I recently viewed a video of a presentation given by Esther Duflo at PopTech 2009.  (Esther Duflo is a development economist who has garnered significant attention for her work on randomized evaluation.  She is based at the Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab at MIT, which she co-founded.)  What I found most intriguing about her commentary is the way she highlights evaluation as a way to figure out what works in development.  She starts with what we all know to be true: development problems are big, intimidating, and seemingly intractable.  But fortunately, she doesn’t stop there.

“To realize meaningful benefits, philanthropy cannot be treated as just another ‘check the box,’ but rather must be executed no less professionally, proactively, and strategically than other core business activities.”

Guest blogger “Edil K” posted these questions in the lead up to Mission Measurement’s session at the 2010 Health and Human Rights Conference in Toronto last week. 

Sara Lee recently introduced a new line of whole-grain bread touting its innovative farming techniques that reduce the use of fertilizers. Natural food advocates and environmentalists can count another tick in the win column, right? Not so, according to The Cornucopia Institute.

My ears perked up when I heard the words “save you money” at a recent CSR event hosted by Jane Madden, SVP of CSR and Sustainability at Edelman.  The guest speaker, Sharon Feigon, CEO of I-Go Car Sharing, explained how her organization has grown beyond individuals to serve businesses and local governments.  “While most of our customers really believe in our social and environmental impact, it’s truly the price that makes or breaks the sale,” she said.  Currently a member of another car share program, I was intrigued.

‘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.

Earlier this month, Starbucks hosted a Summit with leading corporations and international NGOs to discuss “Measuring the Value of Community Service”.  Mission Measurement facilitated this crucial discussion and helped tease out the social and business outcomes that corporate volunteerism advances.  Starbucks isn’t the first corporation or NGO to grapple with this question, but there are many challenges that have impeded a solution to measuring the value of corporate community service.

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.