I recently asked a seasoned observer of the housing world for a one-word take on housing associations.
I was a bit taken back by the response, which was “smug”.
I didn’t have the guts to ask for a word to describe the Housing Corporation but I can imagine it would have been equally difficult to swallow.
I decided to test this view out on another individual whose opinion I respect. He or she (I won’t be any more specific, to protect the innocent) agreed with the description.
Still I didn’t want to admit defeat, so I asked an audience consisting largely of senior housing association staff to put their hands up if they agreed.
When not a single one of them raised their arm, I realised we might have a problem.
Being smug is not, after all, a very attractive state of affairs. It suggests a complacent and self-satisfied way of doing business that is very unlikely to deliver the goods and is totally at variance with what is needed to produce top-class performance.
Smug organisations don’t innovate, they don’t question, they don’t look for continuous improvement.
At some point, they cease to be adequate for what they are trying to do.
Even if it is not fair, it is worth looking at why people should think this about housing associations and what we might do to change that perception.
I wonder if it has something to do with the fact that demand for affordable housing in most areas shows absolutely no sign of easing up and housing associations may be tempted to see themselves as allocating a scarce resource rather than being responsive to needs?
I know very well that this is not how any of them would wish it to appear, but it can be difficult to avoid when every vacant property can be let many times over.
It is this sort of dilemma that has prompted the rash of discussion around choice in public services – with a very welcome comment from Tony Blair recently, recognising that choice is not an end in itself but a means.
We shouldn’t be making excuses for our public services any more than for our affordable homes.
The one thing that would help housing associations not to appear smug is to spend more time listening – including listening to contrary opinions
What we need to do is find ways of making people feel as if they do have a choice, even when for many tenants the reality is very different. Any suggestion of smugness is unlikely to help in that respect.
If seasoned observers use the “s” word to describe housing associations, we need to do something to change it, rather than argue that it is all terribly unfair. Perception is, after all, someone else’s reality.
What might we do? Perhaps the one thing that would help most is to spend more time listening – genuinely listening; including listening to those opinions that are sometimes contrary.
I’m as guilty as anyone in having fixed ideas and a natural tendency to think that those ideas are right but the ability to be open to new ideas and new ways of doing things is hugely positive.
One example of this way of doing things is the “planning for real” exercises that organisations are increasingly using for new development.
They really do force managers to think differently and allow residents to feel genuinely empowered.
No room for smugness there, I think.
We need similar vision in the way we manage and maintain our housing and a constant stretching to meet even higher standards.
I am delighted that most housing associations aspire to exceed the decent homes standard, but is that enough?
And how do we make sure that we are always challenging ourselves?
So, smug? Probably not. But I’d like to think that if I asked the question in a year’s time, I’d get a different answer.
Source
Housing Today
Postscript
Peter Dixon is chairman of the Housing Corporation
No comments yet