Calculating Return on Outcome

By Sara Watts and Iggy Pintado

How do you calculate a return on an outcome that is not quantifiable? I discussed this recently with Sara Watts, former Chief Financial Officer (CFO) at IBM and esteemed colleague for many years. This is her perspective.

I held a number of senior positions in finance including CFO, Financial Controller and Internal Audit Director at IBM for 10 years. I am currently a company director and chair the audit committee of the boards I serve on.

In my free time, I sing with a prestigious Australian choir – which means I must keep in tempo, count bars of music, and constantly subdivide note values. I also bushwalk with friends, and we always compare the number of steps our devices have recorded at the end of a day’s walk. In summary, pretty much everything I do can be measured and my life is full of numbers and numerical acronyms.

ROA, ROE, ROI, IRR, WACC, EPS, P/E are just some of the financial acronyms that are quantifiable measures. But what about Return on Outcome (ROO)? 

How do I describe ‘outcome’? It’s the way things turn out.

Therefore, ROO could be interpreted as a return on or from the way things turn out. That’s very different from ROI which is a relative measure of the return on an investment, and usually requires a quantifiable - often cash or profit - return.  

As a non-executive director (NED) I must consider ROI. After all, one of our key responsibilities is to make sure that we’re spending shareholder, government grant, or donated funds wisely.  However, most NEDs also consider impact, outcome, value, and legacy even if it’s harder to quantify and measure. 

Of course, that is not unique to the NED world. This concept is important enough that some governments have introduced outcomes-based budgeting. For example, both the NSW and Victorian governments in Australia have recently moved towards this. Departments and agencies are asked to submit budgets and make investment decisions based on how the use and expenditure of public resources will deliver outcomes for citizens. It is seen as a way to improve performance and promote transparency.

The concept of ROO appeals to me for two reasons. Firstly, it creates a way to give structure to a discussion that is often informal rather than formal and, secondly, because I see it as complementary to ROI. A discussion about ROO encourages a different conversation around the board table which in turn means deeper consideration of multiplier effects, linked benefits, and unintended consequences whether good or bad.

A discussion about ROO acknowledges that some returns we’re seeking are not easily quantified, can’t be measured, may have secondary and tertiary impacts, and reminds us that not every investment outcome can, nor should, be monetised.  

I don’t know how to quantify the relief someone feels knowing that their aging parent is getting good care, or the benefit to a small and remote African community who received COVID-19 vaccinations. Nor have I yet worked out how to measure the economic benefit of a child learning English when their capacity to earn is still 10-15 years away.  

Whether an organisation is listed on a securities exchange, privately owned, or a non-for-profit, their NEDs will be considering a range of outcomes alongside the more formal ROI measures. 

As the conversation around the board table turns to the impact of the decision on shareholders, the likely reaction of investment analysts or clients, the impact on Environmental, Social, and (Corporate) Governance (ESG) credentials and other reputational factors, it may not be called a discussion about Return on Outcome, but it probably is.

Return On Outcome and Flexible Work

 

By Brian Tasker and Iggy Pintado

My old schoolmate and friend, Brian Tasker and I were discussing our extensive corporate careers over dinner one evening. He began to relate his experience about flexible work arrangements  relative to the business and professional Return on Outcomes (ROO) achieved at his workplace. Here are his perspectives.

With more than 35 years in corporate business, I have been amazed and frustrated by the one dimensional fixation by many senior business leaders on Return On Investment(ROI). I can hear many scoff at this statement. 

ROI is so limiting that it inhibits the true potential that lies within any complex organisation. 

The performance of people is critical for company success - profit, community benefits, innovation and growth. Perhaps only one or two of these success factors could be readily measured by ROI. And how do you quantify the real input and effectiveness of people, let alone one individual?

The Covid 19 pandemic caused a step change in businesses. People can now work from the comfort of their home. Businesses were forced to go along with this ‘dangerous experiment’ and look what happened! In my world, I have only heard of remarkable ‘OUTCOMES’.

Well before the pandemic, I tried to implement flexible working arrangements into the greater organisation through my colleagues in the national executive team. I had already implemented it in my business unit and had two years of very positive outcomes by that stage. This would require investing in more IT equipment for staff to use in their homes, a change to the layout of the existing offices to create more collaboration spaces amongst other changes; and some new technology to allow for staff to book desks and/ or rooms when they needed to come back into the office in any given week. 

I was derided and these ‘positive outcomes’ were excused away by my colleagues . I was told that I was just lucky! Although I had two years of data that proved that flexible working, good leadership and trust delivered both tangible and intangible benefits to the company, I could not give them an ROI. How could I quantify the investment of my time and leadership style? What was the numerical value of motivated staff? And some of them even had the temerity to suggest that if we could achieve so much at home, where no one could see us, how good could my team be doing if I forced them all back into the office? Certainly ROI fails in such circumstances.

I gave people trust and earned their trust.

I developed a sense of team and they all felt a part of something bigger and better than just them. Tangible outcomes were increased and sustained profit, low absenteeism, low annual holidays (I had to work on the team diligently to take their fair share of annual leave) were by-products. An esprit de corps within my team was noticeable not just by me, but by many of my peers who were gracious enough to notice and comment.

When the national executive was forced to send people home to work in May of 2020, a great lesson in leadership and management commenced. The fear amongst my colleagues was palpable. At each weekly meeting, much talk was had over how we could check to see if people were working, how we could influence the Government to allow staff back sooner into the office etc. 

Yet month after month the monthly profit figures came through. No one really connected anything to the new circumstances in the first few months because the results were put down to the pre-pandemic ‘pipeline’ but after six months we found that our monthly profit was not only sustained, it was growing - all this during a pandemic! 

At a time when 98% of our office staff were working from home, still using much of their own equipment instead of company supplied IT gear, the business was doing quantifiably better than when they were in the office pre-pandemic. HR got into the action and undertook an on-line survey. 

The basic result was that our staff felt obliged to do more; give more discretionary effort. 

They were happier, had more personal hours in the day (no travel, getting ‘presentable’ for the office etc). Many commented on the TRUST word too. Everyone was winning!

The qualifiable outcomes proved that this move was invaluable. If it had not been forced upon the organisation by Covid 19, no one would have likely known. You see, could not be measured/valued by ROI. It would have been a ‘dead-in-the-water’ pipe dream. 

Flexible working is now the new way for this and many other organisations. This decision was made through necessity and being forced to experience the quantifiable and unquantifiable return on outcomes - all without any additional investment!