Perspectives on social impact measurement and non-profit organisations

Purpose– Acknowledgement of the social impact created by organisations has become an increasingly frequent discussion among practitioners. The importance of such value creation cannot be understated, yet in an increasingly competitive funding environment, the need to articulate “true” value is paramount. The purpose of this paper is to examine how Australian and US managers of non-profit organisations (NPOs) and foundations view the measurement of the social impact of NPOs.Design/methodology/approach– The paper includes 19 in-depth interviews of non-profit professionals in the USA and Australia. Respondents included non-profit managers, foundation managers and consultants in both countries.Findings– The in-depth interviews found that in both countries respondents generally agreed that objective measures of impact are desirable, but recognised the difficulties in developing objective assessment frameworks enabling comparisons across the non-profit sector. These difficulties, as well as the implications for developing assessments of social value for NPOs, are discussed. This paper demonstrates that there is an opportunity to reposition reporting expectations. The NPO sector can pool together and build on each other’s strengths and market their outcomes as a collective entity. A sector-wide approach provides potential for much needed within-sector mentoring and will showcase the rich and varied outcomes generated by NPOs.Originality/value– This research compares viewpoints in two Western countries, thus offering at least an exploratory examination of social impact assessment from an international perspective. Additionally, this research shows commonalities in terms of what is valued and what is most difficult for non-profits when determining social impact.

Cross-border insolvency law and multinational enterprise groups: judicial Innovation as an international solution

The Article argues that courts confronting the effects of multinational enterprise insolvency must undertake a pragmatic incursion into the separate entity doctrine. This argument is premised on gaps in the current Model Law which confers significant discretion on the courts. Our research shows that courts have fashioned innovative solutions to fill the gaps and thatgreater recognition of the legitimacy of these judicial incursions into the separate entity doctrine would facilitate the reduction of transaction costs in the case of multinational group insolvencies. We identify criteriawhereby a court would be able to determine that the inherentseparateness of the corporate structure should be disregarded andthe group regarded as one.