Defining Impact
When we talk about “impact,” the first thing that comes to mind is often its general definition: the strong effect or influence that something has on a situation or person. For example, we might say, “The new policy had a significant impact on the economy” or “The teacher’s methods greatly impacted the students’ learning.” This is the common understanding of the term, and we often assume “impact” to mean something positive. However, “impact” can be much more nuanced than that. It can be positive or negative, depending on the context in which it’s used and perceived.
One way to understand the kind of impact we’re talking about is by attaching specific descriptors like “positive,” “negative,” “social,” “technological,” and so on. For instance, when we say “social impact,” we’re referring to the effect something has on society or communities. On the other hand, “technological impact” might refer to the influence new technology has on business processes or lifestyles.
But beyond these labels, the context in which impact occurs plays a crucial role in shaping its meaning. What is considered impactful in one situation may not be viewed the same way in another.
Context Matters
Let’s look at how context shapes impact. Imagine implementing digital learning tools in schools. In urban areas with high internet connectivity, these tools might significantly enhance student engagement and personalise learning experiences. However, in rural areas where internet access is limited, these same tools may not have the desired impact simply because the infrastructure to support their use isn’t there.
Similarly, a social media marketing campaign may have a massive impact on a younger audience who are regular users of digital platforms. But the same campaign might fail to resonate with an older population who are less engaged with social media.
This brings us to an important point: the context in which the impact is measured can dramatically alter the perception and outcomes.
Who Creates the Impact?
Another key factor is who is stating or creating this impact. Is it an individual, a group, an institution, or a company? Each entity has its own perspective and bias, and this bias influences how the impact is framed and perceived.
For instance, consider a new environmental regulation. A large corporation might view it as having a negative financial impact due to increased costs of compliance, whereas an environmental group might see it as having a positive environmental impact because it helps reduce pollution. These differing viewpoints show how bias—whether organisational, personal, or institutional—shapes how we interpret impact.
Organisations, in particular, have their own missions and goals, which influence how they present their impact. Their statements are often designed to align with these objectives, which means their perception of “impact” can be quite different from how others may see it.
Power and Influence
This idea of perspective is closely tied to power. Those who have power and influence, such as politicians, large corporations, or well-funded organisations, can dominate the conversation and shape narratives around impact in ways that align with their interests. They can easily use their resources to control the message, often sidelining smaller voices or less powerful groups who may have a different take on what the true impact is.
For example, a politician might emphasise the positive economic impact of a policy, while local communities suffering the consequences of that policy may feel the negative effects are being downplayed or ignored. It’s a reminder that power dynamics often dictate whose version of “impact” becomes the dominant narrative.
Scale and Timeframe: Macro vs. Micro
Another aspect to consider when discussing impact is scale. Impact can occur at both macro and micro levels. On a macro level, a policy might have a significant national economic impact, but on a micro level, it could have a very different effect on a small community. The same is true when looking at the timeframe. Impact can be short-term or long-term, and depending on the goals of the actors involved, they may prioritise one over the other.
For instance, a company might pursue short-term financial gains that have a long-term negative impact on the environment. In contrast, an environmental organization might push for long-term ecological sustainability, even if the short-term benefits are less obvious. Both approaches create impact, but their focus and priorities are different.
Impact for Whom?
Perhaps the most critical question to ask when discussing impact is: impact for whom? Who is benefiting from this impact, and why does it matter? Sometimes, we might think we’re creating a great impact, but if we don’t understand the needs or perspectives of the people we’re serving, that impact might not be perceived as positive.
For example, a well-intentioned project to improve access to technology in rural areas might fail if it doesn’t account for the community’s specific needs or constraints, such as lack of internet access. In this case, despite the efforts, the intended impact may not be realised, or worse, it could even have a negative impact.
Saying “Impact” vs. Making Actual Impact
Finally, it’s essential to recognise the difference between merely stating impact and actually making impact. Saying you’ve had an impact is one thing, but being able to prove it with evidence is another. To genuinely make an impact, you need to back up your claims with data, facts, and measurable outcomes. For instance, if a company claims to have a positive environmental impact, they should be able to present evidence—such as reduced carbon emissions or increased recycling rates—that supports their claim.
Conclusion
Impact is not a one-size-fits-all concept. It is highly context-dependent and influenced by factors such as who is making the claim, the stakeholders involved, the scale of the impact, and the timeframe. Ultimately, to ensure that our efforts are meaningful and sustainable, we must provide robust evidence, critically evaluate the legitimacy of our claims, and consider who we are serving. Only then can we make sure that we are creating real, lasting, and positive impact.
