Resident engagement and scrutiny patrick harkness 15 june 2011 in association with.

resident engagement and scrutiny patrick harkness15 june 2011

in association with

Capital Building, Tyndall Street, Cardiff CF10 4AZ 99 City Road, London EC1Y 1AX T: 029 2047 4466

in association with

introduction to dome

what did the regulator intend?

how have we responded?

barriers and pitfalls

future

questions and answers


in association with

communication

100+ places – changes to management and/or ownership

stakeholder management

nfp and housing sectors

legal, compliance, process and efficiencies, hr, od,

leadership, coaching, stakeholders, reputation,

consultation, engagement


in association with

recent engagement and stakeholder work with:

aster, sovereign group , tarka, teign, westcountry, devon

and cornwall, tor, penwith

personal experience at the most senior levels, across uk –

board membership (rps, groups, other (e.g. shelter)

nfp interim


in association with

gold award advisers on community empowerment and

community cohesion

accredited access to education: community governance,

with centre for community and lifelong learning university

of wales. transportable credits from foundation to phd

level for staff and tenants

community audit and brokering


in association with

resident engagement

is evolving rapidly – response to change (eg inspections)

Consumerist: response to lack of choice?

makes good business sense

, use of technology

no single answer – needs to work with dynamic of landlord and

tenants


in association with


influencing, or direct participation in decision-making

• feedback on services, outcomes,decisions, policies

• involvement in design of policies or services

• involvement in delivery of services

• involvement in assessment of services


in association with


tenants and providers to work together on performance; share best practice challenge and shape activities of management and governors

whole organisation: constitution, governance, business, services

independence from governance and management structures

formality in operation

power for residents to challenge and effect change


in association with

S pillar 1 landlord consultation

pillar 2 representation advocacy.

pillar3 community issues

four pillars of scrutiny

pillar 4governa

nce


in association with

how have we responded?

enthusiastically

recognising and internalising engagement

efficiencies

solving problems and improving performance

but significant barriers and pitfalls


in association with

what do we understand by scrutiny?organisational

critical friend, working for residents

improving tenants’ experience while delivering efficiencies

dedicated to develop thinking and approach

delivering tenant influence into strategic decision making

allow for change and flexibility

driven resident priorities throughout whole business

relationship to governance


in association with

what do we understand by scrutiny?practical/process

part of the co-regulation process

activities - mystery shoppers, peer reviews, walkabouts, audit, inspections

accountability panel

residents’ forum


in association with

panel commissions auditors. small groups monitor local offers. resident involvement teams monitor performance

longitudinal mass market research; offer/theme groups; influence group – part resident board members, part customer inspection advisers

formal structures for resident governance – area panels – local issues - nominate to residents council which can trigger action - or be triggered by area panels. area panels include independents; council relates to board

practical/processexamples


in association with

barriers/pitfalls

beware: early frustrations

initially: lack of commitment

Challenge to status quo – work out what’s valued/of value

lack of understanding of roles

unclear expectations

communication issues

agreeing and reviewing achievable outcomes

time commitment – staff and residents


in association with

beware: early frustrations

needs to be embraced by whole organisation

confidence in process – right pace – be patientstaff understanding of roles – involve early

under-estimating support needed for residents to be effective

recruiting for existing skills or attitude – balance?

how does scrutiny fit with existing structure, internally and externally – risk of isolation

tailored and fluid response and support


in association with

challengesrecruitment

creating a new industry/bureaucracy/hierarchy

demonstrating the difference

managing (dis)connections – perceived removal of influence

clarity about relationship between scrutiny and board

staff cannot “manage” a scrutiny group

follow through

conflict/issue management


in association with

what worksclear, committed leadership at most senior levels: principles

clear link between ri, scrutiny, governance, service and performance

board hear tenants more clearly – but with independence for scrutiny group

flexibility in larger structures to use larger numbers of people across range of activities – independents

use of technology e.g. facebook, survey monkey


in association with

what works

training – overall and specific

capacity building for group and personal development – staff, management, residents

consistent communications for all

inclusivity at the start

consider external support (clean hands), but beware off the shelf solutions


in association with

outcomes

shared sense of purpose, values, culture

staff value challenge

staff recognition of skills and knowledge of residents

maturity – challenge and support

easier to show where residents have made a difference

residents introducing ideas – not passive


in association with

outcomes

influence over policy changes

peer reviews prioritised by residents

peer review as preparation for inspections

service review outcomes directly monitored by residents

demonstrable change to processes

service reviews re-directing resources – vfm


in association with

outcomes

from information dissemination to discussion and contribution

formalised action planning

strategic engagement – e.g. merger

simultaneous recommendations: scrutiny: board: residents’ councils

leaner – are hearing the majority, not the minority – and it costs less

cohesion - local to organisational

resident development plan; recruitment, rewards, recognition policy

learning log


in association with

the future

multiple challenges for all stakeholders – political, economic, social, technological

changed relationships at the core – tenancy, funding, customers, other providers, markets

political and media assault: residents’ status in society; incomes, benefits, compact with landlord

landlords role under stress, new thinking

business, personal and community benefits of resident involvement, : personal and social capital – potential and challenges greater than ever


in association with

contact

[email protected]

02920 474456

www.domeconsultants.co.uk

mailto:[email protected]


in association with

THANKS TO:

AMICUSHORIZON, BROMFORD

SOVEREIGN TARKA

TEIGN TOR

WESTCOUNTRY

Resident engagement and scrutiny patrick harkness 15 june 2011 in association with.

Documents

Transcript of Resident engagement and scrutiny patrick harkness 15 june 2011 in association with.