Value the intangible

One of the most challenging actions in impact evaluation is certainly understanding intangible impacts. How to capture (and to measure) the changes of perspectives in audiences, providing seeds of inspiration, etc.?

One of the crucial reasons why CCIs often focus on reporting outcomes rather than trying to understand impact is the difficulties in understanding what can or can not be measured. More often than not, a pragmatic approach to impact measurement leads to measuring what is easy rather than what is actually relevant.

Many of the people interviewed by the Data Conversations team said they primarily relied on the number of visitors, customers, service users, and some went as far as tracking return visits or so-called repeat customers. While the interviewees were critical of the limitations of simply counting, they were often unable to add other data collection methods.

One of the conflicts that emerged from the interviews is the tension between what is perceived to be scientific methods and "other" impact evidence. CCIs are often concerned about methodological validity, and this causes many to neglect any impact work, as the methods are perceived as too complicated and out of reach for a CCI.

At the same time, many insist that the qualitative approach should be seen as an equally (if not more) valid way of providing evidence, arguing that interviews, witness accounts, personal narratives, and photos are able to provide a more compelling impact evidence.

When considering impact measurements, it is important to capture the empathetic and emotional responses of the audiences, which are difficult to capture with traditional survey instruments. The collection of emotional responses can be a useful and impactful way of understanding the audiences.

30 Mar 2026

Value the intangible

Get in touch