This paper focuses on hybrid board governance and the challenges faced by the board of directors when implementing social impact measurements. Interviews with 36 board chairs and general secretaries in social hybrids in Sweden show that while boards support social impact measurements, they face obstacles in implementing them. Drawing on the institutional logics framework, we identify three main reasons for these implementation problems. First, amid field level regulations focusing on cost efficiency, boards find it difficult to switch to a social impact that lacks a single metric that can be measured annually. Second, board members struggle to find sufficient time when they serve on a pro bono basis, and it is difficult to hold them accountable when limited progress occurs. Finally, acknowledging board practice variation, we highlight the need to distinguish between “beneficiary-driven” and “membership-driven” social hybrids. In the former, boards face the challenge of operationalizing the long-term benefits for end beneficiaries; in the latter, interactions with members are so operationally focused that boards struggle to maintain a long-term agenda for implementing social impact measurement. Given these challenges, we propose that future research should explicitly incorporate the board level in theorizing how hybrid organizations manage institutional logics and performance measurement.

中文翻译：

---

混合董事会治理：探索实施社会影响衡量的挑战

本文重点讨论混合董事会治理以及董事会在实施社会影响衡量时面临的挑战。对瑞典社会混合体 36 名董事会主席和秘书长的采访表明，虽然董事会支持社会影响衡量，但他们在实施过程中面临障碍。借鉴制度逻辑框架，我们识别出这些实施问题的三个主要原因。首先，在注重成本效率的现场监管中，董事会发现很难转向缺乏可每年衡量的单一指标的社会影响。其次，董事会成员在无偿服务时很难找到足够的时间，而且在进展有限时很难追究他们的责任。最后，承认董事会实践的差异，我们强调需要区分“受益人驱动”和“成员驱动”的社会混合体。在前者中，董事会面临着为最终受益人实现长期利益的挑战；在后者中，与成员的互动过于注重操作性，以至于董事会难以维持实施社会影响衡量的长期议程。考虑到这些挑战，我们建议未来的研究应明确将董事会层面纳入混合组织如何管理制度逻辑和绩效衡量的理论中。