This is a 6 part blog series on strategising, planning, budgeting, and implementing social value. The aim is to present the key principles of efficient, meaningful and commercially viable social value delivery.
Social value requires cross-department collaboration. The usual social value cycle contains different phases, ranging from bid readiness to bidding, to actual delivery and finally impact reporting and reviewing. These different phases are often completed by different parts of the business and, therefore, coordination is key.
Social value in procurement is something companies are actively interacting with but are painfully aware that they need to report annually on CSR and monitor ESG KPIs. There are a great number of data points around environmental and social data that companies need to stay on track with monitoring.
Data Collection
MS Excel sheets are currently the primary method used to collect data. Although companies have advanced management systems in place, social value-related data on employment, supply chain, community engagement and environment is often collected manually from disparate systems or downloaded as MS Excel/.csv files. Furthermore, separate Excel sheets are used to modify the structure of the data to be transferred from an operations platform to calculation platforms/metrics platforms, as these systems do not communicate with each other, nor is the data structured in the same way.
Social value, ESG and environmental footprint calculator systems do not follow the same framework or evaluation philosophy. Each system offers different measures (KPIs), and the monetised value of these measures can vary drastically, depending on the calculation method.
There is a need to holistically monitor social value deliverables in a manner that supports the company’s chosen sustainability strategy rather than following one particular framework. Frameworks evolve and change, and various stakeholders require different reporting models based on their chosen frameworks. Therefore, it is important to be able to keep social value data in a format that serves all reporting needs.
Social value reporting in contract work is frequent and time-consuming. There is also a need to avoid ‘double counting’ KPIs and to avoid using the same delivery data in various contract reports. Therefore, contract-specific data on a generic dashboard should be ‘tagged’ in order to be assigned to the contract reporting view. Data from different platforms can be brought to a generic data dashboard, but also by a system transferring MS Excel/.csv files to a compatible format. Additionally, manual entries and other types of automated data queries must be options. In addition to KPI-driven data, including inputs and outputs, there should be qualitative data such as case studies. A contract’s social value delivery presented as historical evidence through a case study is valuable; it can be used in acquiring new contracts.
System security is essential – the system must be GDPR compliant and support the cyber security requirements of each organisation. There is also a need to plan and monitor social value costs. If there is an opportunity to add this element, contract profitability and resource allocations are easier to forecast and evaluate. This will help with internal social value planning approval processes, where there are limitations on what the management team can commit to, and what needs CEO/executive level approvals. It is important to consider that an internal cost model is different from the contract cost model. The data dashboard system should be agile and able to adapt to the maturity of a company’s social value journey.
Reporting
Reporting is a part of the social value cycle that still lacks organisation. Many companies do not effectively monitor or report on their ongoing social value activities. Reporting is essential to understand whether social value has actually been delivered; whether the intended impact was achieved and if the activity is worth investing in in the future.
The current reporting landscape is dominated by monetisation tools that calculate and approximate social value and do not provide evidence of the difference being made. Completing impact reporting to a high standard does not have to mean huge investments. It calls for technology which helps companies to match with organisations that have the capability and tools to report back against donations, volunteering and other partnership contributions.
If the monetised social value is requested, it can be delivered once the qualitative impact is known. Good reporting is beneficiary-led and verified. The motive to get involved should be driven by an interest in the impact and evaluating whether the same investment should be made again. In procurement, proper reporting provides crucial information for any government or local authority body to see whether their procurement budgets were harnessed to create the value they were expecting.
Additionally, reading about impact through case studies, observations, testimonials and reports is powerful in all stakeholder communications. It provides a genuine connection to the cause and an understanding of the difference made by social value activities. For reporting, a combination of qualitative and quantitative data is the optimum.
whatimpact
The most important thing when it comes to data collection and reporting is to have a centralised data management system. whatimpact is excited to announce the launch of a new project (link landing page). Cockpit offers this centralised data management to companies and solves the issue of disorganised and time-consuming data collection and reporting. There is no other product like this on the market, hence why companies turn to spreadsheets and disparate forms of reporting. To learn more, book a demo for Cockpit here.
