By Tasha Seitz
Financial investors weigh risk, return and liquidity in their investment decisions; impact investors weigh all of these factors, plus impact. Intentionality and measurement are fundamental aspects that define impact investing, yet impact measurement is an extremely difficult challenge.
Impact can be defined in many ways, and different investors may have very different goals and interests. Some types of impact may be “easy” to measure (i.e. how much have unbanked or underbanked customers saved by using this fintech service vs. incumbent solutions?); others much more difficult (i.e. how has this advocacy platform influenced public policy?). Counting “lives touched” is unsatisfying, yet the cost of conducting randomized control trials that serve as the “gold standard” for measurement can be lengthy and prohibitively expensive. And given the variety in the types of impact across a portfolio, and across funds, how do you “roll up” impact measurement in any kind of meaningful way?
The challenges are many, and measurement has been an important discussion in the field of impact investing for many years. In a recent articlein the London School of Economics Business Review, Brian Trelstad, Partner at Bridges US, argues that impact management — articulation of an investor’s impact objectives — is an important precursor to effective measurement.
At Impact Engine, we sit down with entrepreneurs during our due diligence process to talk about the impact they hope to achieve, the target populations they want to serve, and how they might measure and report on the impact they’re having, both now and in the future. We often see a […]