Fehlentscheidungen mangels belastbarer Wirkungsdaten

Definition

Australian governance guidance emphasises that impact measurement should be embedded into decision-making and used similarly to financial information so boards can make informed, impact-focused decisions.[2] Government experience shows that where agencies fail to set clear performance and benefit-realisation measures, they cannot demonstrate whether major reforms deliver intended benefits, undermining effective resource allocation.[1] For international trade and development actors, weak impact data means projects continue to receive funding despite limited outcomes, while high-performing initiatives may remain underfunded. Logic-based estimation: if 20–40% of an organisation’s portfolio is under- or over-performing relative to expectations, and 25–30% of that variance is not corrected due to poor impact information, then roughly 5–15% of the annual program budget (e.g., AUD 2–10 million) is misallocated, i.e. AUD 100,000–1,500,000 per year in value at risk.

Why This Matters

The Pitch: International trade and development organisations in Australia 🇦🇺 risk misallocating 5–15% of their annual program budgets because impact performance is not measured or reported accurately. Establishing robust, near-real-time impact measurement can redirect AUD 100,000–1,000,000 per year to higher-value activities.

Affected Stakeholders

Board Members, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Impact Officer / Head of Strategy, Program Directors, Donor Relationship Managers

Related Business Risks