2nd opinion: The fine art of involvement

Put your ear closer to the page and I will whisper you a secret: tenant participation isn't working.

It isn't working because we are all concentrating on participation as a product when in fact, most tenants don't want to participate.

Having said that, I don't want to decry the valuable work some dedicated tenant representatives are doing. I know a few who are genuinely trying to improve the areas they live in, and they are having some success.

But we are all suffering from more or less the same problems. We can't all involve enough of this type of tenant representative – and even if we could, the very people who are most helpful in this role tend to be unrepresentative of their fellow tenants because most ordinary people don't want to participate.

So am I advocating that we abandon tenant participation? Not at all. On the contrary, I believe we should do it more – but we have to do it smarter.

Historically, social landlords have not been good enough at putting tenants at the heart of their services, communicating with them or being accountable to them.

Tenant participation, used as a means to an end, can be a very effective way of doing all three of these things.

But it is what it achieves that is important, not the structure that is set up.

I cannot emphasise this enough. The structure is only important in terms of realising outcomes.

A good example of this is the formulation of a housing strategy. The ODPM says landlords must consult tenants on their strategies, so the housing professional says: "Damn, another job to add to this torturous project. Quick, round up the usual suspects, give them a cup of tea and bore them into submission."

Perhaps it would be more appropriate for the housing professional to think, I need to write a good housing strategy, well-researched and communicated to my customers as well.

Tenant participation would then happen naturally, and in a meaningful way, once social landlords started concentrating on what they are trying to achieve from the consultation.

The difference is that in the second way of working we are not trying to achieve tenant participation in itself, we are using it to achieve something else.

Another good example is resident groups. They can have a real role in improving and sustaining areas. However, it is the difference they make that is important, not the fact that they exist.

If they deliver and then dwindle that is fine, too – I wouldn't turn out to meetings myself if there was no point to them and, moreover, I would be suspicious of any person who did.

Concentrating on what they are trying to achieve will, in itself, encourage residents to participate in such groups.

Stock option appraisals are another great example of concentrating on outcomes.

An appraisal has a clear aim and needs tenant participation to achieve that aim. With best-value comprehensive performance assessment and the fit for purpose standard, the government has plenty of opportunity to ensure tenants are put at the heart of services.

Most tenants don't want to participate but it doesn't matter if you focus on outcomes because you will be an excellent landlord – and that's what counts, after all.