Social Accounting for Sustainability

The basic function of any organization, i.e. that which legitimizes it socially, is to create value for society as a whole; however concern for the economic and financial factors involved in all trading activities has resulted in the development of accounting focused on these instrumental issues. The successful development of this accounting has led to results concerned with the actual purpose of organizations being relegated or overshadowed. This chapter analyses the different theories that make economic results a good indicator or social value: transaction cost theory, contract theory, agency theory, etc. These are contrasted with a system-based outlook taken from stakeholder theory, seen as a more suitable paradigm for understanding the inherent nature of organizations and their consequent function in society. Finally, the main indicators being developed are reviewed in an attempt to visualize the social value generated fundamentally by companies.

The main problem is that we only look systematically at the financial value created or destroyed by firms, since conventional accounting is only concerned with reflecting value for shareholders. We do not currently have instruments that provide us with an intersubjective view of the value generated or subtracted by organizations for their stakeholders as a whole; that value is not just financial but also social, environmental and emotional at least. Any proposed solution must be based on a new discourse of business as a community of stakeholders who share resources and risks to generate value, and must therefore distribute the resulting value among themselves in a balanced fashion. To that end it is necessary to develop social accounting for stakeholders and to properly standardize it so that progress can be made towards a comprehensive, intersubjective framework or value generated and distributed.

A number of prior assumptions are needed to develop and consolidate any method for monetizing social value. Those assumptions may be implicit or explicit. We believe that explicitly expressing the assumptions that underlie the proposal for monetization is an essential step in enabling discussion to take place on elements that will be determinant in the resulting model. The model proposed here is based generically on two major research frameworks: the analytic-synthetic method, which consists of splitting a problem into its elementary component parts, analyzing them separately and then integrating them into a relational model; and cost-benefit analysis, which entails analyzing the gap between the inputs used and the outputs obtained, which enables efficiency analysis to be incorporate in the form of a ratio which, in the case of multiple factors, is developed in a Data Envelopment Analyst (DEA) framework. Four assumptions are made here: first, action research as a methodological process, with a mixed working team comprising persons who are active as actors in the organization investigated, in progressive improvement cycles normally on an annual basis. The second assumption is stakeholder theory, so each firm is considered as a network of stakeholders who contribute resources and risks for the joint generation of value which is subsequently passed on to the stakeholders as a whole. Social value, strictly speaking, is the value generated for stakeholders. The third assumption is a phenomenological outlook, under which the value variables identified are quantified in line with the value perceived by stakeholders. The fourth and final assumption is fuzzy logic, i.e. the values identified are not exact scores but centroid guidelines in a set of fuzzy data, on which upper and lower bounds of belonging are imposed.

This chapter classifies and analyzes the main methods currently in use for quantifying the social value generated by organizations. As an aid in classification, they are grouped under five main headings: Impact Analysis, Assessment of externalities, Monetary Valuation, Management Improvements, and Rating Systems. An in-depth analysis is then conducted of the techniques of monetary valuation, and specifically of its common basis in the form of cost-benefit analysis. Two main groups are distinguished: one centered on the reduction of inputs and the other on the maximizing of outputs. In the latter a distinction is drawn between those that refer to past outputs (trading) and to future outputs (investment). Part two examines the differences between SROI as a method for analyzing return on investment and the synchronous methods of monetization of value. The essential difference is that the former operates on a set of years in which returns on investment take place and the latter focuses on the data for a past period, normally the financial year. An in-depth examination is also made of the limitations of using SROI to quantify social value generated in the past.

Based on the previous analysis of the different methods for quantifying social value and the fours prior assumptions established above—Action Research, Stakeholder Theory, the phenomenological perspective and fuzzy logic—a comprehensive, holistic model is developed that we call the “Polyhedral Model”. This model makes it possible to identify and then quantify the distribution of value between the various stakeholders of an organization. The consolidation of the value generated for the full set of stakeholders reflects the overall value generated by the organization. This model differs from the conventional conflict-of-interest-based approach normally associated with income distribution in that it introduces a holistic concept of value that includes at least financial value, so-called social value and emotional value, though we have been unable to draw up a model for quantifying this last type. Stakeholders do not oppose one another or necessarily converge fully in terms of perceived value; rather there is some degree of value shared between some or all stakeholders, and some degree of specific value for individual stakeholders. The more closely aligned the interests of stakeholders are, the greater the shared value and therefore the joint appropriation of value become. The less closely aligned they are, the more conflict there will be for the specific appropriation of value.

This chapter develops the process of calculating the monetary value of social value based on the “Polyhedral Model”, which consists of six steps. In step one the process begins with the identification of the working team and the setting of the timetable. Step two involves work on the strategic and management documents of the organization, ending with the preparation of a consensus-based stakeholder map. Step three focuses on identifying the value variables perceived by stakeholders, mainly through phenomenological interviews, and ends with the preparation of the Value Variables Matrix (VVM) for the organization. Step four identifies the outputs generated by the organization for each value variable and seeks potential proxies which, after a process of fuzzy calculation, enable reference values to be identified for the respective outputs. Step five entails the quantification of the calculations as per the “Polyhedral Model”, making it possible to see the value generated for each stakeholder, the shared value and the consolidated value in numerical and graphic forms. The sixth and final step is a review of the whole process and the proposal of improvements for the next calculation cycle, which generally coincides with the next financial year.

There is increasing demand in society for the social impact generated by organizations to be measured. Monetizing it and integrating it with economic/financial information so as to optimize the sustainability of organizations themselves and of the socioeconomic system in which they operate is a major challenge. This paper identifies the problem and the main lines proposed for solving it to date. Based on the analytic-synthetic method and on cost-benefit analysis, and making four prior methodological assumptions—action research, stakeholder theory, a phenomenological outlook and fuzzy logic—a model is proposed for interpreting and monetizing the social value generated by organizations. The method proposed involves three distinct parts: first of all an underlying interpretative model called the Polyhedral Model, drawn up on the basis of considering organizations as networks of stakeholders who share resources and risks in order to generate some kind of joint economic, social or emotional value that is then distributed in a shared or individual fashion among those stakeholders. Secondly there is a practical model or application known as SPOLY, which comprises six steps structures to enable all types of trading, public-sector and social organizations to calculate the value that they generate for their stakeholders. Finally there is a proxy-based weighting system applied specifically to groups of variables. Altogether the method proposed can be seen as a new model of social accounting for sustainability.