Search results

Impact investors differ from venture capital firms as they invest to create social and commercial value. This paper pursues the question: how do impact investors select social enterprises? The aim of this study is to understand the selection and investing process of impact investors.

This study developed a database of 115 impact-investing firms across different geographies. Emails were sent to investors associated with each of the impact-investing firms found in the database, out of which 32 replied with consent for a telephonic or in-person interview.

The significant findings presented in the paper are the following. First, this study shows the impact-investing selection process model. The four major steps in the selection process are context, investment focus, venture analysis and decision. In each step, social values and missions become the defining characteristics of the selection process. Second, the findings also discuss the typologies of impact investors as a function of their selection approaches.

This paper discusses the impact investing strategy among social enterprises. It provides a framework for impact investing among investee social enterprises. As an impact investing professional, one learns investment strategy through this paper.

Impact investing is a growing field. It is believed that impact investing could greatly impact sustainable development goals, climate change goals and help in inclusive development. This study helps to further understand impact investing process and hopes to help social enterprises and impact investors make a better match, thereby, creating a greater overall social and environmental impact.

This study helps both practitioners and academics to understand the complexity of impact investing. This study helps develop heuristics that impact investors may use to make investments. This study provides a framework for investing, which the impact investing firms may use to invest.

This paper aims to conduct a systematic literature review of Socially Conscious Investment (SCI) articles published in premier journals. Its objective is to shed light on the publication trend, leading authors, journals, countries and themes in contemporary SCI research. The article also provides a conceptual model of SCI to enhance understanding of the knowledge structure and the future research direction.

A systematic review followed the PRISMA guidelines and encompasses 264 full-text articles indexed in A* and A category journals listed in ABDC is reviewed. The literature synthesis adopts the theories, contexts, characteristics and methodology (TCCM) framework.

The article has identified the research trends related to author impact, journal impact, article impact and the outcomes derived from the TCCM framework. Additionally, it highlights three key themes: Performance of SCI, Behavioural issues and SCI development literature.

The insight on various aspects of SCI was explored for a comprehensive understanding. The authors also developed a conceptual model for socially conscious investment.

Though qualitative evidence of social impact exists for disability-inclusive social enterprise, there is a dearth of quantitative economic impact on their social impact. This study aims to address this gap and investigate the appropriateness and usefulness of social return on investment (SROI) methodology in this context.

Primary data was collected from people with disabilities, their families, staff at the parent company (an Australian Disability Enterprise [ADE]), social investors and other key stakeholders (n = 17). The study was also informed by the literature and a steering group to provide expert opinion when no other data existed to inform estimates. Sensitivity analysis was performed to check the robustness of the analysis.

Social return was estimated at $1.47–$2.65 for every $1 invested (over 3 years) and $8.48–$12.63 (20 years). Some forecast assumptions significantly impacted upon final ratios and need to be tested. How SROI ratios are received by social investors, the ADE sector and government remains untested. However, the political climate suggests ADEs adopting social enterprise models will be well received if they can deliver, and demonstrate through robust measurement, sustainable open employment opportunities.

Few studies exist that estimate the social impact of social enterprises supporting open employment of people with disabilities. At a time when ADEs (sheltered workshops) have been heavily criticised for providing repetitive, menial work for top up wages on welfare payments, the outputs from this research may provide valuable data to an ADE sector in transition as well as social investors and policy makers who increasingly require robust measurement of impact.

The growth of mental disorders and their costs represents a public health challenge. This study aims to explore how a social club can help mitigate its impact through arts and sports workshops.

Using the social return on investment (SROI) methodology, the impact of the social club is evaluated by identifying stakeholders and quantifying their contributions. In addition, the relationship between patients’ attendance and the reduction of relapses and medication consumption is explored.

The SROI showed a positive return on investment, €12.12 per euro invested. This ratio indicates that the social club generates social value well above its initial costs. On the other hand, two stakeholders were identified as higher impact generators, and it was confirmed that sports activities generate more social and economic impact than art activities – however, the positive effects of art activities last longer over time. The study revealed a positive relationship between social club attendance and relapse reduction. Almost 90% of the participating users reported no relapses or emergency hospitalizations during the past year of attendance. In addition, a substantial decrease in medication dosage was observed. These results suggest that social clubs help stabilize mental health and reduce the burden on health-care systems.

The case study highlights the vital role of social clubs in supporting people facing mental health issues. Policymakers and health-care providers can use this knowledge to invest in more effective and sustainable mental health support activities.

The purpose of this study is to contribute to the discussion surrounding impact measurement on social enterprises (SEs). The findings provide a more nuanced perspective on tensions that often emerge from SEs journeys by presenting the complexities which social entrepreneurs and investors should be attentive to.

This research used grounded theory as the means to explore how stakeholders accomplish the requirements for impact measurement, overcoming the challenges that arise in the process. Through 18 semi-structured interviews, the authors develop a conceptual model to better understand how a practice that is often taken for granted might compromise SEs achievements and sustainability in the long term.

The proposed model uncovered an unintended consequence of impact measurement: mission drift. The requirements to assess the social impact raise expectations on different actors and create challenges that affect the true purpose of SEs, the delivery of their social mission.

This study contributes to research and practice. First, the authors develop a theoretical model for social entrepreneurs and social investors to shed light on the hidden consequences of impact measurement. Second, the authors strengthen the knowledge in the field by conducting a study on SEs outside the mainstream Western-centric context.

The authors enrich the literature by exploring the tensions related to impact measurement in SEs in the Global South and unravel new perspectives on the subject.

Social impact research remains in its infancy. The purpose of the paper is to build on Keeling and Marshall’s (2022) “Call for impact” paper and develop a comprehensive social impact pathway (SIP) framework. The aim is to encourage marketing researchers, non-profits and corporations to pursue impactful work that is valued, planned, monitored and evaluated.

The conceptual paper explores the complexities of estimating social impact drawing from a range of illustrative cases.

The paper identifies a lack of clarity in the understanding and application of impact and presents a pathway aimed at increasing focus on social impact across future work to deliver the net-positive changes that are needed to reverse biodiversity decline, climate change and social and health inequalities that continue to be persist and be experienced by so many planet wide.

This paper contributes a pathway forward to encourage and support increased utilisation of the framework in future marketing research.

Mapping and measuring SIPs are concerted efforts directing understanding towards identifying the activities that are contributing to the delivery of outputs that can achieve intended outcomes. The measurement of impact directs investment towards activities that ensure net-positive gains are achieved.

Ever growing social inequities, health disparities, loss of biodiversity and environmental degradation occur when practices are left unchecked. A focus on impact avoids greenwashing practices, ensuring that an understanding of what has changed because of the work is transparently reported.

This paper aims to encourage marketing researchers to engage in social change projects, rather than solely disseminating academic findings. Emphasising the importance of an outside-in approach, this paper highlights the necessity of showcasing accumulated outcomes to demonstrate impact.

In this article, we outline our views on the appropriateness and utility of Return on Investment (ROI) for the evaluation of the value of healthcare quality improvement (QI) programmes.

Our recent research explored the ROI concept and became the genesis of our viewpoint. We reflect on our findings from an extensive research project on the concept of ROI, involving a multidisciplinary global systematic literature review, a qualitative and Delphi study with mental healthcare leaders from the United Kingdom National Health Service. Research participants included board members, clinical directors and QI leaders. Our findings led to our conclusions and interpretation of ROI against the broad QI governance. We discuss our views against the predominant governance frameworks and wider literature.

ROI is in-line with top-down control governance frameworks based in politics and economics. However, there is evidence that to be of better utility, a tool for the assessment of the value of QI benefits must include comprehensive benefits that reflect broad monetary and non-monetary benefits. This is in-line with bottom-up and collaborative governance approaches. ROI has several challenges that may limit it as a QI governance tool. This is supported by wider literature on ROI, QI as well as modern governance theories and models. As such, we question whether ROI is the appropriate tool for QI governance. A more pragmatic governance framework that accommodates various healthcare objectives is advised.

This article highlights some of the challenges in adopting ROI as a QI governance tool. We signal a need for the exploration of a suitable QI governance approach. Particularly, are healthcare leaders to be perceived as “agents”, “stewards” or both. The evidence from our research and wider literature indicates that both are crucial. Better QI governance through an appropriate value assessment tool could improve clarity on QI value, and thus investment allocation decision-making. Constructive discussion about the utility and appropriateness of ROI in the evaluation of healthcare QI programmes may help safeguard investment in effective and efficient health systems.

The article raises awareness of QI governance and encourages discussions about the challenges of using ROI as a tool for healthcare QI governance.

This paper aims to highlight the factors influencing the conceptualisation of return on investment (ROI) from healthcare quality improvement (QI) programmes.

In their previous work, the authors found that the concept of ROI from QI is broad and includes numerous internal and external benefits for organisations. In this paper, the authors developed a framework outlining the factors that influence this conceptualisation of QI-ROI from an institutional theory perspective. The framework is based on the synthesis of their serial studies on the determinants of the concept of ROI from QI. The research was performed from 2020–2023 and involved a global multidisciplinary systematic literature review (N = 68), qualitative interviews (N = 16) and a Delphi study (N = 23). The qualitative and Delphi studies were based on the publicly-funded mental healthcare in UK. Participants included board members, clinical and service directors, as well as QI leaders.

The authors outline a framework of internal and external institutional forces that influence the conceptualisation of ROI from QI programmes in mental healthcare and similar organisations. Based on these factors, the authors state several conjectures. In doing this, the authors highlight the ambiguities and uncertainties surrounding QI-ROI conceptualisation. These challenge leaders to balance various monetary and non-monetary benefits for organisations and health systems. This explains the broadness of the QI-ROI concept.

The authors developed a framework highlighting the forces underpinning the broad, ambiguous and sometimes uncertain nature of the QI-ROI concept. They raise awareness about dilemmas to be confronted in developing or applying any tool to evaluate the value for money of QI programmes. Specifically, the work highlights the limitations of the ROI methodology as a primary tool in the QI context and the need for a more comprehensive tool.

With the recent increasing relevance of sustainability, multinational enterprises are faced with divergent stakeholder demands and persistently shifting priorities. This study aims to examine stakeholders’ perceptions of the sustainability performance of a gold mining subsidiary in Ghana.

Using a purposive sampling technique, the authors interviewed managers and employees of the case enterprise, officials of regulatory institutions and host community members on their perceptions of the case enterprise’s sustainability performance. The authors triangulated the opinions expressed by these stakeholders with data from annual reports. The data were analysed through the lens of stakeholder theory.

The authors found that while members of the host community and the regulatory institutions were keenly interested in the case enterprise’s social and environmental activities, they perceived their performance as unimpressive, considering the economic benefits derived from the mining operations. On the contrary, the managers and employees of the case enterprise were satisfied with their environmental compliance and social intervention programmes, even though the company’s economic position had declined. The authors submit that the variations in the sustainability performance perceptions among the stakeholders are due to the lack of a deeper understanding of the other stakeholders’ expectations.

To equitably satisfy diverse stakeholder expectations, the study highlights the role of stakeholder collaborations in understanding the expectations of more salient stakeholder groups such as community members and employees, as well as the lesser salient groups such as academics. It also demonstrates the fluidity of sustainability and its benefits in designing a consensual sustainable management strategy. This implies that managers of the case mining enterprise make the necessary efforts to meet the diverse stakeholder needs while attaining their primary objective of creating wealth for shareholders.

Compared to advanced economies, studies on sustainability performance in emerging economies are limited. Nonetheless, these limited studies leave out stakeholder perceptions, focusing more on quantitative performance indicators. Using thematic and content analyses, the authors investigate stakeholder perceptions on the sustainability performance of a case mining subsidiary operating in Ghana. The study focused on Ghana because it is ranked with South Africa as the top two producers of gold in Africa. Nonetheless, unlike South Africa, Ghana faces more sustainability challenges from the mining sector due to weak institutions in enforcing sustainability standards.

Measuring shared value (SV) created in innovation ecosystems (IEs) is increasingly relevant but complex, given the multidimensional and multiactor nature of both concepts, which challenges traditional performance measurement systems (PMSs). Moving from this gap, the authors propose an integrated approach to extend the balanced scorecard (BSC) for measuring and monitoring SV creation at IE level.

The proposed approach combines the most recent contributions on PMS in IEs and SV to define perspectives and dimensions that are better suited to deal with the nature of both IEs and SV. The approach is also applied to the real case (Alpha) of an Italian IE through a step wise method. Starting from the IE vision, the authors identify in the strategy map the specific objectives related to each perspective/dimension combination and then associate a performance indicator with each objective.

The resulting SV BSC is composed of indicators interconnected along different perspectives and dimensions. The application of the approach to the real case proves its feasibility and highlights characteristics, advantages and disadvantages of the SV BSC when used at IE level. The authors also provide guidelines for its application to other IEs.

The study contributes to the research on PMS by introducing and applying to a real case an integrated approach to assess SV in IEs, overcoming the shortcomings of PMS framed for single firms. It can be of interest for both researchers in the field of ecosystems value creation and practitioners managing or promoting such complex structures.