The nature of measurement across the hybridised social sector: A systematic review of reviews

IF 2.1 4区 管理学 Q2 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Elizabeth‐Rose Ahearn, Catherine Mai
{"title":"The nature of measurement across the hybridised social sector: A systematic review of reviews","authors":"Elizabeth‐Rose Ahearn, Catherine Mai","doi":"10.1111/1467-8500.12616","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Performance measurement and management serve as the key elements for demonstrating accountability to funders and stakeholders for many social entities. Although substantial study has been completed to understand the measurement practices employed by specific models of social entities, there is an absence of studies taking a broader perspective on organisational performance measurement across the entire system. A systematic review of reviews methodology identified previous systematic and meta‐studies of social performance measurement and management practices across the entire sector. The 19 reviews identified examined the measurement and management practices of a range of hybrid social entities including non‐profits, social enterprises, corporate social responsibility undertakings, impact investments and bonds, government departments, and knowledge‐intensive public organisations. The motivations of demonstrating accountability and learning opportunities for improvement are congruous across all entities. However, the approaches and methods employed to measure impact and meet these objectives are distinct between the different entity forms. Furthermore, acknowledgement of the different measurement approaches of other hybrid social entities was notably absent perhaps indicating a lack of knowledge dissemination across the broader system. Some barriers and complexities seem to be generalised across all hybrid entities; however, other challenges appear to be unique to specific hybrid models and measurement approaches. Through amalgamating a broad range of papers, we present opportunities to strengthen performance measurement and management across an increasingly hybridised social sector. Points for practitioners Performance measurement and management are crucial for demonstrating accountability and improving social impact for all forms of hybrid entities including non‐profits, social enterprises, corporate social responsibility undertakings, impact investments and bonds, government departments, and knowledge‐intensive public organisations. While the measurement practices of these organisational entities have been studied separately, there has been a lack of understanding as to the common practices and deviations across a hybrid organisational system. Practitioners should explore the different approaches and methods employed by the various social impact entities to identify opportunities for improved practice. Meeting the information needs of the diverse range of stakeholders in social services sector poses a challenge for all social initiatives. However, our review highlights the importance of ensuring that the voice and perspectives of social service recipients are adequately represented.","PeriodicalId":47373,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Public Administration","volume":"39 ","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Public Administration","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12616","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Performance measurement and management serve as the key elements for demonstrating accountability to funders and stakeholders for many social entities. Although substantial study has been completed to understand the measurement practices employed by specific models of social entities, there is an absence of studies taking a broader perspective on organisational performance measurement across the entire system. A systematic review of reviews methodology identified previous systematic and meta‐studies of social performance measurement and management practices across the entire sector. The 19 reviews identified examined the measurement and management practices of a range of hybrid social entities including non‐profits, social enterprises, corporate social responsibility undertakings, impact investments and bonds, government departments, and knowledge‐intensive public organisations. The motivations of demonstrating accountability and learning opportunities for improvement are congruous across all entities. However, the approaches and methods employed to measure impact and meet these objectives are distinct between the different entity forms. Furthermore, acknowledgement of the different measurement approaches of other hybrid social entities was notably absent perhaps indicating a lack of knowledge dissemination across the broader system. Some barriers and complexities seem to be generalised across all hybrid entities; however, other challenges appear to be unique to specific hybrid models and measurement approaches. Through amalgamating a broad range of papers, we present opportunities to strengthen performance measurement and management across an increasingly hybridised social sector. Points for practitioners Performance measurement and management are crucial for demonstrating accountability and improving social impact for all forms of hybrid entities including non‐profits, social enterprises, corporate social responsibility undertakings, impact investments and bonds, government departments, and knowledge‐intensive public organisations. While the measurement practices of these organisational entities have been studied separately, there has been a lack of understanding as to the common practices and deviations across a hybrid organisational system. Practitioners should explore the different approaches and methods employed by the various social impact entities to identify opportunities for improved practice. Meeting the information needs of the diverse range of stakeholders in social services sector poses a challenge for all social initiatives. However, our review highlights the importance of ensuring that the voice and perspectives of social service recipients are adequately represented.
跨混合社会部门测量的性质:对评价的系统评价
对许多社会实体来说,绩效衡量和管理是向资助者和利益相关者展示责任的关键要素。尽管已经完成了大量的研究,以了解社会实体的特定模型所采用的测量实践,但缺乏对整个系统的组织绩效测量采取更广泛视角的研究。对整个行业的社会绩效测量和管理实践的系统和meta研究方法进行了系统的回顾。已确定的19项审查审查了一系列混合社会实体的衡量和管理实践,包括非营利组织、社会企业、企业社会责任企业、影响力投资和债券、政府部门和知识密集型公共组织。展示责任和学习改进机会的动机在所有实体中都是一致的。然而,衡量影响和实现这些目标所采用的方法和方法在不同实体形式之间是不同的。此外,对其他混合社会实体的不同测量方法的承认明显缺失,这可能表明在更广泛的系统中缺乏知识传播。有些障碍和复杂性似乎适用于所有混合实体;然而,其他挑战似乎是特定混合模型和测量方法所特有的。通过合并广泛的论文,我们提供了在日益混合的社会部门加强绩效衡量和管理的机会。对于所有形式的混合实体,包括非营利组织、社会企业、企业社会责任企业、影响力投资和债券、政府部门和知识密集型公共组织,绩效衡量和管理对于展示问责制和改善社会影响至关重要。虽然这些组织实体的度量实践已经被单独研究过,但是对于跨混合组织系统的共同实践和偏差缺乏理解。从业者应探索不同社会影响实体采用的不同途径和方法,以确定改进实践的机会。满足社会服务部门各种利益相关者的信息需求对所有社会倡议都是一项挑战。然而,我们的审查强调了确保充分代表社会服务接受者的声音和观点的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
9.10%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: Aimed at a diverse readership, the Australian Journal of Public Administration is committed to the study and practice of public administration, public management and policy making. It encourages research, reflection and commentary amongst those interested in a range of public sector settings - federal, state, local and inter-governmental. The journal focuses on Australian concerns, but welcomes manuscripts relating to international developments of relevance to Australian experience.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信