Many organisations we work with have one or more tools to explain how change happens: a theory of change, a logic model, an impact framework. Yet the distinctions between them are often blurred. In the social impact world, people regularly use these terms interchangeably. And to be honest, even the Bean team, who think about this every day, occasionally slip into shorthand. So here’s a short explainer on how these tools relate, and why the differences matter.

A useful way to think about it is the tools showing the “same map, but different scales”. All of the frameworks are showing the same thing, but zooming in at different levels.

Theory of Change: the aerial view

The Theory of Change is your high level view, looking down at the scene from on high, outlining why you do what you do and where you do it. It captures the need for your work, who you are seeking to support, the challenges you’ll face and briefly gives you a flavour of the routes you might take to reach your end goal. At this level you are articulating the landscape you are working in and why.

Logic model: the route you plan to take

A logic model zooms, providing an annotated route map, giving you directions on how you will get to your end destination. It sets out the modes of transport (activities), routes to change (approaches), your travel companions (partners and audiences) and what will change along the way (outcomes). Logic models aren’t always linear — context, relationships and feedback loops matter, just like diversions and side roads.

Impact Frameworks: what you’ll notice along the way

An impact framework moves you closer to the detail still – think of it like a journey log or dashboard. It articulates how you agree to notice what changes along the journey. It specifies how you will measure your progress against outcomes (indicators), how you will collect this information (data collection methods), how often (frequency) and what you will do with it (analysis and reporting). By capturing these aspects of the journey, you can use the information to track progress, reflect and course correct.

Start with purpose not indicators

Strong impact frameworks start with purpose – in other words the outcomes that matter the most, as grounded in the theory of change. Many charities and funders start their impact frameworks from the standpoint of indicators, thinking about what they can measure rather than what they should. Whilst this can feel efficient it can in fact simply lead to a deluge of data that doesn’t tell the true story of the change being achieved. However, keeping core outcomes in the front of mind when designing an impact framework ensures that you are measuring what matters and supports learning.

Do you need all three?

Not necessarily. Some organisations combine elements: for example, a theory of change with added detail can function as a simple logic model, and a logic model may include basic measurement plans. The key is to understand what your organisation (and your funders) need: a shared high-level picture, a clearer route, or a practical way of tracking change.

Starting from scratch

For those starting with a blank piece of paper, we would always recommend developing a Theory of Change as a first step. It can seem daunting if you’re new to it, but by answering these questions you can build the rest:

  • What change are you here to make?
  • Who does that change affect?
  • What needs to be true for the change to happen?
  • What barriers stand in your way?

We love working with clients to build and refresh these different “maps”. Zooming in and out to find the right level of detail isn’t always easy, but the process often brings clarity, confidence and shared understanding. And if you can tell a story, you can create any of these tools – just remember to draw on the voices of the people travelling with you.