Why can't I just use a survey tool to track ESG or outcomes?
Back to FAQs home
While survey tools can be useful for collecting data, they may not be sufficient for tracking ESG or outcomes. Here are a few reasons why:
- Limited scope: Surveys often have a limited scope and may not capture all of the relevant data points for tracking ESG or outcomes. For example, ESG factors are typically evaluated through a combination of quantitative and qualitative data from a variety of sources, including financial reports, sustainability reports, and news articles.
- Selection bias: Surveys may be subject to selection bias, which occurs when certain groups of people are more likely to respond to the survey than others. This can skew the data and make it difficult to draw accurate conclusions.
- Difficulty in measuring change over time: Surveys may not be able to capture changes over time or long-term trends. For example, if a nonprofit is tracking outcomes over multiple years, it may need to collect data using consistent methods to ensure that the data is comparable over time.
- Lack of rigor: Surveys may lack the rigor needed to ensure that the data is reliable and accurate. This can lead to inconsistencies in the data and undermine the credibility of the results.
- To track ESG or outcomes effectively, nonprofits may need to use a combination of data collection methods, including surveys, interviews, focus groups, and data from other sources. They may also need to develop a robust system for data management and analysis to ensure that the data is reliable and meaningful.