

NPOs and their funders are increasingly drawn to the Social Return on Investment (SROI) method to evaluate the social impact of programs, organizations or organization networks. While many claims about the benefits of SROI have been expressed, various points of criticism have also been raised. On the basis of both current research and our own experience in conducting SROI analyses, we develop a comprehensive assessment of this method, which is structured along two dimensions: the observer's paradigmatic perspective, on the one hand, and positive or negative valuation, on the other. We identify two major merits: SROI analysis can provide legitimacy to NPOs or their funders, and it can assist in allocating resources. We identify limitations from three perspectives: From an interpretative-sociological perspective, criticism of commensuration and utilitarianism calls the method as a whole into question. From a technical-instrumental perspective, there are a number of difficulties that could however be overcome as the method matures. From an intermediary perspective, a number of limitations become apparent that, while inherent to SROI analysis, are no reason for abandoning it, as long as they are thoroughly understood. We conclude by providing suggestions for the responsible use of SROI analysis.

The global economy as we know it is changing: stakeholders' priorities have shifted towards businesses that provide demonstrable impact on their communities and the environment. But are South African Small-, Micro- and Medium- Enterprises (SMMEs) prepared to rise to the challenge of measuring and communicating their impact? The adoption of Impact Measurement among enterprises has scarcely been covered in empirical literature, where the limited research available has put a strong emphasis on impact measurement for investors, and not necessarily the enterprises creating the impact. Furthermore, there is a dearth of information available on the use of Impact Measurement in South Africa, arguably a country desperate for effective, impact-driven capital allocation. Technology provides the opportunity to make Impact Measurement more accessible to these organisations, as it has the power to provide solutions at scale, giving enterprises across the world a unified platform to measure and communicate their impact. This two-phased study leveraged the power of mixed-methods research to gain an understanding of the impact measurement adoption behaviour of South African SMMEs. Phase 1 was initiated with the utilization of a Partial Least Squares – Structured Equation Model (PLS-SEM) based on the framework of the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) using a sample size of 90 SMMEs. This was followed by interviewing candidates and using a deductive qualitative research approach to create an understanding of their adoption behaviour based on the Technology, Organisation, Environment (TOE) framework. Furthermore, the second phase of the study made use of a systematic review based on Kuo et al.'s adapted PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses), followed by interview questions regarding user requirements to identify the appropriateness of existing impact measurement technologies in the South African SMME market. The first phase of the study revealed that even though SMMEs are aware of the significant impact they have on society, it is often based on informal measurement techniques and subjective opinion. This is mainly due to a lack of understanding of what impact measurement means, or how to even go about it. Furthermore, this is reinforced by the strong influence of social norms in this emerging impact economy, where there is very little emphasis or expectation to provide robust impact measurement. The main drivers of impact measurement adoption were found to include the affordability, the business' intent on creating impact and that businesses are likely to adopt impact measurement if there is a perceived value in doing so. The second phase of the study revealed that some of the major drivers behind the lack of adoption of Impact Measurement Software is the lack of awareness on available platforms, the lack of understanding of how to measure the impact, and finally the prohibitively high cost of acquiring the software – even though there isn't necessarily one piece of software that fits all requirements, it was found that there are various platforms that do meet the needs of South African SMMEs in some ways. This study has added to the knowledge of understanding the behaviour on impact measurement adoption among South African SMMEs and scoped the field of suitable, available technologies in a time where it is critical to rebuild the economy in a more equitable and impact-driven approach, after the devastating economic impact of COVID-19.

This thesis investigates the relationship between organizational size and the decision of using social impact measurements in Swedish socially entrepreneurial organizations, which include organizations and individuals that aim at solving social problems. Data is collected using an online survey, and three different ways to measure organizational size are used and tested whether they have a positive relation-ship with the use of social impact measurement. Organizational size is measured as the yearly turnover, available personnel and the number of members and participants in the organization. The association was analyzed through three different analytical methods, and we also present detailed descriptive statis-tics for the data sample. The results showed significant relationships between available staff as well as members and participants and the use of social impact measurements, while no significant relationship between the yearly turnover and the use of social impact measurements could be confirmed. We suggest a consideration of impact measurements when addressing sustainable organizational development as well as consideration of organizational size for local governments when introducing policies, funding and other support for socially entrepreneurial organizations.

Social work as a science and profession, particularly through its social work research, has always concerned itself with the verification of the impact of its interventions. However, in practice, formal systematic impact studies have lagged behind. Grantmaking, which is fast becoming a career, is also under scrutiny regarding the measurement of its funding impact. The aim of the study was to measure the impact of Ithuba Trust’s financing policy and operations for access to its funds. Data was collected by means of a literature review on poverty and inequality and an empirical study. The empirical study was conducted in two stages. During the first qualitative study, data was collected by means of a series of focus group interviews. Mailed questionnaires and document analysis of the sample files kept at Ithuba Trust offices were used to collect data in the second quantitative phase. The research findings revealed that Ithuba Trust funding policy and operations facilitated access to its funding as a contribution towards poverty eradication. Notwithstanding, the organization was found lacking in narrowing the gap between developed and under-developed communities. This discrepancy was ascribed to Ithuba Trust’s adherence to the past apartheid laws which were in force at the time and favoured developed communities. Poverty eradi-cation is about partnerships. This study concluded that the uneven distribution of Ithuba Trust’s funding is a microcosm of the uneven trade relations in the global poverty eradication initiatives, which involve partnerships between the poor and the rich. Due to barriers such as digital divide, globalization and access to markets, which favour the rich and powerful, poor people become marginalized from such skewed partnerships, reinforcing the increasing levels of poverty as resources get misplaced. The contribution of the study lies in sensitizing development practitioners on the significance of impact studies in intervention programmes in order to ensure that the poor people’s interests are defended and protected for their ultimate development. The outcome of the study was a Community Ownership Market Development Strategy to be presented to the Ithuba Trust Board of Trustees as a recommendation for consideration regarding their intended amendments to the existing funding policy and procedures. / Thesis (DPhil (Social Work))--University of Pretoria, 2005. / Social Work and Criminology / Unrestricted