Measuring Impact - Nicva
Measuring Impact - Nicva
Measuring Impact - Nicva
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
44 <strong>Measuring</strong> <strong>Impact</strong> – Case-studies of impact assessment<br />
Other service users also showed a major distinction by gender. Among the Asian community,<br />
women valued the organisation’s approach to developing their skills and confidence, and<br />
valued the opportunity to try new activities. They felt that the voluntary organisation added<br />
‘weight’ rather than ‘wait’ to their job applications. Asian men stressed the importance of<br />
community development. They were keen to get involved in helping others in their situation<br />
as service providers (mostly as volunteers), regardless of their personal circumstances.<br />
Although their original reason for seeking out EMEC or Positive Action in Housing was to<br />
access more suitable jobs, they found that voluntary organisations provided an environment<br />
within which they could use their existing skills to help others.<br />
Critique of methodology 6.4<br />
The conclusions concern two main areas: understanding how the perception of impact varies;<br />
and the methodology for identifying and capturing this variation.<br />
System mapping demonstrated differences in how the service users, front-line staff and project coordinators<br />
perceive the context within which an organisation operates. This appears to be related<br />
to their location in the hierarchy of the organisation and seems to result in differing perceptions of<br />
impact. The system-mapping stage was a useful way of uncovering these differences.<br />
A key finding was the variation in perceptions of impact, and the need to recognise that impact<br />
themes vary significantly according to the individual and their position and circumstances. As<br />
such, impact is arguably a subjective, social construct. While this has implications for impact<br />
measurement, it means that qualitative approaches need a coherent framework for analysis.<br />
Moreover, the continuum between service users and service providers demonstrates an<br />
increasing awareness or concern for community impact. It follows that the way in which the<br />
stakeholder sees themselves (service user or service provider) will also influence the kinds of<br />
impact they perceive. Therefore, the key to assessing impact lies not just in fielding stakeholder<br />
perceptions, but understanding the changing contexts that can alter them.<br />
The study found two key and interconnected dimensions of impact that have the potential to<br />
provide a framework for the development of indicators:<br />
• how impact is perceived at personal, community and organisational levels;<br />
• how these perceptions differ according to gender, culture and stakeholder type.<br />
Conclusion 6.5<br />
A number of conclusions could be drawn from this study. The needs of service users, and the<br />
ways in which front-line staff attempted to address them, extended beyond the specific aims and<br />
objectives of the organisation (i.e. some impacts result from the willingness of voluntary organisations<br />
to go the extra distance, as they are concerned with maximising benefit, not profit). It<br />
appeared that perception of impact varied according to a person’s role in the organisation,<br />
resulting in a focus on either personal, community or organisational level impact. Furthermore,<br />
wider stakeholder involvement, not just across organisations, but also down the hierarchy of the<br />
organisation, can be used to develop indicators that offer a fuller picture of impact.