Measurement is not the point: better decisions are

For a sector that talks so much about impact, we often get stuck in the mechanics of measuring it. Frameworks. Indicators. Data systems. Reports. Important, yes, writes Simon Faivel. But also, frequently, missing the point.

I’ve spent much of my career working in and around social impact measurement: building strategies, running evaluations, training thousands of people in social value and Social Return on Investment (SROI), and working alongside organisations across Australia and beyond. SVA has given me a platform to see this work across very different contexts – urban, regional, and remote; government, philanthropy, social enterprises, Aboriginal Community Controlled Organisations (ACCOs) and community organisations. 

And the pattern is consistent. The organisations that create the most meaningful change are not the ones with the most sophisticated measurement systems. They are the ones that use evidence – formal and informal – to make better decisions. 

The false comfort of measurement 

Measurement can create a sense of control. If we can define the outcomes, collect the data, and quantify the value, then we can prove impact. And if we can prove it, then surely we’re doing good work. But that logic breaks down quickly. 

Too often, measurement becomes something done to satisfy accountability rather than to inform action. Reports get produced. Numbers get quoted. And then… very little changes. 

I’ve seen beautifully constructed frameworks sit on shelves, disconnected from the day-to-day decisions that actually shape people’s lives. 

And I’ve seen the opposite: organisations with imperfect data, but a deep commitment to listening, learning, and adapting, consistently improving their impact over time. 

What actually matters

The work I keep coming back to is not about measurement as an end in itself. It’s about: 

• Clarity of purpose: being explicit about what you’re trying to change 

• Proximity to people: understanding what is actually happening in communities 

• Feedback loops: creating mechanisms to learn and adapt in real time 

• Decision-making discipline: being willing to change course based on what you learn 

• Proportionality: only collecting what you need. 

This is where measurement earns its keep. It is not in the report but instead in the decisions that are made, that are focussed on what matters most.  

Walking alongside, not evaluating from afar 

Some of the most instructive work I’ve been involved in has been long-term partnerships – where evaluation is not a one-off exercise, but part of an ongoing relationship. Over decades, not months. 

In these contexts, you start to see what real impact looks like: generational change, shifting trajectories, communities shaping their own futures. And you also see how messy, non-linear, and context-dependent that work is. 

You cannot capture that fully in a framework. But you can support it; by listening carefully, by bringing evidence into conversations, and by helping organisations reflect on what’s working and what’s not. 

The power and responsibility of valuing 

Through my work with Social Impact Measurement Network of Australia and Social Value International, I’ve spent a lot of time thinking about how we assign value. What we choose to measure, and how we value it, shapes decisions. 

It determines what gets funded, what gets scaled, and what gets left behind. 

This is not a technical exercise. It’s a question of power. Whose voices are included? Whose outcomes matter? Who decides?  If we are not careful, measurement can reinforce existing power structures rather than challenge them. 

A different starting point 

So when I work with organisations now, I start in a different place. 

Not: What should we measure? 

But: What decisions are you trying to make – and what do you need to know to make them better? 

It moves measurement from the periphery to the centre of how organisations operate. It is not a compliance task, but rather a core part of strategy and leadership. 

Where to from here 

The social sector doesn’t need more measurement for its own sake. It needs better use of evidence. 

That means being more honest about what we know and don’t know. Being more willing to adapt. And being more deliberate about whose perspectives shape our understanding of value. And this is more pronounced right now, with the use of technology and AI.

Measurement still matters. Deeply. But only if it helps us do the thing we’re all here to do: make better decisions, so that people and communities can thrive.