The following is a review of the (2016) publication, which presents a Volunteer Resources Balanced Scorecard (VRBSc) model, for use in evaluating the impact of an organisation’s volunteering engagement.
https://www.energizeinc.com/store/measuring_impact_volunteers
This publication is a useful addition to the debate around establishing sound and user-friendly means of assessing the impact of their volunteer engagement, and makes a helpful attempt at adapting Kaplan and Norton’s balanced Scorecard.
However a couple of points for consideration are:
A. Review of literature
This needs a more comprehensive approach to support a stronger argument.
For example the report (on page 11) states:
“We began by doing extensive research to see if there were any measurement tools or approaches already in use that captured the impact of volunteer engagement in a more meaningful way—and found nothing of value.”
This comment is unsupported and also would appear to be inaccurate. As such it undermines the publication’s findings and conclusions.
A more credible review of literature could incorporate a critical evaluation of the following:
1. Hager and Brudney (2004)
Identified five other categories, aside from cost saving, and cited these as:
(i) Adding value to current services.
(ii) Providing services that could not otherwise be provided.
(iii) Increased public support (via community relations and fundraising).
(iv) Detailed attention to the people served by the organisation.
(v) Access to specialised skills by volunteers.
https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/58191/411125-Balancing-Act.PDF
2. The Volunteering Impact Assessment Toolkit (IVR, 2001 – updated, 2015)
Outlines 5 types of ‘capital’ that volunteering creates
(i) Physical capital: Services/outputs (e.g. no. of hours given, patients supported etc.)
(ii) Human capital: Skills acquired and personal development
(iii) Economic capital: Financial and economic effects of volunteering
(iv) Social capital: The development of a cohesive community, networks and relationships
(v) Cultural capital: A shared sense of cultural identity (including language and heritage)
https://www.scribd.com/document/355507899/Sample-from-The-volunteering-Impact-Assessment-Toolkit
In addition, whilst the publication below postdates the development of the VRBSc model, the categories cited for impact measurement provide further evidence of the ongoing search for more sophisticated analysis of the value of volunteering engagement.
3. Volunteering impact measurement (Scottish Volunteer Forum, 2018)
Presents several categories for impact measurement
(i) Securing funding
(ii) Driving performance
(iii) Reporting to funders and stakeholders
(iv) Demonstrating progress against organisational goals
(v) Marketing and promotion
(vi) Volunteer recruitment
(vii) Improving practice
NB This toolkit also references a range of other volunteer impact measurement resources
https://www.volunteerscotland.net/media/1396801/so_what.pdf
B. The VRBSc model
The report (on page 11) states:
“With input from many of our colleagues who brainstormed commonalities and helped us to synthesize and refine the results, we identified these four perspectives for the VRBSc:
• Build Volunteer Capacity
• Enhance the Client and Staff Experience
• Develop Internal and External Partnerships
• Commit to Quality Improvement
There needs to be more evidence of how this input from colleagues was informed by the review of literature, and how this input resulted in the identification of the four themes that make up the VRBSc model.
For example, it appears that there is some synergy between these four categories and those cited in the various models above. However there does need to be a stronger rationale for the deviation from Kaplan and Norton’s original categories (Finance; Customers; Learning & Growth ; and Internal Business Processes).
Attend (2011) utilised categories close to those of the original Balanced Scorecard model to assess the impact of engaging with disabled volunteers, which would suggest that more justification for deviating from this model in a volunteering context is required. http://www.attend.org.uk/node/1118
Concluding comment
Despite the limitations outlined above, this publication and the proposed VRBSc model does has some intuitive value for organisations seeking to develop their thinking around developing a more strategic approach to assessing the impact of their volunteer engagement.