Measuring What Matters, Rethinking Impact Beyond Good Intentions

At the beginning of the Nambo Udik literacy project, I understood impact in simple terms: how many books were collected, how many were shipped to the village, how many children attended reading sessions, and how many activities we ran with teachers at Nambok Udik.

These felt like tangible achievements. I had opened a donation box for English books, carefully divided them into different reading levels, delivered them to Nambo Udik village, and worked with teachers to support students learning how to read in English. On paper, everything looked successful.

Counting books and attendance did not tell me whether children were actually improving their reading skills, gaining confidence, or developing interest in English. Participation alone did not explain learning. I realized that while I could describe what I did, I struggled to articulate what truly changed. Impact felt vague and difficult to define.

Key Course Learning: 

This experience taught me that measurement is not about control, it is about accountability and learning.

Evaluating impact helps ensure that programs remain relevant, responsive, and grounded in real outcomes. It also strengthens credibility, showing that initiatives are guided by evidence rather than intention alone.

For me, rethinking impact transformed how I see social projects. Good intentions may start the journey, but thoughtful measurement sustains it. When we measure what truly matters, we move closer to creating change that lasts.

Designing with People, Not for Them Lessons from Human-Centered Design

The Nambo Udik idea was straightforward: improve children’s exposure to English by providing books and basic reading support. At the beginning, most decisions came from me. I determined what types of books to collect, how to categorize them, and how the learning sessions would run. While teachers supported implementation, the overall design was largely driven by my own assumptions about what rural students needed.

Students were involved as recipients, not decision-makers.

Looking back, this raises an important reflection: was the design driven by empathy or assumption?

What I learned: 

• Human-centered design: I learned that meaningful solutions begin with people, not ideas. Human-centered design emphasizes understanding users’ lived experiences before proposing interventions. In the context of Nambo Udik, this meant recognizing that literacy is not just about books; it is about motivation, teaching methods, cultural context, and learning pace. Designing with students and teachers matters far more than designing for them.

• 
  

• Prototyping and iteration: Rather than aiming for a fully polished program from the start, I learned the value of testing small and improving continuously. The initial version of Nambo Udik was essentially a prototype: collecting books, organizing levels, and running reading sessions. Each stage revealed insights that helped refine the approach.

• Feedback as data, not criticism: This mindset shift was powerful. Instead of viewing feedback emotionally, I began to treat it as information. Teacher observations, student engagement levels, and participation patterns became data points that guided improvement.

Reflection: What I Had to Unlearn

One of the hardest parts of this journey was unlearning perfectionism. 

I had to become comfortable with incomplete “messy” solutions. Initially, I wanted everything to feel organized and successful from the start. But I learned that early imperfection is part of learning.  

Most importantly, solutions do not arrive fully formed. This project evolved through trial and reflection, what seemed logical on paper sometimes fell flat in classrooms, while smalll changes made unexpectedly large differences. 

Application to the Nambo Udik Project: 

• Redesign sessions to be more interactive, incorporating simple speaking activities, group reading, and informal discussions rather than purely textbook-style learning.

• Book levelling: Use the teacher’s input to help refine placement based on actual student reading ability, improving accessibility and reducing frustration. 

Opening a donation box and shipping books was only the starting point. Real impact emerged through listening, adapting, and learning alongside teachers and students. Design is not a one-time action, it is a continuous learning process.

When communities are treated as collaborators rather than beneficiaries, and feedback is embraced as insight, social initiatives become more relevant, inclusive, and sustainable.

From Social Project to Social Enterprise What I Learned About Defining the Real Problem

When I first started Nambo Udik, I based all my decisions and attentions on what I saw before applying structured research or deep engagement with the community. I believed that the main issue was that the students weren't learning effectively, meaning I had to implement more teaching and resources. But there was an underlying problem I couldn’t see. These assumptions were based on my own experiences and a desire to help, but they didn't always show what needed to be fixed.

Social entrepreneurship was something I wanted to do but wasn’t doing. I learned that social entrepreneurship needed some sort of slower pace, as I needed to research beforehand, listen to stakeholders, and also understand the root cause of the problem before acting with instinct. The course changed that way of thinking by stressing the need to define an issue before coming up with solutions. But something that really cracked my thinking was the difference between “We want to help” vs “What problem actually needs solving?” Even though I had to let go of my certainty, switching gears from the project team into insights of the community released inputs I would have missed.

Lessons from the course changed my overall thinking and approach on my whole Nambo Udik Project. Firstly, I learned that understanding the core problem isn’t easy and not a one-time step: it has to be an ongoing process. By observing and talking openly with stakeholders, I was able to have a better idea of the problems and priorities that were really important. As I continue this project, I now recognize that sustainable impact starts with understanding, not assumptions.

Key Takeaway: 

This journey taught me that problem definition is not a one-time activity; it is continuous.

Communities change. Needs evolve. Assumptions must be revisited.

Going forward, I approach decisions differently. Instead of asking, “What can I offer?” I now start with, “What is truly needed?” This shift has fundamentally changed how I view social entrepreneurship. Sustainable impact does not begin with action, it begins with listening.