How can one tell which decisions are strategic? This article proposes a framework that helps distinguish strategic decisions from non-strategic ones. Whether a decision is strategic or non- strategic depends on how a decision ranks along two dimensions: its influence on the degree of commitment and its influence on the scope of the firm. Four distinct types of decisions emerge: strategic, neo-strategic, tactical, and operational. This categorization of decisions can help the firm prioritize decisions, allocate resources, and develop capabilities.

Organizations with social missions, such as nonprofits and social enterprises, are under growing pressure to demonstrate their impacts on pressing societal problems such as global poverty. This article draws on several cases to build a performance assessment framework premised on an organization's operational mission, scale, and scope. Not all organizations should measure their long-term impact, defined as lasting changes in the lives of people and their societies. Rather, some organizations would be better off measuring shorter-term outputs or individual outcomes. Funders such as foundations and impact investors are better positioned to measure systemic impacts.

As a global NGO working in 45 countries, ActionAid International aims to eradicate poverty by addressing its underlying causes such as injustice and inequality. This case follows a series of radical transformations implemented by the organization's CEO, Ramesh Singh--a power shift from its headquarters in London to an international secretariat in Johannesburg; a new federated governance structure that increases the influence of units in Africa and Asia; and, innovations in accountability and transparency to the poor communities with which it works. But as Singh gets ready to step down after seven years, he is confronted with challenges from newly empowered country units that he feels risk taking the organization in the wrong direction. How will the divisions between the Northern and Southern units play out? Will they tear the organization apart, just when it is becoming a global player?

Created by hedge fund and financial managers, the Robin Hood Foundation fights poverty through grants to nonprofit organizations. As the global financial crisis continues to impact the poor disproportionately, the Foundation needs to ensure that its funds are being spent on the most effective poverty-fighting programs. The organization's senior vice president, Michael Weinstein, has developed a benefit-cost (BC) approach to analyze the performance of program grants. How effective is the method? Is funding programs with the highest BC ratios a good way to fight poverty? In three or five years, how will Robin Hood know whether it is succeeding?

Acumen Fund is a global venture capital firm with a dual purpose: it looks for a return on its investments, and it also seeks entrepreneurial solutions to global poverty. This case examines Acumen's new projects in Kenya. The organization's investment committee and its chief investment officer, Brian Trelstad, must decide whether or not to fund two for-profit ventures. The first provides clean and accessible shower and toilet facilities in urban areas, serving a critical need for low-income populations - its financial sustainability, however, is less clear. The second investment is a network of successful private health clinics that primarily serve middle-income populations but which have the potential to reach low-income markets. On what basis should Acumen decide whether or not to invest? What performance metrics should it use? As the investment committee nears a decision, political and social unrest breaks out in Kenya following a highly contested presidential election. Acumen Fund must now also consider the political risks of investing.

As Acumen Fund, a global venture philanthropy firm, moves forward with an investment portfolio exceeding $22 million, it runs into two critical measurement problems. First, how should it track the performance of each investment when its interest is not just the bottom line, but also social impact? What should its performance tracking system look like to enable ease of comparison, and to identify problems before they become too significant to fix? The second challenge involves attracting investors. Acumen wants to build the field of "social investing" by creating a new asset class for investors who care about social impact. Doing so will require working with competitors in the field in order to establish benchmarks and standards of measurement. How can Acumen build industry-wide benchmarks when peer organizations are concerned about confidentiality of data? Without such comparisons, how will Acumen attract investors to the field?

A U.S. government agency, the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC), provides aid to developing countries, focusing on poverty reduction through economic growth. It measures results through an economic rate of return based on increases in farmer incomes anticipated over twenty years. As MCC and Ghana finalize a $547 million grant for agriculture and transportation infrastructure, they come up against an accountability and measurement problem: how to address an urgent request from Ghana to fund community services-such as schools and drinking water-for which the results will be more difficult to measure.

bracNet, a for-profit/nonprofit partnership, aims to establish Internet connectivity throughout Bangladesh. Venture capitalist Patrik Brummer invested in a first round of funding to connect major cities. Should he invest again, this time in a rural roll-out, which may have lower financial returns but greater social returns?