Beyond Vanity Metrics: Measuring Real Impact

Most social impact leaders think they’re measuring their impact — but are they really? 

Measuring impact is especially difficult when change happens over years or even decades, and when the outcomes are tied to complex, systemic issues. On top of that, the process of evaluation and measurement can feel like extra work — another task on an already full plate. 

But without it, we risk relying on anecdotes and vibes instead of real data to prove we’re making a difference.

In this episode, Eric and Jonathan break down:

• The difference between evaluation and measurement
• Why tracking the wrong metrics can hurt your mission
• How to measure impact without faking it. 
• Three critical pillars of impact evaluation
• How to avoid the pitfalls of mission creep while staying focused on what your organization does best.

If you’re struggling to track the real impact of your work — or wondering how to balance storytelling with hard data — this conversation is for you.

Episode Highlights:

[00:00] Why Impact Evaluation Is So Hard

• Measuring success isn’t just about external outcomes—it’s about internal sustainability too.
• Why some nonprofits don’t track their impact (and why that’s a problem).

[01:22] Evaluation vs. Measurement: What’s the Difference?

• Evaluation = the big picture. Measurement = the tools.
• Why confusing the two can lead to misleading conclusions.

[03:50] The Challenge of Proving Long-Term Impact

• "That impact story took 20 years—how do you measure it in year two?"
• How to identify leading indicators that show progress before the full impact is realized.

[12:48] The Mission Creep Trap: Why Nonprofits Lose Focus

• The risk of trying to "fix everything" instead of doubling down on what you do best.
• How social impact leaders can take a page from academic research to avoid spreading too thin.

[15:39] Measuring Internal Sustainability: The Missing Piece

• If your organization is burning out, your impact won’t last.
• The three critical pillars of evaluation every nonprofit should track.

[23:46] A Simpler Way to Measure Success

• "Look, this doesn’t have to be complicated. Pick three things. Track them. Get better over time."
• How to integrate measurement into your culture—without hiring expensive consultants.

Notable Quotes:

• "We can’t always say, ‘We solved the problem.’ But we can ask: ‘Did our contribution do what it was supposed to do?’" – Jonathan Hicken [03:50]
• "That impact story took 20 years. If you measured it in year two, you’d miss the full picture." – Eric Ressler [05:25]
• "Measuring impact isn’t just about external outcomes—it’s about internal sustainability too. If you burn out, your mission burns out." – Eric Ressler [15:39]
• "Look, measuring success doesn’t have to be complicated. Start small. Pick three things. Track them. Get better over time." – Jonathan Hicken [23:46]

Resources:

• Article - Beyond Aesthetics: The ROI of Brand Building
• Article - Prove it or Lose it: Why Proof of Impact Matters in the Social Impact Space

Transcript:
 

Eric Ressler [00:00]:

We need to be good about evaluating and measuring impact so that we can be sure that we're actually making a difference, but also so that we can have good ammo for building trust and credibility with our supporters.

Jonathan Hicken [00:12]:

We're often trying to solve these extremely complex problems and we're being asked to evaluate our own work in terms of solving that

Eric Ressler [00:21]:

Huge problem. That impact story took 20 years. If you tried to measure that year two, how would there might be some leading indicators, but this is a perfect example of just how hard it is to measure those things. Measuring your impact is not just about your external impact, but your internal sustainability because if that's not healthy, then none of the rest of your work is going to be healthy either. 

Jonathan Hicken [00:51]:

Eric, today I want to talk to you about evaluating impact that may seem like a really simple, obvious thing for any social impact leader. I want to talk about evaluation and I want to talk about measurement, but I want to talk about those a little bit differently and I think it's worth separating the two of those. What do you think when you hear the word evaluation versus measurement?

Eric Ressler [01:22]:

I mean, the first thing that comes to mind honestly for me is that evaluation feels like a more holistic approach and measurement feels more like a tool or a tactic to support broader evaluation efforts.

Jonathan Hicken [01:34]:

And I think that's exactly right. I mean, I think a broader evaluation can be qualitative in nature. It can resort to stories and it can resort to relationships. Evaluation could be many things. Measurement is that quantitative piece, and I think sometimes as leaders we kind of mix those two up and I think there's a place for each of those in evaluating impact. What are the conversations that you're hearing from leaders in the social impact space as it relates to this question in particular?

Eric Ressler [02:11]:

So I've worked with organizations who are really good at evaluation and have evaluation experts on their team. I've also worked with organizations that don't seem to really do this at all, which honestly kind of surprised me the first couple of times I stumbled upon that. And then the more that I learned about it, the more that I started to realize like, oh, this is actually really hard. This is really hard to do well, and especially I think when we're talking about systemic issues or really complex or wicked problems and maybe even problems that take years if not decades, to be able to even fully evaluate. I started to understand a little bit more about A why there are experts and consultants that specialize in evaluation as an entire career path, and then B, why so many nonprofit organizations and social impact organizations in general just don't have a very strong evaluation program or model built into their approach. I mean,

Jonathan Hicken [03:14]:

First of all, I think it is really challenging, and I think one of the things that we struggle with in this space is that we're often trying to solve these extremely complex problems and we're being asked to evaluate our own work in terms of solving that huge problem when in many cases we can't tease apart all of the pieces or the players or the actors or the reasons why a problem might get solved. What we can do is we can ask ourselves, is my contribution doing the thing that it's supposed to do as opposed to am I solving the problem as this one singular

Eric Ressler [03:50]:

Organization? So I'm just curious. We talk a lot on this show about getting clear about what is the problem. This makes me almost wonder if we need to expand our question there and say, what is the problem and what part of the problem are we trying to solve?

Jonathan Hicken [04:05]:

I think it's the first thing you must do. In fact, if you're listening to this episode and you haven't gone through that exercise, you should go do that and then come back and restart because we're going to talk about this as if you have that problem or you have that problem already defined.

[04:23]:

But I do think that starting with defining the problem and defining the piece of that problem that you solve is absolutely critical. I work in the science education space. We talk a lot about creating scientists and launching curious young minds to pursue STEM education and careers, and we talk about that and I think that's real. And I know in 20 years, a 7-year-old who comes through the center, now whether that person decides to pursue a STEM education, they're going to be a lot of factors on whether or not they choose to do that Seymour Center. And our contribution might be one of those factors. But I can't credibly claim that the reason that 7-year-old in 20 years is pursuing a STEM education is because of our contribution to her journey. But I do think we can measure whether or not what happened during her experience did lay the foundation for the rest of her journey ahead of her.

Eric Ressler [05:25]:

And I think that is a really good, if not perfect example of one of the challenges of measuring and evaluating impact, which is that impact story took 20 years. If you tried to measure that year two, how would there might be some leading indicators like, oh, this student signed up for extracurricular science activities by choice or something like that. But if one of the things you're trying to measure is new scientists created, this is a perfect example of just how hard it is to measure those things. And I think you've shared in a previous episode one story of a scientist that actually was born out of an experience at the Seymour Center and came out and claimed that, and that's such a perfect impact story to have, but you might not have, and there might even be 10 of those in motion right now that you don't even know about.

Jonathan Hicken [06:18]:

Almost certainly there is, and we may not ever find out about those, and we're trying to get better at that, and we're trying to stay in touch with some of these young people who go through the problem, but we may never know,

[06:28]:

And even if we do know, there's no way of proving that Seymour Center was the only reason that they pursued that education or the career. And therein lies the challenge for a lot of social impact organizations when it comes to evaluating their own impact is because there are so many factors, whether it comes to housing and homelessness or food security or you name it. I mean, there's a million worthy causes out there that are so interconnected with other particular causes or other variables or other levers. It's really hard for us as leaders to stand up and make a claim about our services being the reason that somebody's life was changed, but we have to because we're asked to do that in order to earn that support or earn a funder trusting us, for example. Now, I think that there are three key components to evaluating impact. I think the three R is our work moving us towards our vision. Okay, number one. Number two is our work allowing us to build a sustainable business? And the third is are the things that we're doing day to day are those successful?

[07:56]:

Those are the three pieces of it. So let's break that down. The first one really comes back to it's impact. It's the impact statement. If we are doing this work, is that work truly solving a problem or at least solving a part of a problem as we were just talking about? So for me, a lot of this comes down to thought experiments. So right now, for example, something like 8,000 young people come through the formal youth programs at the Seymour Center, and I ask myself, if every single public school student in our county came through our program, are we doing a better job of solving the science education problem, for example? But I think the first place is to begin evaluating your impact is to ask yourself and be certain that your work is advancing society towards the vision that you've set forth.

Eric Ressler [08:53]:

So on this example of the Seymour Center, if you don't know truly if that's going to happen fully for 20 years, 15, 20 years, I have to imagine you guys are doing some amount of measurement for other signals or stories or leading indicators that you're on the right track with these students.

Jonathan Hicken [09:14]:

And that brings us to the third pillar around is the work that we're doing day to day, are we successful in that work?

Eric Ressler [09:20]:

Sure.

Jonathan Hicken [09:20]:

So for this example, we do, we're collecting testimonials, we're collecting heuristic evaluations from teachers, from students, from the instructors in the classes. They're all evaluating their experience there. And ultimately it comes down to whether or not they believe that the students were engaged in meaningful science learning, and we could break that down and be happy to another day, but at the end, that's how we are collecting those leading indicators. Did those young people have a great experience at the Seymour Center today? And that's in some cases, for us at least, that is the proxy to impact, is we have to believe that education, these meaningful moments of science, there is an inherent belief that these meaningful moments of science when added up over the course of a young person's early life can ultimately lead or put that person on a journey towards that education or career.

Eric Ressler [10:23]:

Yeah, I think a lot in terms of reverse engineering and a framework that I often like to use for this is thinking about some kind of desired future state. So in this case, creating new scientists in reverse engineering, what would have to happen for that to be true on day one, on experience one in year one in year three in year 10? And the idea of a thought experiment I think is a really interesting framing for that that I think fits pretty well into my mental model here because if all you do is focus on the end goal but don't have a way to, especially in these situations where impact isn't necessarily going to happen instantaneously, which I think is true for a lot of social impact organizations, then I think you do have to deconstruct and reconstruct the answer to that question, what would have to be true in order for this end desired future state to happen?

Jonathan Hicken [11:21]:

I think that's a brilliant way of thinking about it, and I think every social impact leader should be thinking about it in those terms. I'm probably going to use that framework myself. And this brings us back to the messiness of social impact because we could plot that young person's journey between age seven and age 27, and there are going to be so many touch points on that person's life that are completely out of the control of my organization. And is there a version of this where we could create partners with schools and other organizations around town to create this seamless journey through her young life? Maybe that also sounds incredibly daunting.

Eric Ressler [12:01]:

Yeah, I mean, this is, I think often where nonprofits get into mission creep or mission drift because you start to see, especially when you're in this mental mode of thinking about the big picture and the ultimate impact and the vision and these big problems that you're only solving a part of, you can see all the connections. You can see like, oh, well, if we just tapped into this school network, then imagine the impact we could have there. And if we just tapped into this parent network, imagine the impact we could have there. But then you start to dilute your impact. You're diluting, diluting, diluting, and if you don't have strong measurement and evaluation and the right mental model to really hyper focus on the part you are uniquely positioned and best at, then you might actually start to hurt your impact and the depth of your impact there.

Jonathan Hicken [12:48]:

For all the criticisms I have about academic science and publishing and all that stuff, one thing that is great about academic publishing is there's this section called Next steps or the Next study, and I think that that's a model that really works. A scientist goes deep on a particular question, and over the course of their work, they identify the next work that needs to be done. I think that's something that social impact leaders could do is like, Hey, here's the thing that we're doing. We're really good at this piece, but through the course of our work, we're seeing these other gaps that exists, and maybe I'm going to put a call out to my community or to funders to solve that problem. I might not be in the position to do it, but I'm going to name that next step that needs to happen.

Eric Ressler [13:33]:

Yeah, I like that a lot.

Jonathan Hicken [13:41]:

So the second piece of evaluating impact is can I build a sustainable business on solving this problem?

Eric Ressler [13:50]:

This one surprised me. I mean, I love this framing in general because I think it's a huge problem that often gets overlooked in the social impact space is that we've kind of just accepted, well, this isn't going to sustain itself, but we're just going to laser focus on the mission and it'll work out somehow that kind of just passion power that happens in this space a lot. But I'm curious to hear how you think about this under the umbrella of evaluation and measurement of impact.

Jonathan Hicken [14:18]:

Well, unless you're an organization that's just like, Hey, we're going to go on a five year sprint, we're going to just invest a bunch of money. We're going to solve a problem or we're going to get out. Which if you're going to do that more power to you.

Eric Ressler [14:29]:

It's like the Navy SEAL model.

Jonathan Hicken [14:30]:

Exactly. Get in, solve a problem, get out. Look, if you can do that, great. I applaud that. Most of us are looking to build a sustainable business because we care about our people and we want to make sure they have stable work, and we are solving problems that aren't going to be gone in five years. And so the best thing that we can do to delivering impact is to ensure that that work is still viable in the years ahead of us.

Eric Ressler [14:59]:

So I love this because what you're saying is measuring your impact is not just about your external impact but your internal sustainability. Because if that's not healthy, then none of the rest of your work is going to be healthy either. So it's really kind of a precursor or a prerequisite to doing impact work at all and doing that well. And of course, you're not going to be able to just pause all of your impact work and make the businesses sustainable and then get back to it. That's not how this is going to work. But the framing of including some kind of sustainability score or measurement as part of your impact measurement, I think is a really, really solid idea.

Jonathan Hicken [15:39]:

When I host my all pants staff meetings once a month, we look through all of our measurements and all of our metrics and openly as a team, we are looking at impact metrics and we're looking at financial metrics because in order to deliver the impact that we seek, we need to take care of ourselves too along the way. And that's a message that I share with my team regularly. We need to build a healthy business and order to deliver this impact that we have promised our community. And so that is inherently part of the impact evaluation.

Eric Ressler [16:10]:

It's like the oxygen mask in the airplane metaphor, right?

Jonathan Hicken [16:14]:

Yeah. Take care of yourself first so that you can take care of your child next to you. So we've talked about it a little bit already, but the third piece of this is are we successfully doing the work day to day? So there's a difference. Let's tease that apart. Is the work we're doing helping us solve a problem, moving us towards our vision? That's more of almost like a theoretical position or evaluation. The third is the work we're doing working.

[16:44]:

So we use a system called objectives and key results, and we essentially break down everybody's jobs and everybody's tasks into these really discreet, measurable outcomes that tell us if we are doing our jobs successfully. Let's take an example from the Seymour Center. We have a contributed income target, so that's the philanthropic target, and we break that target up into its discrete pieces. We have our individual giving, we have our major donor giving, we have our university giving. We also have a membership giving piece. Now multiple people are contributing to the membership income piece. We have the membership acquisition team, which is at the front desk, and we have our retention team, which is kind of back of house or our fundraising team.

[17:35]:

So we then break down, hey, the front desk, one of your key outcomes, an indicator of the strength and health of the team is how well you're able to sell memberships to people who walk in the, and so we set daily, weekly, monthly targets for membership sales, and we look at those together as a team. So to me, that's an example of breaking down a top level metric, which is contributed income. We know we need to have that in order to have a healthy business. And breaking that down into an individual team member's job, which is at the front desk. And one of your tasks is to sell memberships. Are we doing that or not?

Eric Ressler [18:16]:

So what's occurring to me is that these three steps of measurement are really kind of looking from a macro to a medium and then a micro level. So you're breaking down at a big picture, are we achieving the goals that we're setting out to achieve in the middle? It's like, are we doing the right things that we think need to be true in order to achieve those goals? And then this last step is really, are we doing the things every day that are going to allow us to be successful in doing those right things? So it's kind of this branching model that you're using. Does that sound right?

Jonathan Hicken [18:47]:

Yeah, I'd say that's fair. Now, that's just how one organization approaches impact evaluation, and we are a science center and a science education field. What are some other organizations and other leaders doing to evaluate their impact that you see from your work with cosmic?

Eric Ressler [19:05]:

Yeah, I mean, I've seen it done in different ways. I often actually have seen people bring in external consultants and evaluation firms to do this more objectively, or maybe it's a mix of that. And also they just don't have anyone on their team who specializes in this. And I don't know, honestly, that process is a little bit opaque to me because I just get the results of that work and often in the process of trying to collect impact for storytelling purposes and for marketing purposes. So I've seen it done that way. I've often frankly also seen a lot of organizations who don't have a very strong evaluation and measurement program in place, and they kind of lament the difficulty of doing this well, and it is always kind of in the spirit of, we're working on trying to get better about this, but we're just having trouble because of reason X, Y, Z, it's complicated.

[20:04]:

We don't have the capacity, et cetera, et cetera. And so then I do see those types of organizations tend to lean more on qualitative measurements, testimonials, social proof, individual stories versus more qualitative analytical metrics around number of people served or whatever. Or even sometimes the way that those qualitative metrics are framed to me can kind of feel a little bit like, I don't want to say fake impact, but not necessarily. It's like things that are easy to measure, but maybe not all that impactful in the end. For example, number of people served. Did you serve them well? Did you actually create behavior change? Did their outcomes improve or did they just come in and out the doors? Right. So again, I don't mean to be judgmental here. This is just what I see.

Jonathan Hicken [20:54]:

Why do you think it's so hard for social impact leaders to go through this exercise of evaluation?

Eric Ressler [21:01]:

Yeah, I mean I think it is. There's probably a number of different reasons. I think sometimes people just don't, they're so focused on doing the work that they don't and they don't consider this an important part of doing the work, or it's just something that kind of slips through or they don't have the capacity or the budget to build this into their work, or they don't have the culture from a leadership level to see how you might build this in with the existing resources and capacity that you have. So I think there's a number of different reasons why it could go wrong and it does go wrong, and frankly, sometimes I just sort of wonder, is this something that they know they can get away with not doing? Oddly, where it's like, well, we know if we tell good stories and hey, maybe I'm part of being guilty of this because I'm out here preaching the power of storytelling.

[21:53]:

And I do believe it to be very powerful, but I do think it needs to be grounded in objective truth. And I think because I do think that more broadly in culture, if you're not in the social impact space, if you're not working at a nonprofit or a social enterprise, there is sometimes a lack of trust in social impact organizations. Like, oh, those organizations are scams. They're not actually making a difference. They're just paying salaries to their executives, which I find hilarious because if you actually know anything about the space, how absolutely ridiculous that is. Of course, there are situations where there has been fraud and scams and fake nonprofits set up, but of course, but those are by far the exception over the norm, and it's actually kind of insulting and degrading to so many people who've sacrificed so much to work in this space.

[22:40]:

Nevertheless, there is a certain percentage of the public that is skeptical of nonprofits, and I think that there is some validity to that skepticism, especially if you start to look at some of these issues that have not really seen much progress despite lots of funding, lots of organizations working on them, which to me just makes this conversation that much more important. We need to be good about evaluating and measuring impact so that we can be, first of all, so that we can be sure that we're actually making a difference and have data and science backing that up and not just good feelings, but also so that we can have good ammo for building trust and credibility with our supporters and activating and nurturing new supporters.

Jonathan Hicken [23:27]:

You brought up this idea of bringing in external consultants to help with evaluation and measurement, and I got to be honest, I kind of gag at that idea because I think that evaluation measurement is a lot simpler than maybe we make it out to be.

Jonathan Hicken [23:46]:

And this is honestly, I think this is something that any executive leader, if you're not already measuring success and discussing with your team, it's not a ton of work to get started on that. This is definitely one of those, start somewhere and keep getting better over time, kinds of situations. You don't need to pay a hundred thousand dollars or more to have somebody tell you how to do it. This is something that you can start measuring, even if it's like, I'm going to pick three things and as a team, we're all going to measure these three things for a year, and then if we like it, we'll add another. I mean, there's a simple starting point, and part of it is just building a habit. If you're not looking at numbers with your staff in your one-on-ones, start looking at numbers tomorrow. If you're not doing that at your all staff meetings, start doing that at your next meeting. Look at a number as a staff and just have a discussion about it and get used. Build that muscle, build that habit, because I really think for most of us, hiring a consultant to begin measurement, evaluation of impact is not necessary.

Eric Ressler [24:55]:

Okay, counterpoint on that one. You are this culture of leadership, and I've known you for a while now. I think you're really strong at it naturally. I think this is how your brain works and you have training in it and you like to geek out on measurement frameworks and OKRs and all these, you're reading business books about this stuff, which I respect and applaud, but that's not how everyone's brain works. And so if this feels really difficult to you, and I agree, you should try, and I don't think you need to hire an outside consultant, but I do think that the right outside consultant for the right team actually can make a big difference, especially if that consultant is coming in to help build internal organizational capacity and culture to be better at this. So should you rely on an outside consultant to do this and think about it, you're outsourcing the work, I think that is a mistake because I think that is essentially pushing the problem off of your desk when it needs to be more integrated into the work that you're doing.

[25:59]:

But if you as a leader struggle with this and you don't know where to start and you're not the type that is comfortable experimenting, maybe that outside consultant if you find a good one is just what you need to get that early framework going and get that behavior changing, culture going. I say this to some degree because this is something that I actually struggle with a little bit in that my brain is not analytical from a measurement and I'm a creative person. My brain fires on all cylinders at all times, and I get inspired by a lack of structure and which is odd because we run an extremely tight ship and structured business, and so I can kind of hold both, but as we've been trying to improve our own KPIs and measurements and make data-driven decisions, I find that it's actually a real struggle for me and I'm lucky to have other members of my team who are really strong here, and so we've been able to build those up and they kind of take ownership over that.

[26:57]:

But I do want to push back a little bit on the idea that a consultant is just always a bad choice. I think it's like you have to figure out what is your culture, where are you strong, where are you weak? And if you do bring a consultant in, if that is the right choice for you to ensure that you do it in a way that's building culture and capacity that then you can take over maybe with some additional consulting here and there, but not the idea that you're going to kind of push this off your desk onto a consultant to do.

Jonathan Hicken [27:25]:

Yeah, fair enough. Now, there's one pitfall that I think is worth naming with any of this evaluation, which is a lot of impact. Evaluation can be navel gazing, it can be very inward looking. And look, there's a time and a place for that. If you're talking about your revenue and your expenses, these are things that you're really, really only you and your team that are looking at. Maybe some funders, maybe your board, but really it's internal looking. There's a place for those. I think the one piece that is often missing from an evaluation dashboard, if you will, is value to the constituent and spending time to understand how your constituents or the people you're serving value themselves and are you helping to deliver the value as they define it, not as you define it. And I think that's actually really interesting for cosmic as a business because you're delivering value by each of your clients, probably defines that a little differently. And so you can't have a standard metric for success because each of your clients might be looking at it slightly differently.

Eric Ressler [28:29]:

Yeah, it's funny because this entire conversation, I've really been thinking about this from the lens of an executive director or a nonprofit leader and kind of putting my own personal struggles with this aside, but now that you bring it up, this has actually been a huge goal and struggle for us at Cosmic, especially because so much of our work is brand and brand is actually really, really hard to measure, and especially to fully capture, in my opinion, the value of brand. And it can be expensive if you start to think about awareness or affinity or some of these spots or topics that traditionally you would invest 60, a hundred, $200,000 to run a huge research study to figure out your nonprofits aren't going to and should not invest that amount of money unless you're really big to measure brand. And so a lot of the branding work, especially that we do, and the storytelling work and the messaging work, maybe not so much messaging that is a little bit easier to measure and test, but it could be really difficult to measure. And so I do empathize with especially nonprofit organizations that are doing really systemic intractable work and that it can be hard to measure. So I have to actually go and re-listen to this entire episode now thinking about it from my own personal point of view, because I think it actually be really helpful for us.

Jonathan Hicken [29:51]:

And I would encourage you to have these conversations with your clients, what does success look like to you? And at the end of this, we're going to ask you if we helped you get there

Eric Ressler [30:00]:

So that we do and that we're getting better at. But I do relate to the struggle of how do you put metrics behind all of these different things that are important to measure sometimes, and it's even like what you measure matters, right? So to your last point about are you looking too inward? Is this too navel gazing? Making sure you're measuring the constituent experience and their outcomes and what they're looking for, not just your own internal metrics, I think is really important. And that's actually been the part that's been hardest for us. Measuring our own stuff is easy at Cosmic. Our business model is simple, but measuring the impact that we're having, which can be a little bit more qualitative in nature and can be a little bit murkier, that's the part that we've struggled the most with. So I'm going to go back and listen and try some of these strategies out that you've identified here.

Jonathan Hicken [30:50]:

One last tip before we wrap up is, as a leader, I encourage you at least once a year to ask yourself, are we measuring the right things and be ready to shift those things? Especially once you've gotten your feet under you and you're feeling really confident with measurements, you can get stuck in measuring the same thing for years and years and years when actually success may change around you. So you need to be asking yourself, am I measuring the right thing at least once a year? Alright, that does it for talking about evaluating impact. Thanks for doing this with me today, Eric.

Eric Ressler [31:22]:

Yeah, that was fun. Thanks, Jonathan.

Jonathan Hicken [31:23]:

I hope today's discussion helps you gain some traction in delivering your social impact. Catch us next week for the next episode of Designing Tomorrow.