By Evonne Miller

With the 21st century frequently described as the era of sustainability, organisations are expected to produce Triple Bottom Line (TBL) reports outlining their impact on ‘profits, planet and people’.

But what are the social or ethical equivalents of ‘revenue and ‘expenses’ for your organisation?

Unlike indicators for profits and the planet, social impacts aren’t easy to identify and measure. In fact, there is little agreement about how organisations should define or assess their social impact, and no single tool or methodology for social TBL reporting.

Typically, social TBL has been narrowly interpreted as the dollar value of sponsorships and other philanthropic community activities, but this doesn’t take into account broader issues. Factors such as employee health and satisfaction, the safety of products and impact on local communities and consumers should all be  easured to assess an organisation’s social sustainability.

Fortunately, the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) – the most well known sustainability TBL framework – identifies four core social performance indicators:

• Labour Practices – Employment,Labour/Management Relations,Health & Safety, Training & Education,Diversity & Opportunity

• Human Rights – Strategy & Management, Non-Discrimination,Freedom of Association, Collective Bargaining, Child/Forced Labour

• Safety – Community, Bribery & Corruption, Political Contributions

• Product Responsibility – Customer Health & Safety, Products & Services, Respect for Privacy

The GRI has been criticised, as some indicators aren’t relevant for Australian organisations. It’s also purposely vague about measurement, the idea being that organisations can focus on social issues relevant to their own industry and develop their own measures. Unfortunately, this means benchmarks and  comparisons can’t be made overtime or between industries.

Businesses and researchers are currently working to develop a systematic way to calculate overall social performance. I have advocated for the establishment of a quantifiable measure, and with my colleagues have developed a social impact survey utilising pre-existing measures to provide a comparison standard for judgments. For this, we focused on measures of employee andcommunity wellbeing, arguing that there is a minimum of two social impact levels: internal (i.e., employees and suppliers)and external (i.e., customers and community).

It’s a challenge for any organisation,but consumers increasingly expect businesses to be socially accountable. The global Millennium Development Poll on Corporate Social Responsibility found 45% of 25,000 respondents believed companies ‘should set higher ethical standards and help build a better society’. Added to that, 40% had‘thought about punishing a specific company perceived as not socially responsible’. I recommend thinking about how you would measure the social impact – and value – of your organisation and shape the debate over whether, how, why and what social impacts should be measured.

Evonne Miller, PhD, is a social psychologist and senior lecturer in the School of Design at Queensland University of Technology. Her main research interests are social sustainability, social gerontology, community engagement and behaviour change. She can be reached at e.miller@qut.edu.au