10 learnings from the Data Conversations impact survey

The Data Conversations project recently invited cultural professionals and creatives to share their perspectives on impact needs and challenges. Discover the findings - and the learnings!

The Data Conversations for Impact project aims to enhance the societal and economic impact of the Cultural and Creative Industries (CCI) by addressing key challenges in impact design, data literacy, digitalisation and AI adoption.

In particular, Data Conversations will develop a digital impact design and assessment tool, building on successful frameworks like the MeMind Impact Canvas, Museums of Impact self-evaluation and the Europeana Impact Playbook.

To ensure that the tool is as useful as possible to those in the sector, the project recently ran a benchmarking survey which asked cultural professionals and creatives to share their ideas, experiences and requirements around impact assessment, which will inform the development of the tool.

On behalf of the project, we would like to extend our thanks to everyone who took part in the survey, and share 10 things we learned from the responses.

There is a diverse understanding of the meaning of ‘impact’ in the sector. The way that survey respondents understood impact ranged from purposeful and planned change achieved by the activity, to an ephemeral moment, where the cultural activity has made you think. While there are no right or wrong ways of thinking about impact, when we link it to assessment, measurement and reporting culture, we need to focus on the impact that we can capture.
Both one-person operations and huge organisations with over 200 employees) find impact work relevant. The survey received responses from people working for organisations of diverse sizes, from small or one-person operations (13% of total respondents) to large organisations with over 200 employees (11%). This shows that impact work is relevant across the board, regardless of organisational scale.
Size seems to have implications for practice though. Smaller organisations often have multi-tasking roles, where individuals handle everything from artistic creation to reporting, tasks that seem to often be separated in larger organisations. This may influence how impact is understood and which challenges are present, in terms of resources and time.
Management roles are speaking for the sector. Among those who responded to our survey, management and leadership roles were far more common than artistic ones. Because the survey was voluntary, this result mainly tells us about our respondents - but it raises the question of whether administrative perspectives tend to dominate over creative practice in the sector more broadly.
Staff strongly agree that impact work helps improve services, but are less convinced it supports organisational development. Expert insights highlight the opportunity for organisations to utilise impact analysis as a tool for internal development. While a majority of the respondents agreed that working with impact contributes to better services, activities and content, as well as key to reporting and securing funding, fewer were convinced of its role and strategic value for organisational development. This suggests a gap between an operational and strategic understanding of impact that needs to be bridged.
Time and money are tightly linked barriers. A series of survey questions explored the main barriers to impact work - namely time, money and skills. Among these, lack of time emerged as the most pressing challenge. Respondents who reported lack of time as a barrier also tended to report a lack of resources, indicating that time and money constraints often co-occur. The survey results showed a significant correlation between a lack of time and a lack of financial resources for impact work. This suggests that time and money are not isolated challenges, but rather tightly linked barriers that tend to reinforce each other.
Data exists, but isn’t always used. A striking insight from the survey reveals a paradox: many organisations have data - but they don’t use it. A fourth of the respondents agreed with the telling statement, ‘We have all this data, but we don’t use it,’ highlighting that the challenge is not just technical, but strategic: data is often collected without being meaningfully integrated into decision-making. Another third of respondents were unsure about the statement, suggesting not only under-use, but also uncertainty about what data exists and how it could support organisational goals. This points to a need for more open and strategic conversations about data, not only about tools and access, but about purpose, value, and use.
Long-term impact measurement is rare but happening. Satisfaction rates and return visits are commonly tracked, but deeper insights - like long-term impact or behavioural change - are rarely explored. Respondents acknowledge the value of long-term impact, but note that it is difficult to measure. While only a minority of the organisations (39%) measure long-term impact, this number is still surprisingly big given the challenges and how expensive long-term measurement can be.
Almost one-third of respondents feel a balanced budget matters for impact. However, organisations are eager for non-monetary indicators, showing a tension between economic and societal measures of value. Despite the interest in non-monetary measures of impact, financial metrics still predominate in the cultural and creative sectors, reflecting institutional and funding pressures, especially from governing bodies. The pressure to ‘balance the books’ can hinder more extensive evaluations of organisational practices.
AI and tech tools provoke mixed and opposite reactions. The survey reveals complex and sometimes contradictory attitudes towards AI and digital tools in the cultural and creative sectors. While many respondents welcomed the potential of tech-enabled impact analysis, AI-specific features sparked noticeable mixed reactions. Privacy and sustainability were flagged as critical issues, as well as concerns about trust, oversimplification and AIs inability to handle nuances in qualitative data.
Impact reporting often ignores audiences. Understanding your audience is central to creating meaningful cultural experiences. Yet, the survey shows that many organizations either lack audience data or aren’t sure if they have it at all. Additionally, while the cultural and creative industries acknowledge the importance of communicating impact to general audiences, it rarely seems to translate into practice when it comes to impact reporting. Impact reporting remains closely tied to funding cycles, often at the expense of deeper audience insight.

Article authors: Georgia Evans, Elena Coli, Josefin Waldenström and Pille Pruulmann-Vengerfeldt.

05 Nov 2025

10 learnings from the Data Conversations impact survey

Get in touch