‘Why measure?’ is a question that has been bandied about by social change agents —business people, nonprofit professionals, educators—for quite some time.  How we measure is also a source of debate.  From randomized testing to post-activity evaluation, there is no real consensus on how and why to measure.  But most people can agree that measurement is effective when it enables you to clarify desirable results, create a system to track progress, and communicate effectiveness.  However, this assumes that measurement is being used to highlight what’s working in real time, not to determine attribution after the fact.

The first time a client used the term “WIIFM” (pronounced whiff-um) in a sentence as though it were a real word, I thought perhaps she was speaking another language or using an industry-specific expression that I wasn’t familiar with.  I quickly learned that WIIFM is not only a part of the English language but also a concept that’s relevant to every industry and every project I’ve worked on.  WIIFM stands for “What’s In It For

Survival in the global economy often requires responding to global crises such as HIV/AIDS – particularly for the pharmaceutical industry.   Pharmaceutical companies striving to profitably deliver products that solve health problems will require continued creativity and innovation to survive.  Maintaining a healthy balance of profitability and social impact can be challenging for many industries.   This dynamic tension between delivering profits and achieving social impact is a dilemma highlighted in the pharmaceutical industry’s response to the global HIV/AIDS crisis.   

Investment in small and medium enterprises (SMEs) is growing and becoming increasingly high-profile in both the development and investment fields.  A report released earlier this year by the World Resources Institute reveals that of the 20 leading SME investment funds, more than half were established after 2004.  While the majority of these funds have little name recognition outside of the SME funding community, big names are entering the market.

At last week’s sySTEMnow Conference in Milwaukee, a convening of math and science educators and the businesses funding their efforts, I was a panelist for a session titled The ROI for STEM Outreach Efforts: Quantifying Corporate Social Responsibility. Several conferences have begun hosting sessions like this to help employees in CSR departments measure the business impact of their corporate philanthropy and volunteerism.  

The Obama Administration has signaled that partnerships are a key component of our foreign policy.   President Obama said in a speech at the Clinton Global Initiative on September 22nd, “Today’s threats demand new partnerships across sectors and across societies—creative collaborations to achieve what no one can accomplish alone.

"...I’m here today to announce that the State Department is opening its doors to a new generation of public-private partnerships. We will expand current partnerships and embark on new ones. We’ll embrace collaboration and become more receptive to the ideas and approaches that you will bring to us. And we want to deploy the full range of tools available..." -Secretary of State Hilary Clinton at the Global Philanthropy Forum (April 22, 2009) Source: US Department of State

“Is the economic downturn affecting the willingness and readiness of companies to look at the economic, social, and environmental impact of their business practices? Or is this a perfect time to reassess current programs and adapt them to changing—and in many cases increasing—needs in society?” 

Dozens of the largest corporate foundations, CSR groups, and nonprofit executives attended the 2009 Boston College Center for Corporate Citizenship Conference. The theme of this year’s conference was “Leading Change, Finding Opportunity.” CEO of Mission Measurement, Jason Saul, led a workshop at called Beyond the Business Case: Measuring the Business Value of Social Impact.

In their recent contribution to the Harvard Business Review, Doing Well By Doing Good? Don’t Count on It, Joshua Margolis and Hillary Anger Elfenbein rekindle the venerable debate on the relationship between Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and financial performance. Since its inception, CSR has struggled to build legitimacy against forces pressing corporate social and environmental strategies to demonstrate a direct, causal relationship with stock performance.