Universal impact reporting standards seem to have fallen out of grace – and social enterprises are none the wiser on how to measure their impact effectively. But what if a new approach changed what felt like a chore into a welcome pick-me-up?
Measuring impact is expensive and can be seen as an unnecessary burden for impact investors and enterprises – but it may be the only antidote to impact-washing.
Concerns about virtue-signalling and purpose-washing are widespread – and sometimes justified – in the conference circuit. Big claims or good intentions are no longer enough: sponsors must do all they can to prove their commitment.
The more that impact measurement is relied on to shape investor decisions, the more worried we should be, says Dr Jess Daggers: the information gathered does not necessarily correspond with reality, and yet few take this risk into account.
Impact verification firm highlights impact investors from global sample which it identifies as best in class at impact management, going above and beyond the Impact Principles.
In his new series, responsible business pioneer Michael Solomon challenges businesses to a “race to the top” to convert positive impact into “cold, hard competitive advantage over the greenwashers, laggards and other stalwarts of business as usual”.
IMPACT 101: What does impact verification actually mean? Who's doing it – and is it the solution to impact-washing? The Good Economy's Matt Ripley explains all in our latest impact economy explainer.
If we don’t try to change unfair systems – even if it means working with institutions we fundamentally disagree with – are we ignoring the root cause of the problem? It's complicated, says Migrateful founder Jess Thompson.
