Quants Deny Secret Love of Metaphor

Jeff  Trexler: "if social enterprise is truly going to adopt rigorous analysis that goes beyond the limits of the past, it must face the harsh reality of its own faddishness." When we have a consistent yardstick on which to measure the negative/positive social impact of every corporation, and when we tax or fine corporations on their negative returns, then social entrepreneurship will have a yardstick against which to judge its own relative success or failure. But who can cite a number for the social benefits, positive or negative, of KKR, Blackwater, Coca Cola? If we can't measure them how can we measure the social bottom line of some froufrou social venture? If it cannot be quantified, calling it a bottomline is metaphor - the quant's secret passion, shameful as it may be. You would think by now this fatal flaw in social venture thinking would have been rectified. Maybe GiveWell could come up with a universal, univocal, social metric? How much net social goodness did FOX News put into or suck out of our society Year to Date 2008? I mean, come on, the world wants to know.

Comments

[Jay Taber]

I think we can distinguish between rhetoric and reality, authenticity and fraud rather easily, without the aid of scientists.

[Phil]

Priestcraft in the 18th century; MBA-Craft today. Shamans with authority.