Not those option appraisals with one credible option, one clearly ridiculous option and one no change option, but appraisals of credible alternatives to existing services alongside ongoing reflection for more radical overhauls.

It means having a discussion about the relative value of different mixes of changes in different groups of people’s wellbeing. It means having more granular and detailed information about changes that have to be aggregated in order to report to funders and commissioners who often need data to be summarised across groups.

Could we have created more value with the resources we have available?

This thinking process is much less about ‘evaluation to prove’ and much more about constantly trying to create more value for those we are working for, and thinking about the viability of different offers for different sections of people we work with. It means accepting that information is not always designed to be objective but designed to bring more transparency of the issues relating to value to any group that are trying to make decisions to increase value. He reckons that this has led to trust and opportunities that have far outweighed the initial lost income.

Social Value International’s Principles are designed to help maximise value, not just report on how much value has been created. However, in order to embed this approach, organisations will need a culture where the board is asking the question could we have created more value with the resources we have available?

Photo credit: Pierre Rougier