Best Value regime forsees big changes

Best Value is approaching fast. By the end of September, all associations with more than 250 units in management need to have reviewed the Housing Corporation's guidance with their boards, and have plans in place for implementation. From the survey launched last week, most registered social landlords feel confident about taking on Best Value. But there are concerns: strengthening the role of residents, improving staff morale, reducing costs and being too small to use specialist appointments or expensive techniques. What lessons can be learned from the pilots?

At the beginning, most of the pilots found the jargon off-putting, and had several questions: Best Value seemed to be yet another initiative, following on from other quality techniques. Could the pilots use what they were already doing, or did they have to start all over again? Should there be a 'big bang' approach to change, or could they learn as they went along? And what did they need to do exactly?

Paul Corrigan, from the Office of Public Management, discussed the change management with the RSL pilots recently. The usual management approach is to reassure staff, who are, not surprisingly, nervous of change. It is easier to assert that Best Value will use existing quality tools, that comprehensive service reviews will continue a process already begun. And of course it is true - Best Value is not that original, it synthesises ideas from other quality management systems.

But Best Value is designed to bring about change. Existing or new quality systems, such as the Business Excellence model, can help, but they are not essential. What is needed is an openness to change, a willingness to listen, and an ethos which aspires to 'the best possible', rather than 'good enough'. Staff and residents need to be clear that there will be change, and that they will be involved.

The drivers of change are both residents' views, and a cycle of reviews. Together they which challenge why things are done as they are, compare performance with others, consider whether other providers could do better (compete), and consult with residents so they have real influence. So change is likely to be incremental: organisations will learn as they try out the review process. Some of the pilots have chosen a limited focus for their review, but with the intention of applying the findings across the organisation: North British housing association has looked at local lettings in two areas, but intends to review allocations for the whole organisation. Circle 33 Housing Trust is aiming to reduce the costs of maintenance, but has involved a wide range of staff so that they gain experience of the process.

Best Value should encourage that elusive concept, culture change. Staff need to be involved at all levels, to encourage ownership of the changes. Front-line staff need to be as involved as the senior staff: Ealing Family housing association interviewed front-line staff to identify suggested improvements to the service.

Liverpool Housing Trust recruited staff across the organisation to two groups: one to review core services, streamline and reduce costs; and one to look at what 'value added' services could be provided with the savings. Involving staff is vital to improve responsiveness to residents. Circle 33 set up five project groups to look at different aspects of its maintenance service. Each group consisted chiefly of front-line staff with some middle managers. Each group, working with residents, had two months to do a comprehensive review, using a review handbook, to define the service which ought to be provided, and to make proposals for delivering it.

'Strengthening the role of residents' will not happen overnight, but if successful, its impact will be felt throughout the organisation. But how can residents be drawn into the process, if there has only been limited involvement before? Some pilots have used the findings of previous satisfaction surveys to choose the first area of review; they have also told the residents, so they know the organisation chose the issue they had identified. Various approaches to further consultation can work: conferences, more targeted surveys, residents' design groups, staff and resident 'continuous improvement teams', mystery shoppers, and resident involvement in recruitment have all been used.

South Staffordshire housing association's pilot is to encourage resident involvement across scattered villages; others will be able to learn from what works here. East Dorset housing association have had 'improvement groups', involving staff and residents, to investigate good practice elsewhere, review internal practices and recommend improvements. The trick is to try different ideas, and to build up a dialogue, whether in writing or in person, rather than one-off initiatives which are not followed up.

Modern management textbooks tell us that culture change takes time - and that it involves people. This may seem obvious, but engaging staff in the process, encouraging ownership of review and change, developing better dialogue between residents and staff at all levels, are essential. Communication and feedback are also vital: residents need to hear what happened after the conference, who is on the panels, and what has happened since. Staff need to hear about the stages of the review, what questions are being asked, how they can be involved, and what will happen next. Ongoing dialogue forms part of the process, but it also starts to change the culture. The pilots have found that they are learning all the time, and they will apply that learning to the next review. Best Value is flexible: it can work for all types of organisation. 'What matters is what works'; what works is involvement of residents and staff, and being willing to learn and to change.