This paper reports the collaborative achievements of transformative service researchers and nonprofit practitioners and their learning processes for refugee integration and social impact measurement. The purpose of the paper is to present the process of a cocreating a toolkit designed to help non-profit organizations (NPOs) measure and communicate the social impact of their initiatives. Collaboration with a UK-based NPO resulted in the development of a practical toolkit designed to identify and report social impacts that are typically challenging or difficult to measure.
Following a three-phase co-creative process model over two years, the project team began by co-defining impact metrics in partnership with an NPO specializing in personalized employment support, language and digital skills training and job search assistance for refugees. This led to the codesign of a social impact measurement strategy. The final phase involved coproducing a social impact reporting toolkit that offers comprehensive guidance to bridge existing gaps in measurement practices and empowers NPO employees to effectively measure and communicate social impact.
The study found that, although the NPO collected extensive data, its focus was primarily on individual-level economic outcomes, often overlooking broader social impact measurements. The cocreated toolkit addresses this oversight by providing resources for a holistic assessment.
The toolkit equips NPOs with a user-friendly resource for effectively measuring and communicating the social impact of their initiatives, supporting their operational and funding requirements.
By improving how social impact is measured and communicated, the toolkit can positively influence funding decisions and enhance the support available to refugees, thereby facilitating their integration into host societies.
This paper highlights two key contributions: (1) the development of a co-produced social impact reporting toolkit consisting of five modules and (2) the co-creation process itself. Through collaboration between the academic team and the NPO, the toolkit was designed to meet both theoretical standards and practical needs, tailored specifically for small to medium-sized NPOs, particularly those working in refugee integration.
1. (Impact) problem generation and impact to be achieved
Measuring and communicating social impact has become crucial for non-profit organizations (NPOs) seeking to demonstrate the effectiveness of their initiatives, advocate for policy change and maintain public confidence in the sector. Moreover, donors, granting bodies and other funding sources increasingly require NPOs to provide evidence of their impact and demonstrate the value of their work. However, the complex nature of social impact makes it challenging to identify and communicate (Keeling and Marshall, 2022), particularly when addressing multifaceted issues such as refugee integration. Many NPOs lack the resources and skills to effectively measure and communicate their social impact, further compounding this challenge.
In 2023, the UK granted refugee status to over 160,000 individuals, the highest number since records began in 1984. Over 200 NPOs support these individuals, offering a range of services from legal aid and housing assistance to language support and integration programs. The diversity of these NPOs’ approaches underscores the need for a flexible yet robust social impact measurement tool. Our partner, a UK-based NPO, has been a leading employment-focused organization for refugees since 2016, assisting approximately 4,000 refugees annually with personalized employment support, language and digital skills training and job search. The NPO differentiates itself through a holistic approach to refugee support, emphasizing long-term integration and employment outcomes. Their strategy involves segmenting support models, enhancing accessibility and fostering impactful partnerships with the private and public sectors.
As the refugee situation continues to evolve, these NPOs must demonstrate their impact effectively to secure funding, optimize their services and achieve their strategic objectives. As such, our research contributes both a practical toolkit and insights from the collaborative development process designed to support NPOs in measuring and communicating their vital contributions in a resource-efficient manner, which aligns with their goals to be data-led and evidence-based in their approach. We identified the critical challenge of measuring and communicating social impact through multiple direct discussions with the NPO representatives regarding day-to-day operations over two years. As highlighted by an NPO representative:
[…] demonstrating the social impact of our initiatives on refugees and also the partnering businesses becomes crucial in ensuring sustained and future funding from statutory service funders, charity service funders and corporate funders. However, we do not have a strategy nor the tools to assess social impact systematically. (NPO Statement, February 2024)
This impact article details how we developed a collaborative approach for measuring and communicating social impact by coproducing a practical toolkit with our partner NPO. The following sections document our collaborative journey. This process involves three key steps:
co-defining outcomes and impacts;
codesigning a social outcome measurement system; and
coproducing a reporting toolkit.
Throughout this article, we use the term “impact” in two distinct ways. First, as intended in the European Journal of Marketing impact articles (Scott and Mende, 2022), we use “impact” to report the achievements within the research-practitioner collaboration and learning process. Second, the term “(social) impact” refers to the long-term achievements of social projects on family, community or societal levels, as commonly described in academia (Ebrahim and Rangan, 2014) and practice (Phineo, 2016).
2. Working with stakeholders
Collaboration with nonacademic stakeholders can take various forms and levels, and successful collaboration often requires ongoing and iterative efforts. The partnership between the research team and the NPO began with a foundational meeting at the 12th SERVSIG conference in Glasgow, UK, in 2022. An employee of our partner NPO participated as a practitioner panelist and shared insights from their work on refugee labor integration. The partnership was further strengthened in June 2023 at the Transformative Consumer Research Conference held at the Royal Holloway University of London. The dialogical format of the conference facilitated an in-depth exchange of ideas, allowing the research team to learn about the challenges refugees face in the UK, such as long asylum case processing times, employment restrictions and language and cultural barriers. The discussions highlighted the NPO’s crucial role in enhancing refugees’ entry into the workforce and the challenge of measuring the social impact of these initiatives. The NPO representative indicated the benefits of collaborating with an academic team, particularly in developing a robust social impact measurement approach and creating a practical toolkit to improve their practices.
Following the conference, the research team engaged in internal brainstorming sessions and workshops with an NPO representative to develop strategies for social impact measurement. A workshop was held in November 2023 to refine the partnership’s strategic direction and goals. In December 2023, the research team and the NPO representative met again to review the identified challenges and strategize solutions, resulting in the decision to hold a collaborative workshop involving the NPO’s leadership and case managers. The collaboration reached a pivotal moment in February 2024, with a virtual workshop focused on impact measurement, followed by a virtual workshop in April 2024 to further discuss the co-creation and learning process.
Throughout the partnership, the research team encountered and managed several challenges, including the academic language barrier, the tendency to isolate problems and coordinating timelines. Working closely together enriched the knowledge of both the research team and the NPO about how social impact was understood, investigated and achieved. The NPO’s leadership and case managers were actively involved in the research process, providing valuable insights and feedback and ensuring the feasibility and relevance of the proposed solutions. The collaboration also highlighted the importance of adaptability and continuous communication when working with nonacademic stakeholders. Maintaining an open dialogue enabled the research team and the NPO to navigate challenges, refine their approach and work more effectively toward their shared mission of supporting refugees.
3. The knowledge exchange, (co-)creation and learning process
A key component of successful collaboration on social impact measurement and communication was the knowledge exchange between the NPO and the academic team. Recognizing both the extensive literature on social impact measurement and the importance of co-creation “with, rather than for, people” (Rundle-Thiele et al., 2021, p. 180), we prioritized establishing a shared understanding of social impact with the NPO’s leaders and case managers.
The knowledge exchange and co-creation process required active engagement from key stakeholders within the NPO, each bringing essential expertise to the collaboration. This included a case manager, herself a refugee, who contributed unique insights drawn from personal experiences and professional interactions with refugees. Her involvement ensured that the toolkit was grounded in the real-world challenges faced by the population that the NPO serves. A representative from the data team contributed insights into the NPO’s existing social impact measurement practices, ensuring that the toolkit aligned with regulatory standards and was technically feasible within the organization’s current structure. Additionally, a project manager, who works closely with companies employing refugees, ensured that the impact metrics were relevant and actionable for corporate partners, enhancing the toolkit’s practical applicability across different contexts.
Through iterative discussions and workshops with the NPO’s leaders and case managers (as outlined in Section 2), we explored perspectives on the social impact of the NPO’s work and measurement strategy needs. These insights were analyzed through collaborative discussion and interpretation among research team members, focusing on identifying key themes and requirements. Drawing on this analysis, we designed a collaborative strategy for knowledge exchange and co-creation, aligning with the European Journal of Marketings call for “co-problematizing, co-designing and coproducing constitutive practices with nonacademic stakeholders.” Our collaboration followed a three-phase co-creation process, with each phase incorporating iterative feedback loops to ensure continuous refinement and adaptation of the toolkit. This process is explained in detail in the following sections.
3.1 Phase 1: co-define impact
In this initial phase, we engaged in discussions with the NPO’s leaders and case managers to explore different perspectives on defining the term “impact.” This foundational step for developing a toolkit was not a one-time event but an ongoing dialogue that began in June 2022 and continued to evolve as we delved deeper into the subject matter. Our knowledge exchange taught us how the NPO measures and communicates its impact. The NPO shared that they currently define their impact using the terms “output” and “outcomes,” with outputs referring to tangible metrics such as hours of support provided by the NPO to the involved corporate business partners and outcomes encompassing achievements relevant to both refugees and partner businesses.
In turn, we shared with the NPO that there is an ongoing debate in academic circles regarding the definition, conceptualization and measurement of impact. Some authors define impact as a significant change in people’s lives at the individual level. By contrast, others use the term to describe long-lasting results and achievements at the community or societal level (Ebrahim and Rangan, 2014). Moreover, we discussed the focal points of different social impact models (see Web Appendix), including the Social Return on Investment Analysis, which was seen as too cost/investment-oriented, and the comparability of costs in different cooperations, contexts seemed problematic; The “Co-create-Build-Engage” model (Rundle-Thiele et al., 2021), which was perceived as very established in academia. The model focuses clearly on the idea of co-creation and equal partnership interactions, which, according to our partner NPO, cannot always be achieved to the full extent with refugees; Finally, the more practice-oriented “Social Impact Navigator” model by Phineo (2016) was chosen based on two reasons. (1) Language and logic model: Phineós model logic corresponded most closely to the one already used in the NPO. Phineo distinguishes between inputs (what is invested in a project), outputs (services and products offered), outcomes (results at the individual level) and impacts (results of a project on the societal level). (2) Simplicity and implementation: The model was considered to be very easy to understand, and our partner found it very helpful that Phineo offers guidelines and additional information free of charge and also offers consultancy to implement the model in practice, if needed (www.phineo.org/en/impact-analyses).
In addition to discussions with the NPO on conceptualizations and models, we also shared information on the current social impact measurement. Our knowledge exchange revealed the NPO’s current impact reporting practices, including comprehensive yearly impact reports that provide a detailed breakdown of the organization’s reach and effectiveness, showcasing both quantitative measures and qualitative client testimonials. This understanding of the NPO’s existing approach informed our collaborative efforts to design and implement a robust social impact reporting toolkit.
3.2 Phase 2: codesign a social impact measurement strategy
In early 2024, we built upon our foundational understanding by codesigning a social impact measurement strategy after a successful workshop with the NPO leadership. The meeting started with the research team outlining the conceptual underpinnings of prior Transformative Service Research (TSR). We highlighted TSR’s evolution from Transformative Consumer Research, emphasizing its role in enhancing human well-being through service (Anderson et al., 2013). Specifically, we referenced Nasr and Fisk’s (2018) study on TSR’s significance in addressing the complex challenges of the refugee crisis. They noted that the global refugee crisis was a missing topic in service research. Nasr and Fisk advocated focusing on “relieving suffering” as a more apt perspective for aiding refugees.
Additionally, we clarified to our NPO partner the distinctions made between individual, family/community and societal levels in Boenigk et al.’s (2021a) refugee service experience framework, which are pivotal for our measurement strategy. Importantly, we agreed with the NPO to adopt the “3A integration process framework” for structuring the social impact measurement strategy, as detailed by Boenigk et al. (2021b). By adopting this framework, we structured our strategy around the Awareness, Alignment and Access phases. These phases describe refugees’ journeys from post-arrival awareness to securing employment, which is pivotal for their integration.
Figure 1 outlines a three-phase approach to refugee integration facilitated by service. The first phase is the “Awareness Phase,” where refugees begin their journey post-arrival as they settle in the host country. This phase is crucial for refugees to become aware of their new environment and the available resources. The second phase is the “Alignment Phase,” which is central to the process. In this phase, refugees engage with the service to improve their skills and understanding of accessing critical services. This phase is the core, where significant effort is invested in helping refugees align their abilities and knowledge with the host country’s labor market and society requirements. The third and final phase is the “Access Phase,” where the ultimate goal is for refugees to secure permanent employment. This phase marks the successful culmination of the integration process, as refugees achieve stable employment and presumably become self-sufficient members of the host society.
The research and NPO team focused on assessing impact primarily during the alignment and access phases. In both phases, we reflected on the importance of the NPO’s current outcomes and impact measures and discussed their suitability for a social impact measurement strategy. In its original form, the NPO focuses during the alignment phase on preparing refugees for labor market integration, with outcomes centered on improving language skills, application readiness and job interview preparation. These outcomes can be translated into measurable indicators such as the number of applications submitted and invitations received for job interviews. Conversely, in the Access Phase, the primary goal of the NPO is to fulfill its mission and ensure refugees’ entry into the job market or higher education. Here, the outcomes related to employment and educational attainment take precedence.
Our research team’s observations during the meeting reflected a common issue found in the literature. While the NPO collects extensive data, its focus remains primarily on individual-level economic outcomes, rather than encompassing broader social impact measurements. In line with Phase 1, “co-define impact,” we agreed that social impact measurement should assess and quantify the societal effects of a specific intervention, program or initiative. This process evaluates how an organization’s activities contribute to achieving intended positive changes in specific target populations, going beyond a sole focus on individual outcomes. Although such interventions or programs may generate unintended spillover effects, both positive and negative, for other stakeholders in society, measuring these effects was beyond the scope of the assessment tool developed in this project. It was agreed that the existing indicators used by the NPO were not designed to capture broader social impacts. Following this, the research team and the NPO exchanged views on the limitations of the current approach and identified key improvement areas for developing a more adaptable toolkit. The research team summarized these into four main challenges, which were then slightly refined by the NPO.
Challenge 1: The partner revealed divergent measurement preferences among stakeholders (local governments, grant bodies, corporate partners, etc.). While these stakeholders often focus on tracking individual-level outcomes, such as employment or education access, the NPO highlighted the significance of softer metrics related to refugees’ well-being. They advocated empowering refugees to establish their definitions of “meaningful employment,” considering the ideal job and the value of workplace engagement and personal development;
Challenge 2: The NPO identified challenges in collecting qualitative data. Despite using case studies and focus groups, there was a clear desire for more qualitative insights in their impact measurement approach;
Challenge 3: More comprehensive overviews of available measurement tools, including online surveys, key performance indicators, interview guidelines and measurement scales, are lacking; and
Challenge 4: Selecting and using appropriate statistical analyses proved challenging. Our NPO partner noted that the research team's expertise could be particularly valuable in this area.
When inquiring how we, as a research team, could contribute to their social impact measurement efforts, our NPO partner emphasized the importance of providing a practical toolkit that addresses the identified challenges. This toolkit should offer social impact measures, guidance on data collection for social impact measures, focus on both quantitative and qualitative data and provide templates for reporting and analysis. Crucially, the toolkit should be accessible and understandable to all employees, whether they are part of the data team requiring in-depth analysis or client or corporate partner workers needing guidance on data collection methods.
Throughout the process, we worked closely with the NPO to develop recommendations to ensure a comprehensive social impact assessment, focusing on achieving the best possible well-being outcomes for all stakeholders involved. This strategy involves measuring and understanding the more profound implications of our study and its resonance in the real world. Prompted by stakeholder input, researchers and practitioners found themselves compelled to reevaluate their understanding of impact, with researchers often focusing on long-term impact – a challenging metric to measure – while practitioners predominantly engaged with more short-term outcomes, which, while valuable, may not fully capture social impact.
3.3 Phase 3: co-produce a concrete social impact reporting toolkit
From February to April 2024, we coproduced a comprehensive social impact reporting toolkit with the NPO to address the challenges and requirements identified in the earlier phases. The toolkit’s iterative development also incorporated academic feedback during the review process, refining it to meet academic standards. Reviewer suggestions strengthened the qualitative analysis techniques, emphasizing storytelling to capture the complexity and diversity of participant experiences. This highlights the value of integrating diverse perspectives. Figure 2 illustrates the structure of this co-produced toolkit, while Figure 3 compares the prior social impact measures used by the NPO with the newly suggested measures and outcomes.
This phase involved multiple iterative design sessions and meetings with key NPO stakeholders to refine objectives, adjust strategies and incorporate feedback at every stage of development. The first step was to agree on the primary objective of the toolkit: to measure and assess the broader social impact of the NPO’s initiatives more effectively. In collaboration with the NPO, we further developed and agreed upon the following sub-objectives for the toolkit:
Comprehensive guidance: The toolkit provides step-by-step instructions, customizable templates and interactive training opportunities to enable the NPO's employees to measure and assess the broader social impacts of their labor market integration initiatives. It offers guidance for incorporating new scales and research indicators that are more aligned with social impact measurement;
Bridging the gap: The toolkit facilitates evidence-based decision-making and fosters a deeper understanding of the social outcomes generated by refugee integration programs by offering practical resources and guidance; and
Empowering employees: Through accessible language and a user-friendly approach, the toolkit seeks to empower practitioners at all levels of expertise, enhance their social impact measurement practices and enable them to derive actionable insights from the data.
The research team introduced new scales and research indicators, which were collaboratively evaluated with the NPO to ensure they were appropriately aligned with the organization’s evolving needs. The toolkit incorporates practical resources and guidance suggested by both the NPO and the research team, with the flexibility to be continuously refined and adapted based on feedback from the NPO employees who will use it.
At this stage, the research team and the NPO agreed on a coproduced toolkit consisting of five modules (see Figure 2):
Module 1: Social impact measurement:
Comprehensive guide: This section provides instructions for identifying and measuring broader social impacts, including new concepts, scales and indicators derived from refugee integration research.
Templates: This section offers customizable templates for assessing social impacts, such as community integration and well-being. These templates can be adapted to suit the specific needs and contexts of different refugee programs.
Data analysis tools: This section includes resources and tutorials for analyzing social impact data, such as identifying trends, correlations and patterns in social outcomes. Further, it involves analysis for the data team concerning uplift modeling, which allows for tackling the specifically mentioned problem of measuring the impact of single interventions;
Module 2: Qualitative data analysisA primary challenge in impact measurement is the decentralized nature of qualitative data collection, making it crucial for all employees to adhere to a uniform standard.
Interviewing techniques: This section offers practical guidance for conducting qualitative interviews with refugees. It covers topics such as developing interview guidelines, asking open-ended questions and collecting deeper insights. Tips on transcribing interviews and organizing qualitative data are also provided.
Focus group facilitation: This section outlines best practices for facilitating focus group discussions with refugees, including creating a safe and inclusive environment, managing group dynamics and eliciting rich qualitative data. Sample discussion guides and icebreaker activities are included to assist facilitators.
Qualitative data analysis software: To support NPOs in managing their growing qualitative data, this section introduces appropriate software tools, such as MAXQDA, with tutorials on coding qualitative data, identifying themes and drawing meaningful conclusions from textual data. Users are cautioned that relying solely on software can sometimes prioritize patterns over the deeper, nuanced understanding of individual experiences.
Qualitative analysis techniques: This section provides an overview of various qualitative analysis methods, including thematic, narrative and interpretive analyses. It emphasizes the importance of these techniques in capturing the full depth and complexity of refugee experiences. Practical examples and step-by-step guidelines are included to assist researchers in applying these techniques effectively in their analysis. Please note: This was adapted based on reviewer feedback and aligned with input from the NPO; and
Module 3: Template library
Standardized templates: This section provides ready-to-use templates for consent forms, interview guides, focus group protocols, and observation checklists that ensure ethical standards and support systematic data collection.
Reporting templates: This section includes sample reporting templates to guide users in summarizing quantitative findings, presenting qualitative insights, integrating both types of data into comprehensive impact reports for stakeholders and ensuring consistency and clarity in the reporting; and
Module 4: Case studies and best practices
Success stories: This section features case studies of successful interventions and impact measurement strategies implemented by other organizations, showcasing best practices and lessons learned in refugee labor market integration.
Storytelling and narrative approaches: This section features methods and techniques that emphasize the narrative aspect of data, ensuring that participants’ voices are conveyed more vividly and authentically. Please note: This was added to the toolkit based on reviewer feedback and aligned with input from the NPO.
Expert insights: This section includes interviews with experts in refugee integration and impact measurement who offer valuable insights and guidance for practitioners; and
Module 5: Interactive workshops and webinars
Virtual Training Sessions: This module enables the NPO to host interactive workshops and webinars covering social impact measurement methodologies, data collection techniques and analysis approaches. These sessions offer opportunities for hands-on activities and discussions with field experts.
4. Key impact outcome
The key outcomes of our collaboration with the NPO are twofold:
the provision of a coproduced social impact reporting toolkit consisting of five modules; and
the co-creation process itself.
4.1 (1) Provision of a coproduced social impact reporting toolkit
The toolkit was presented to the NPO in April 2024. The presentation was designed to introduce the features and intended applications of the new tool. Built through co-creation, it offers modular implementation flexibility and integrated templates to allow step-by-step implementation and reduce resource burden.
Figure 3 compares the metrics and tools currently used by the NPO to measure impact with those suggested by the research team and agreed to by the NPO. This comparison illustrates how the codesigned social impact measures build on preexisting measures and add value by addressing the NPO’s identified needs and aligning them with contemporary research and best practices.
While the measurement strategy before the collaboration effectively tracks individual-level hard outcomes, such as the number of refugees in employment, training or internships, it leaves room to capture additional dimensions of individual outcomes, such as the quality and meaningfulness of the work the clients engage in. The proposed toolkit complements this by suggesting the measurement of soft outcomes such as job satisfaction, job commitment, job quality and perceived qualification-job position fit. Further, professional language certificate tests should also measure self-reported outcomes, such as language improvements.
The main improvement suggested is to measure social impact on a family, community and societal level, which is not yet part of the NPO’s social impact measurement strategy. Methodologically, we proposed conducting qualitative interviews with family and community members or administering family well-being surveys. At the societal level, we suggested analyzing observable UK labor market panel data to determine whether the proportion of refugees in employment has increased over time, thereby addressing the shortage of skilled workers in the UK. The NPO found this to be particularly compelling. However, while societal-level data can provide useful context, we want to highlight the limitations of broader metrics in directly attributing outcomes to the NPO’s activities. Therefore, the focus should be on demonstrating community-level outcomes such as increased employment rates among the NPO’s beneficiaries, which more accurately reflects the NPO’s contributions.
In terms of stakeholders, the NPO’s data team expressed the need for a toolkit to incorporate guidance on advanced data analysis and measurement approaches (Challenge 4). Module 1 addresses this need by introducing statistical techniques, such as uplift modeling, to assess program effectiveness. By equipping the NPO with these tools, the toolkit enables deeper, more actionable insights, empowering staff to derive greater value from existing data. Further, the toolkit includes standardized scales commonly used in research, which the team found particularly valuable, given the challenge of sourcing reliable and valid measures. Finally, the toolkit provides a centralized framework within the NPO to measure social impact.
4.2 (2) Co-creation process
The co-creation process was designed to be collaborative, iterative and highly responsive to the NPO’s specific needs rather than a top-down imposition of theoretical models. This approach ensured that the final toolkit was practical and relevant. Furthermore, the co-creation process not only brought together the NPO and the research team but also united diverse stakeholders within the NPO, fostering shared engagement.
The co-creation process provided critical insights into the challenges encountered along the way, which were the key to coproducing a useful and impactful tool.
A major challenge throughout the three stages was reconciling the diverse priorities of stakeholders within the NPO. While the leadership prioritized “hard” impact measures, such as the number of refugees securing jobs, case managers focused more on “soft” impact metrics related to the refugees’ well-being. Through ongoing dialogue and multiple feedback loops, we were able to strike a balance, ensuring that the toolkit addressed both types of metrics. This alignment was crucial for ensuring the toolkit’s relevance across all levels of the organization and its actual implementation.
Another challenge was the NPO’s limited resources regarding time and staffing. Therefore, it is essential to develop a comprehensive and manageable toolkit that is easy to implement. We continuously co-refined the toolkit to ensure that it did not add significant administrative burden. Therefore, the toolkit was designed with a modular structure, allowing phased implementation to ease the process.
In addition, many NPO staff members had little formal training in data collection or interview techniques. Because we worked with the data team to incorporate social impact metrics, it was important to keep the toolkit accessible. We simplified the technical language and implemented skill development, empowering the NPO staff to confidently and effectively use the toolkit. To support this, we included virtual training sessions (Module 5) and ready-to-use templates.
Collecting data from populations experiencing vulnerability, such as refugees, required careful ethical considerations. We had to ensure that data collection methods respected the dignity and privacy of beneficiaries, which meant designing surveys and interviews to be sensitive to their experiences. The co-creation process involved ongoing discussions with NPO staff to ensure that all methods used were culturally and ethically appropriate.
Another key challenge was to ensure the toolkit’s applicability beyond the involvement of the research team. Thus, we discussed how long it will take to systematically integrate the new measurement tool for the content of all five modules one by one. Given the NPO’s constraints and typical project cycles, we anticipate that fully realizing and assessing the actual impact of the toolkit may take approximately three to five years, as indicated by the NPO. The co-creative process has begun, and while it is unfolding, our ongoing support and adaptation to the NPO’s feedback remain pivotal to ensure its implementation. Finally, we continue to obtain feedback from the NPO on the tool’s utilization and assess its impact on their initiatives. This ongoing feedback is instrumental in evaluating the toolkit’s effectiveness, leading to any necessary adjustments.
In conclusion, by focusing on a collaborative co-creation and co-production process, we developed a toolkit that is theoretically sound, practical, responsive and sustainable. The challenges faced, from aligning stakeholder priorities to building internal capacity, were crucial in shaping a toolkit that met the NPO’s needs. This process-driven approach, rooted in real-world collaboration, offers valuable insights for future social impact measurement initiatives, particularly for small- to medium-sized charities in the migration sector. The result is an adaptable toolkit that can be tailored to specific organizational contexts. Given the focus of this project and the request from the NPO, the toolkit primarily focuses on evaluating the intended positive impacts of the NPO’s initiatives, programs and efforts. While it does not address the unintended or negative effects of these efforts, future tools could be developed to consider both positive and negative, direct and indirect effects. Such tools could also refine the qualitative methods used, aiming to minimize or eliminate potential social desirability bias and other types of bias that may arise from respondents’ inclination to provide favorable responses to please the NPO or its staff, particularly to secure continued access to initiatives or programs.
5. Ethics of impact
In our collaborative process with the NPO, we jointly defined impact as measurable positive changes in refugees’ lives and their communities, considering both immediate outcomes and long-term societal benefits. While our academic team faced various challenges when collaborating with the NPO and its employees (as discussed in Section 2), ongoing conversations, active listening and empathy during workshops and meetings helped both sides overcome these challenges, thus enhancing our collaboration.
Researching populations experiencing vulnerability has significant ethical challenges (Hugman et al., 2011). We recognize the inherent power imbalances between refugees and support organizations. Our NPO has established ethical guidelines, including a confidentiality policy framework, data protection policy, best practice sessions and trauma-informed care approach. Our toolkit builds upon these, recommending additional measures such as informed consent, cultural sensitivity and addressing power dynamics. Our toolkit incorporates methods to mitigate bias and encourage honest feedback, including anonymous mechanisms, third-party interviews, clear communication of rights, diverse data sources and long-term follow-ups, creating a safe space for feedback without fear of losing support. While our collaboration included an NPO staff member with refugee experience, broader refugee involvement was limited. Future toolkit iterations could benefit from direct engagement with refugees.
The authors would like to thank the cochairs of the 2023 Transformative Consumer Research Dialogical Conference at the Royal Holloway University of London for their support. A special thank you to all the NPO representatives who participated and facilitated this study. This article is a ServCollab research project (www.servcollab.org).
The authors declare that our partner NPO owns both the impact and its measurement. At their request, we have protected the identities of the organization, its employees and refugee clients.
Statements and declarations: No funding was received to assist with the preparation of this manuscript. The authors have no competing interests relevant to the content of this article to declare.
Author contributions: All authors contributed to the study's conception and design. They also wrote the first draft of the manuscript and commented on previous versions. Finally, all authors read and approved the final manuscript.
References
Supplementary material
The supplementary material for this article can be found online.
