Abstract
Social enterprise has become a key phenomenon in providing public services in many developed countries. The debate on the evaluation of the socio-economic impact generated by this kind of organization has gone hand in hand with the growth of social entrepreneurship. This study provides an exploratory analysis of the emerging practice of measuring the socio-economic impact of social enterprises using the theoretic construct called “Blended Value Accounting” (BVA). Among the models and tools proposed by BVA, we examine in particular the Social Return on Investment (SROI)—an instrument of causal contribution analysis—conducting a literature review on its application to the evaluation of socio-economic impact of social enterprises and on its implications for BVA. Finally, we reach a conclusion as to the role that these tools of mixed accounting and assessment might play—particularly the one examined—with respect to the positivist, critical, and interpretative theories of accounting, thus identifying the areas for further research.
Résumé
L’entreprise sociale est devenue un acteur clé de l’offre en matière de services publics dans de nombreux pays développés. Le débat sur l’évaluation de l’impact socio-économique généré par ce type d’organisation est allé de pair avec une croissance de l’entreprenariat social. Cette étude offre une analyse exploratoire de la pratique émergente consistant à mesurer l’impact socio-économique des entreprises sociales en utilisant la construction théorique connue sous le nom de « Comptabilité de Valeur Mixte » (CVM). Parmi les modèles et les outils proposés par la CVM, nous examinons en particulier le Retour Social sur Investissement (RSSI)—un instrument d’analyse de la contribution causale—en passant en revue la littérature portant sur son application à l’évaluation de l’impact socio-économique des entreprises sociales et de ses conséquences pour la CVM. Enfin, nous offrons une conclusion sur le rôle que ces outils de comptabilité et d’évaluation mixte—en particulier celui examiné ici—pourraient jouer en relation aux théories positiviste, critique et interprétative de la comptabilité, identifiant ainsi des domaines susceptibles de faire l’objet de plus amples recherches.
Zusammenfassung
In zahlreichen Industrieländern spielen Sozialunternehmen inzwischen eine wichtige Rolle bei der Bereitstellung öffentlicher Dienstleistungen. Die Diskussion über die Bewertung der sozioökonomischen Auswirkungen seitens dieser Organisationen geht Hand in Hand mit dem Wachstum des sozialen Unternehmertums. Unter Anwendung des theoretischen Konstrukts „Blended Value Accounting (BVA)“—die buchhalterische Erfassung des gemischten Wertes—stellt die vorliegende Studie eine exploratorische Analyse der zunehmenden Praxis der Messung sozioökonomischer Auswirkungen auf Sozialunternehmen bereit. Von den im Rahmen des BVA vorgeschlagenen Modellen und Werkzeugen untersuchen wir insbesondere die Sozialrendite—ein Instrument der kausalen Beitragsanalyse—und führen eine Literaturauswertung hinsichtlich seiner Anwendung bei der Bewertung sozioökonomischer Auswirkungen der Sozialunternehmen und hinsichtlich der Konsequenzen für das BVA durch. Abschließend gelangen wir zu einer Schlussfolgerung über die Rolle, die die Instrumente verschiedener Buchhaltungs- und Bewertungskonzepte, insbesondere das näher untersuchte Instrument, mit Hinblick auf die positivistischen, kritischen und interpretativen Buchhaltungstheorien gegebenenfalls spielen und identifizieren so Bereiche für weitere Forschungen.
Resumen
La empresa social se ha convertido en un fenómeno clave proporcionando servicios públicos en muchos países desarrollados. El debate sobre la evaluación del impacto socioeconómico generado por este tipo de organización ha ido mano a mano con el crecimiento del espíritu emprendedor social. El presente estudio proporciona un análisis exploratorio de la práctica emergente de medición del impacto socioeconómico de las empresas sociales utilizando el constructo teórico denominado “Contabilidad del Valor Combinado” (BVA, del inglés Blended Value Accounting). Entre los modelos y herramientas propuestos por BVA, examinamos en particular la Rentabilidad Social de la Inversión (SROI, del inglés Social Return on Investment)—un instrumento de análisis causal de las contribuciones—realizando una revisión del material publicado sobre su aplicación a la evaluación del impacto socioeconómico de las empresas sociales y sobre sus implicaciones para BVA. Finalmente, llegamos a una conclusión en cuanto al papel que estas herramientas de contabilidad y evaluación mixtas pueden desempeñar—en particular la examinada—con respecto a las teorías positivistas, críticas e interpretativas de la contabilidad, identificando de este modo áreas de investigación futura.
摘要
社会企业已成为许多发达国家提供公共服务过程中的一个重要现象。对社会此类机构引起的社会经济影响的评估辩论与社会企业家精神的增长密切相关。本项研究对运用所谓的“混合价值会计”(BVA)理论框架衡量社会企业的社会经济影响这一新兴做法提供探索性分析。在BVA提出的模式和工具之中,我们着重研究了投资社会回报(SROI)这一因果贡献分析中的工具,并对其在社会企业的社会经济影响评估中的应用及其对BVA的影响开展文献综述。最后,我们对混合会计和评估中使用的这些工具(尤其是我们研究的那一个工具)在会计实证主义、批判和阐释性理论中的作用得出结论,从而提出进一步研究的领域。
ملخص
أصبحت المشاريع الاجتماعية ظاهرة رئيسية في توفير الخدمات العامة في كثير من البلدان المتقدمة. لا يزال الجدل بشأن تقييم الأثر الإجتماعي والإقتصادي الذي نشأ بواسطة هذا النوع من التنظيم جنبا˝ إلى جنب مع نمو المشاريع الإجتماعية تقدم هذه الدراسة تحليلا˝ إستكشافيا˝ عن الممارسة المستجدة لقياس الأثر الاجتماعي والإقتصادي للمؤسسات الإجتماعية بإستخدام نظرية البناء التي تسمى “القيمة المخلوطة للمحاسبة” (BVA). بين النماذج والأدوات التي إقترحها(BVA)، نحن ندرس على وجه الخصوص العائد الإجتماعي على الإستثمار (SROI)- أداة لتحليل المساهمة الغير رسمية—إجراء مراجعة الأدب على تطبيقها لتقييم الأثر الإجتماعي والإقتصادي للمؤسسات الاجتماعية و على آثارها على (BVA). وأخير˝ا، نصل إلى إستنتاج بشأن الدور الذي يمكن أن تقوم به هذه الأدوات للمحاسبة المختلطة و التقييم—خاصة الذي يفحص—فيما يتعلق بالنظريات الوضعية، الحرجة و التفسيرية للمحاسبة، بالتالي تحديد المجالات التي تحتاج إلى مزيد من البحث.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alcock, P., Millar, R., Hall, K., Lyon, F., Nicholls, A., & Gabriel, M. (2012). Start up and growth: National evaluation of the social enterprise investment fund (SEIF). London: Department of Health Policy Research Programme.
Angroff, R., & McGuire, M. (2003). Collaborative public management: New strategies for local governments. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.
Anheier, H., & Leat, D. (2006). Creative philanthropy. London: Routledge.
Arvidson, M. (2009). Impact and evaluation in the UK third sector: Reviewing literature and exploring ideas. Working Paper 27. Third Sector Research Centre, University of Birmingham, Birmingham.
Arvidson, M., Lyon, F., McKay, S., & Moro, D. (2010). The ambitions and challenges of SROI. Working Paper 49. Third Sector Research Centre, University of Birmingham, Birmingham.
Bagnoli, L., & Megali, C. (2011). Measuring performance in social enterprise. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 40(1), 149–165.
Bernholz, L. (2004). Creating philanthropic capital markets. Hoboken: John Wiley.
Bertotti, M., Leahy, G., & Sheridan, K. (2011). To what extent do social enterprises measure their social and environmental impact? British Journal of Healthcare Management, 17(4), 152–156.
Bishop, M., & Green, M. (2008). Philanthrocapitalism: How the rich can save the world and why we should let them. London: A and C Black.
Bornstein, D. (2004). How to change the world: Social entrepreneurs and the power of new ideas. Oxford UK: Oxford University Press.
Borzaga, C., & Defourny, J. (2001). The emergence of social enterprise. London: Routledge.
Borzaga, C., & Galera, G. (2009). Social enterprise: An international overview of its conceptual evolution and legal implementation. Social Enterprise Journal, 5(3), 210–228.
Boschee, J. (1995). Social entrepreneurship. Across the Board, 32(3), 20–25.
Boschee, J., & McClurg, D. (2003). Toward a better understanding of social entrepreneurship: Some important distinctions. Minnesota: Institute for Social Entrepreneurs.
Bovaird, T., & Loeffler, E. (2003). Evaluating the quality of public governance: Indicators, models and methodologies. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 69(3), 313–328.
Brunsson, N., & Olsen, J. (1993). The reforming organization. London: Routledge.
Bull, M. (2007). Balance: The development of a social enterprise business performance tool. Social Enterprise Journal, 3(1), 49–66.
Chua, W. (1986). Radical developments in accounting thought. The Accounting Review, 61(4), 601–632.
Clarke, J. (2004). Dissolving the public realm? The logics and limits of neo-liberalism. Journal of Social Policy, 33(1), 27–48.
Covaleski, M. A., Dirsmith, M. W., & Samuel, S. (1996). Managerial accounting research: The contributions of organizational and sociological theories. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 8, 1–35.
Dart, R. (2004). The legitimacy of social enterprise. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 14(4), 411–424.
Defourny, J., & Nyssens, M. (2008). Social enterprise in Europe: Recent trends and developments. Social Enterprise Journal, 4(3), 202–228.
DiMaggio, P., & Anheier, H. (1990). The sociology of nonprofit organizations and sectors. Annual Review of Sociology, 16(1), 137–159.
DiMaggio, P., & Powell, W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160.
Drayton, W. (2002). The citizen sector: Becoming as entrepreneurial and competitive as business. California Management Review, 44(3), 120–132.
Economist. (2006). The rise of the social entrepreneur, 23, February.
Economist. (2009). Saving the world, special report on entrepreneurship, 12, March.
Emerson, J. (2003). The blended value proposition: Integrating social and financial returns. California Management Review, 45(4), 35–51.
Emerson, J., & Twersky, F. (1996). New social entrepreneurs: The success, challenge and lessons of non-profit enterprise creation. San Francisco: The Roberts Foundation.
Emerson, J., Wachowicz, J., & Chun, S. (2000). Social return on investment: Exploring aspects of value creation in the nonprofit sector. San Francisco: REDF.
Fazzi, L. (2012). Social enterprises, models of governance and the production of welfare services. ‘Public Management Review’, 14(3), 359–376.
Flockhart, A. (2005). The use of social return on investment (SROI) and investment ready tools (IRT) to bridge the financial credibility gap. Social Enterprise Journal, 1(1), 29–42.
Gair, C. (2009). SROI II: A call to action for next generation SROI. San Francisco, CA: REDF.
Gambling, T., Jones, R., & Karim, R. (1993). Credible organizations: Self regulation vs. external standard setting in Islamic banks and English charities. Financial Accountability and Management, 9(3), 195–207.
Gray, R. (2002). The social accounting project and accounting organizations and society: Privileging engagement, imaginings, new accountings and pragmatism over critique? Accounting, Organizations and Society, 27(7), 687–708.
Harding, R. (2004). Social enterprise: The new economic engine? Business Strategy Review, 15(4), 39–43.
Hart, T., & Houghton, G. (2007). Assessing the economic and social impact of social enterprise: Feasibility report. Centre for City and Regional Studies: University of Hull.
Hood, C. (1998). The art of the state: Culture, rhetoric, and public management. Oxford UK: Clarendon Press.
Hopwood, A. (1978). Towards an organizational perspective for the study of accounting and information systems. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 3(1), 3–13.
Hopwood, A. (1983). On trying to study accounting in the contexts in which it operates. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 8(3), 287–305.
Hulme, D. (2000). Impact assessment methodologies for microfinance: Theory, experience and better practice. World Development, 28(1), 79–98.
Iverson, A. (2003). Attribution and aid evaluation in international development: A literature review. Ottawa: International Development Research Centre.
Jacobs, A. (2006). Helping people is difficult: Growth and performance in social enterprises working for international relief and development. In A. Nicholls (Ed.), Social entrepreneurship: New paradigms of sustainable social change. Oxford UK: Oxford University Press.
Jepson, P. (2005). Governance and accountability of environmental NGOs. Environmental Science and Policy, 8(5), 515–524.
Jesson, J. K., Matheson, L., & Lacey, F. M. (2011). Doing your literature review: Traditional and systematic techniques. London: SAGE.
John, R. (2006). Venture philanthropy: The evolution of high engagement philanthropy in Europe. Oxford, UK: Skoll Centre for Social Entrepreneurship.
Kanter Moss, R., & Summers, V. D. (1987). Doing well while doing good: Dilemmas of performance measurement in non-profit organizations and the need for a multiple constituency approach. In W. W. Powell (Ed.), The nonprofit sector: A research handbook. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Kendall, J., & Knapp, M. (2000). Measuring the performance of voluntary organizations. Public Management, 2(1), 105–132.
Kerlin, J. A. (2006). Social enterprise in the United States and Europe: Understanding and learning from the differences. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 17(3), 247–263.
Kottak, C. P. (1985). When people don’t come first: Some sociological lessons from completed projects. In M. Cernea (Ed.), Putting people first. New York/London: Oxford University Press.
Laughlin, R. (1999). Critical accounting: Nature, progress and prognosis. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 12(1), 73–78.
Lecy, J. D., Schmitz, H. P., & Swedlund, H. (2012). Non-governmental and not-for-profit organizational effectiveness: A modern synthesis. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 23(2), 434–457.
Leeuw, F., & Vaessen, J. (2009). Impact evaluations and development: NoNIE guidance on impact evaluation. Washington DC: The Network of Networks on Impact Evaluation.
LeGrand, J. (2003). Motivation, agency, and public policy: Of knights and knaves, pawns and queens. Oxford UK: Oxford University Press.
Lewis, J. (2004). The third sector, the state and the European union. In A. Evers & J. L. Laville (Eds.), The third sector in Europe. Cheltenham and Northampton: Edward Elgar.
Lingane, A., & Olsen, S. (2004). Guidelines for social return on investment. California Management Review, 46(3), 116–135.
Lukes, S. (1974). Power: A radical view. London: MacMillan.
Meyer, J., & Scott, W. (1992). Centralization and the legitimacy problems of local government. In J. W. Meyer & W. R. Scott (Eds.), Organizational environments: Ritual and rationality. London: Sage.
Millar, R., & Hall, K. (2012). Social return on investment (SROI) and performance measurement. Public Management Review. doi:10.1080/14719037.2012.698857.
Mohr, L. B. (1995). Impact analysis for program evaluation. London: Sage.
Mook, L., Quarter, J., & Richmond, B. J. (2007). What counts: Social accounting for nonprofits and cooperatives. Cambridge: Sigel Press.
Mook, L., Quarter, J., & Ryan, S. (2012). Business with a difference: Balancing the social and the economic. Toronto: Scholarly Publishing Division, University of Toronto.
Neely, A. (1998). Performance measurement: Why, what and how. London: Economist Books.
Network, S. R. O. I. (2011). Guide du retour social sur investissement (SROI). Cergy-Pontoise: Les Cahiers de l’Institut de l’Innovation et de l’Entrepreneuriat Social-ESSEC IIES.
New Economics Foundation (NEF). (2004). Social return on investment: Valuing what matters. London: New Economics Foundation.
New Economics Foundation (NEF) and Cabinet Office. (2009). A guide to social return on investment. London: Society Media.
New Philanthropy Capital. (2010). Social return on investment. Position paper. London: New Philanthropy Capital.
Nicholls, A. (2006). Social entrepreneurship. In D. Jones-Evans & S. Carter (Eds.), Enterprise and small business: Principles, practice and policy. Harlow: FT Prentice Hall.
Nicholls, J. (2007). Why measuring and communicating social value can help social enterprise become more competitive. London: Cabinet Office.
Nicholls, A. (2008). Social entrepreneurship: New models of sustainable social change. Oxford UK: Oxford University Press.
Nicholls, A. (2009). We do good things, don’t we?: ‘Blended value accounting’ in social entrepreneurship. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 34(6–7), 755–769.
Nicholls, A., & Cho, A. (2006). Social entrepreneurship: The structuration of a field. In A. Nicholls (Ed.), Social entrepreneurship: New paradigms of sustainable social change. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
NONIE The Network of Networks on Impact Evaluation-Subgroup 2. (2008). Impact evaluation guidance. NONIE impact evaluation guidance. Washington DC: NONIE.
Nyssens, M. (2006). Social enterprise. At the crossroads of market, public policies and civil society. New York: Routledge.
Office of the Third Sector. (2009). A guide to social return on investment. London: Cabinet Office.
Olsen, S., & Lingane, A. (2003). Social return on investment: Standard guidelines. Berkeley CA: University of California.
Palmer, P., & Vinten, G. (1998). Accounting, auditing and regulating charities towards a theoretical underpinning. Managerial Auditing Journal, 13(6), 346–355.
Paton, R. (2003). Managing and measuring social enterprises. London: Sage.
Peattie, K., & Morley, A. (2008). Social enterprises: Diversity and dynamics, contexts and contributions. A research monograph. Cardiff: ESRC Centre for Business Relationships.
Potter, C. (2006). Program evaluation. In M. Terre Blanche, K. Durrheim, & D. Painter (Eds.), Research in practice: Applied methods for the social sciences (2nd ed.). Cape Town: UCT Press.
Power, M. (1994a). The audit society. In A. Hopwood & P. Miller (Eds.), Accounting as social and institutional practice. Cambridge: Cambridge Studies in Management.
Power, M. (1994b). The audit explosion. London: Demos.
Power, M. (1997). The audit society: Rituals of verification. Oxford UK: Oxford University Press.
Power, M. (2003). Auditing and the production of legitimacy. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 28(4), 379–394.
Power, M. (2007). Organized uncertainty: Designing a world of risk management. Oxford UK: Oxford University Press.
Power, M., & Laughlin, R. (1996). Habermas, law and accounting. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 21(5), 441–465.
REDF-Roberts Enterprise Development Fund. (2000). SROI methodology. San Francisco, CA: REDF.
REDF-Roberts Enterprise Development Fund. (2009). SROI Act II: A call to action for next generation SROI. San Francisco, CA: REDF.
Ridley Duff, R., Seamour, P., & Bull, M. (2011). Measuring social outcomes and impacts. In R. Ridley Duff & M. Bull (Eds.), Understanding social enterprise: Theory and practice. Sage: London.
Rossi, P., Lipsey, M. W., & Freeman, H. E. (2004). Evaluation: A systematic approach (7th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Rotheroe, N., & Richards, A. (2007). Social return on investment and social enterprise: Transparent accountability for sustainable development. Social Enterprise Journal, 3(1), 31–48.
Ryan, P. W., & Lyne, I. (2008). Social enterprise and the measurement of social value: Methodological issues with the calculation and application of the social return on investment. Education, Knowledge and Economy, 2(3), 223–237.
Ryan, B., Scapens, R. W., & Theobald, M. (2002). Research method & methodology in finance & accounting. London: Thomsom.
Salamon, L. M., & Anheier, N. K. (1997). Defining the non-profit sector. A cross national analysis. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press.
Salmen, L., & Kane, E. (2006). Bridging diversity. Participatory learning for responsive development. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
Scholten, P., Nicholls, J., Olsen, S., & Galimidi, B. (2006). SROI. A guide to social return on investment. Amstelveen: Lenthe Publishers.
Silverman, D. (2010). Doing qualitative research: A practical handbook. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Social Enterprise Partnership UK. (2003). SEP project overview. London: Social Enterprise Partnership UK.
Social Ventures Australia (SVA) Consulting. (2012). Social return on investment, lessons learned in Australia, investing in impact partnership. Sydney: SVA Consulting.
Suchman, M. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 517–610.
Thomas, P. (2004). Performance measurement, reporting and accountability: Recent trends and future directions. Public policy paper series (23). Saskatoon, SK: The Saskatchewan Institute of Public Policy.
Vickers, J., & Wright, V. (Eds.). (1988). The politics of privatization in Western Europe. London: Cass.
White, H. (2009). Theory-based impact evaluation: Principles and practice. Working Paper 3. New Delhi: International Initiative for Impact Evaluation.
White, H. (2010). A contribution to current debates in impact evaluation. Evaluation, 16(2), 153–164.
Whittington, G. (1986). Financial accounting theory: An over-view. The British Accounting Review, 18(1), 4–41.
Young, D. (2006). Social enterprise in the United States and Europe: Understanding and learning from the differences. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 17(3), 246–262.
Zald, M., & Davis, G. (2005). Social change, social theory, and the convergence of movements and organizations. In G. Davis, D. McAdam, W. Scott, & M. Zald (Eds.), Social movements and organization theory. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Zimmerman, J., & Stevens, B. (2006). The use of performance measurement in south carolina nonprofits. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 16(3), 315–316.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Manetti, G. The Role of Blended Value Accounting in the Evaluation of Socio-Economic Impact of Social Enterprises. Voluntas 25, 443–464 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-012-9346-1
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-012-9346-1