21879 Measuring Social Impact
Warning: The information on this page is indicative. The subject outline for a
particular session, location and mode of offering is the authoritative source
of all information about the subject for that offering. Required texts, recommended texts and references in particular are likely to change. Students will be provided with a subject outline once they enrol in the subject.
Subject handbook information prior to 2025 is available in the Archives.
Credit points: 6 cp
Subject level:
Postgraduate
Result type: Grade and marksThere are course requisites for this subject. See access conditions.
Description
This subject examines different approaches to identifying and analysing the social impact of corporate and not-for-profit organisations. It explores the potential usefulness and relative merits of various impact assessment methods – including the use of literature reviews, interviews, focus groups, surveys and various existing indices and datasets. The subject focuses on assisting students to develop enhanced social programs by developing a Theory of Change, a portfolio of evidence, a Program Logic and an Evaluation Plan.
Subject learning objectives (SLOs)
| 1. | Explain and critically analyze the rationale for the evaluation of both corporate and not for profit sectors’ social impact |
|---|---|
| 2. | Critically analyze business-not-for profit partnerships |
| 3. | Evaluate the main methodologies, both qualitative and quantitative, used in measuring social impact |
| 4. | Applying these methodologies to critically evaluate a corporate or not-for-profit social programs and present a program evaluation |
Contribution to the development of graduate attributes
This subject addresses the responsibility businesses have to the community beyond their commercial operations and the role that not-for-profit organisations play in realising that corporate social responsibility. It explores the powerful potential of measuring social performance and the challenges of definition, measurement and data. The subject enables students to develop a flexible framework that encourages evaluative thinking throughout the lifecycle of a social program and accounts as fully and accurately as possible for social impact. In doing so, this subject is aligned with the graduate attributes of social responsibility and cultural awareness and professional and technical competence.
This subject also contributes to the development of the following Program Learning Objective for the Master of Not-for-Profit and Social Enterprise Management courses:
- Integrate advanced knowledge of complex not-for-profit and social enterprise concepts, including Indigenous perspectives, and technical skills to lead professional practice that contributes to the public good (4.1)
Teaching and learning strategies
The Learning Guide, which contains subject and content outlines and information, suggests a learning pathway students to follow and directs student learning towards the assessment tasks. It helps students to keep track of the entire subject while simultaneously working on the details, and to move through the subject with some freedom about the pace and times that best suit them.
A core teaching strategy is discussion with peers, as a whole class and in smaller groups. This includes a groupwork assessment that involves delivering a presentation to the whole class. Learning by discussion, group work and delivering presentations all replicate crucial facets of professional life and the classroom is designed for students to practice and develop these skills in a safe space, and in ways that allows students to share the diversity of their experiences.
Extensive use is made of the UTS Online learning system, Canvas, which is used to share information, provide feedback and encourage interaction between staff and students.
This includes access to weekly lectures and class materials via Canvas, which students can access at their own pace ahead of the weekly face-to-face workshops.
Content (topics)
- The political and socio-economic drivers for the increasing proliferation of evaluation activities;
- Motivations for measuring social impact and types of processes used by businesses and not for profits to implement their social objectives;
- Developing a Theory of Change and Logic Model
- The merits and limitations of various impact assessment methods;
- Program evaluation research tools: Data gathering techniques, including observation, interviews, case studies, surveys, and the use of secondary data sources.
- Contemporary challenges and trends relating to measuring social impact, including payment by outcomes
Assessment
Assessment task 1: Presentation (Group)*
| Objective(s): | This addresses subject learning objective(s): 1 and 2 |
|---|---|
| Weight: | 30% |
| Length: | 12-15 minute presentation + whole of class Q&A and discussion. |
| Criteria: | *Note: Late submission of the assessment task will not be marked and awarded a mark of zero. |
Assessment task 2: Report (Individual)
| Objective(s): | This addresses subject learning objective(s): 3 and 4 |
|---|---|
| Weight: | 30% |
| Length: | 1400-1700 words (not including referencing, footnotes or executive summary). |
Assessment task 3: Program Evaluation (Individual)
| Objective(s): | This addresses subject learning objective(s): 3 and 4 |
|---|---|
| Weight: | 40% |
| Length: | Proposal report of 2250-2750 words (not including references, footnotes or executive summary). |
Minimum requirements
Students must achieve at least 50% of the subject’s total marks.
Required texts
The following will be the required readings for this Semester. Students can access them online via Canvas.
Baines, J. T., Taylor, C. N., & Vanclay, F. (2013). Social impact assessment and ethical research principles: Ethical professional practice in impact assessment Part II. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 31(4), 254–260. https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2013.850306
Cairney, S., Abbott, T., Quinn, S., Yamaguchi, J., Wilson, B., & Wakerman, J. (2017). Interplay wellbeing framework: A collaborative methodology ‘bringing together stories and numbers’ to quantify Aboriginal cultural values in remote Australia. International Journal for Equity in Health, 16(1), 68. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-017-0563-5
Carman, J. G. (2007). Evaluation Practice Among Community-Based Organizations: Research Into the Reality. American Journal of Evaluation, 28(1), 60–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214006296245
Davidson, B. (2023). Measuring Narrative Change: Moving From Theory to Practice. SSIR https://doi.org/10.48558/XF6R-5B96
Dinh, K., Worth, H., & Haire, B. (2019). Buddhist evaluation: Applying a Buddhist world view to the Most Significant Change Technique. Evaluation, 25(4), 477–495. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389019841654
Fraser, A., Tan, S., Lagarde, M., & Mays, N. (2018). Narratives of Promise, Narratives of Caution: A Review of the Literature on Social Impact Bonds. Social Policy & Administration, 52(1), 4–28. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12260
LaFrance, J., & Nichols, R. (2010). Reframing evaluation: Defining an indigenous evaluation framework. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 23(2), 13–31.
Leavy, P. (2017). Research design: Quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods, arts-based and community-based participatory research approaches. The Guilford Press.
Luke, B., Barraket, J., & Eversole, R. (2013). Measurement as legitimacy versus legitimacy of measures: Performance evaluation of social enterprise. Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 10(3/4), 234–258. https://doi.org/10.1108/QRAM-08-2012-0034
McLaughlin, J. A., & Jordan, G. B. (2015). Using Logic Models. In K. E. Newcomer, H. P. Hatry, & J. S. Wholey (Eds.), Handbook of Practical Program Evaluation (1st ed., pp. 62–87). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119171386.ch3
Neimand, A. (2023). How to Tell Real Stories About Impact. https://doi.org/10.48558/4J1H-SY40
Onyx, J. (2014). Social Impact, a Theoretical Model. Cosmopolitan Civil Societies: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.5130/ccs.v6i1.3369
Productivity Commission. (2020). Indigenous Evaluation Strategy. Australian Government. https://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/indigenous-evaluation/strategy/indigenous-evaluation-strategy.pdf
Sawhill, J., & Williamson, D. (2001). Measuring what matters in nonprofits. The McKinsey Quarterly, 2, 98–107.
Vanclay, F., Baines, J. T., & Taylor, C. N. (2013). Principles for ethical research involving humans: Ethical professional practice in impact assessment Part I. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 31(4), 243–253. https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2013.850307
Whelan, J. (2020, May 6). Theories of Change [Referemce]. The Commons - Social Change Library. https://commonslibrary.org/theories-of-change-2/
Zappala, G. (2020). Meaningful Evaluation: A holistic and systemic approach to understanding and assessing outcomes. Cosmopolitan Civil Societies: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 12(2–3). https://doi.org/10.5130/ccs.v12.i2-3.7034
Zappala, G., & Lyons, M. (2009). Recent approaches to measuring social impact in the Third sector: An overview [Background Paper]. Centre for Social Impact UNSW.
Recommended texts
On top of with the required readings above, you are expected to read widely in this subject beyond what is provided by the course coordinator.
This will include reviewing relevant literature on your social impact area, as well as explore literature on where similar program models your selected approach have been implemented in the past.
You're encouraged to start building a literature library early on in the session and to familiarise yourself with the UTS Social Impact Toolbox https://www.socialimpacttoolbox.com/
References