In part 1 of this series, we explored why tracking the effectiveness of human rights due diligence (HRDD) measures is important, emphasizing that it’s not just a compliance requirement or a strategic necessity, but fundamentally about improving outcomes for rightsholders.
We discussed how companies can anchor effectiveness tracking within a risk-based due diligence approach and highlighted key principles, such as integrating effectiveness tracking from the start, addressing root causes rather than symptoms, and engaging stakeholders to ensure that the measures are truly making a difference for those affected.
In this part 2, we move from principles to practice. What is effectiveness tracking in practice? What factors do you need to consider? How do you move beyond checking boxes and start collecting the kinds of insights that lead to real-world improvement?
Based on our work with companies across sectors, in this CORE Message, we share five practical tips that can help organizations start or strengthen their impact tracking efforts.
Five practical tips for tracking the effectiveness of due diligence measures
1. Combine quantitative and qualitative indicators
Two perspectives, one goal.
To measure effectiveness meaningfully, numbers alone won’t provide the full picture. To understand what has changed, context, perception, and lived experience is needed. That’s why it makes sense to combine quantitative and qualitative indicators-each adds a different kind of value.
Quantitative indicators give you measurable data points:
- Number of complaints submitted
- Percentage of staff trained
- Share of women in leadership positions
They can be seen as “objective” indicators. But: numbers need interpretation. For example, a rise in complaints might signal more issues or reflect increased trust in the system, with more people feeling safe enough to speak up.
Qualitative indicators reflect experience and perception:
- Trust in a process
- Felt safe in the workplace
- Overall satisfaction
They’re often gathered through interviews, focus groups, or surveys (which can even be combined with quantitative scales like “How safe do you feel? 1-5″). These insights help interpret the numbers, especially when change isn’t immediately visible in the data.
2. Take a risk-based approach and start with a focus
Effectiveness tracking doesn’t have to be perfect from day one. The important thing is to start with a clear focus.
The outcomes of the risk analysis and subsequent risk-mitigating measures are a crucial starting point to consider here:
- What are your most salient risks?
- Who are the most vulnerable groups?
- What are measures to respect people’s rights, specifically those of vulnerable groups and therefore mitigate the salient risks?
Following this risk-based approach, you can identify measures that should be prioritized and consider effectiveness tracking from the beginning when planning the implementation. Keeping in mind that the level of detail of the effectiveness tracking should be tailored considering factors such as the scope of the measures in question as well as the risk the action aims to address. What matters is a structured, appropriate approach.
Many companies have already implemented measures without necessarily having a systematic approach to effectiveness tracking from the start. To move to a more structured system, it can help to start small: choose one relevant measure and test a method like the Theory of Change combined with setting indicators and engaging with stakeholders. This allows to build a shared understanding internally of a more systematic approach to effectiveness tracking and to show, through a concrete example, that it doesn’t need to be overly complex.
3. Use existing channels for data collection
Companies likely already have valuable data sources, especially within their own organization such as health and safety reporting systems, employee engagement, satisfaction surveys or employee network groups.
These can provide both quantitative and qualitative insights, especially when they are aligned with human rights goals. The key is to look beyond traditional compliance data and identify ways existing corporate processes and systems can be leveraged to assess whether human rights measures are making a difference for rightsholders.
In supply chains, collaboration is key. Unlike internal operations, where companies have more control and visibility, supply chains involve multiple actors and often limited direct access to rightsholders. This makes collaboration with actors such as suppliers, industry associations, trade unions and local civil society essential to gathering meaningful data on the ground. Here, it can be helpful as well to look at existing structures, partnerships or sector collaborations that could be built on for impact tracking.
4. Don’t rely too heavily on audits
Many companies still lean heavily on audits often because they’re already built into compliance systems. But audits usually offer snapshots, not a reliable picture of real, long-term change. Research and experience show that audits often miss structural issues, and the “policing-style” approaches rarely lead to sustainable improvement.
A better approach is to shift focus toward dialog, trust, and capacity-building with your suppliers, for example, through long-term collaboration, feedback loops, and training with follow-up support. These methods are often more effective in creating lasting change than social audits are.
5. Practical advice for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs)
Small and medium-sized companies don’t necessarily need to build large-scale monitoring systems, but they can still take a meaningful, impact-oriented approach.
Examples of effective practices for SMEs:
- Gather informal feedback: via team talks, working group discussions, or brief questions during regular check-ins. Even sensitive topics like discrimination and fairness can be explored in these settings.
- Make use of shorter communication paths: Improvements can often be made quickly and informally, whether during team meetings or through direct conversations with suppliers or employees.
Good effectiveness tracking doesn’t just ask: “What did we do?”. It asks: “Did it make a difference, and if so, for whom?” The key lies in asking the right questions, focusing on real change, and resisting the temptation to report only what’s easiest to measure. Because in the end, it’s not about ticking off requirements, it’s about making an impact where it truly matters.
If you’re working on effectiveness tracking and want to explore new ideas or challenges together, we’re always happy to connect: theresa@peopleatcore.com
Theresa for the CORE team
