The
Social Return on Investment (SROI) framework has been developed for
mapping and measuring social impact. It may be used for legitimating
organisations and projects. The framework is often criticised for its
overemphasis of the SROI ratio, i.e. the relationship between monetised
benefits and costs. This study aims to demonstrate how the SROI method
legitimates organisations or projects with multiple other discursive
ways besides the SROI ratio. It also discusses the status of these other
ways of legitimation in relation to the quantifying and monetising core
tendency of SROI.

The
empirical data consist of an SROI guidebook and 12 SROI reports. Their
study applies Theo van Leeuwen’s ideas for analysing the discursive
legitimation of social practices. The study takes place broadly in the
framework of Norman Fairclough’s critical discourse analysis, aided by
qualitative content analysis.

In
the analysis, the full spectrum of the van Leeuwenian legitimation
means used by SROI – authorisation, rationalisation, moral evaluation
and mythopoetical narration – is brought out in the data and the status
and social context of the legitimation means are assessed and discussed.
It is shown that there is existing potential for broader and more
visible use of different legitimation means.

Based
on the findings of the study, suggestions for the improvement of SROI
reporting by a more balanced explicit use of the multitude of
legitimation means are presented.

The
study is original both in its subject (the spectrum of legitimation in
SROI) and its method (qualitative discursive and contentual analysis of
SROI as a legitimating discourse).