If you can't beat them, join together

Is anyone else out there feeling fed up, frustrated and cynical about this? Cynical because this was supposed to be a pilot programme. Frustrated because we know we put in some very competitive bids that did not get allocations – in fact, I understand that some bids made through the traditional route were as competitive, if not more so, as those made by the chosen partners. And fed up because our well-run, community-based RSL is desperate to do more.

So what next? Will the 71, as is rumoured, be reduced to 40? Will all development end up being done by private firms? I hope not, because I think RSLs do add value to the development process, particularly if we take our partnerships with local government seriously and use our extensive customer base to ensure ongoing feedback to improve our product. But in future, this may be viewed as icing on the cake. If this is all about output – and Kate Barker says we need to double the number of new affordable homes developed each year – it is mass production, not a tailored product, that is being sought.

So what does this mean for the 1300 or so of us who are outside the tent? How does it fit with the In Business for Neighbourhoods scheme to reposition RSLs as social businesses and, indeed, with the Communities Plan?

The signs are not encouraging. At the recent National Housing Federation chief executives' conference, regeneration minister Lord Rooker asked why there were still so many of us– hadn't he, after all, told us last year that he wanted to see mergers, our numbers reduced?

A plethora of small and medium-sized players in the housing world is seen as a major inconvenience to the government. It would be easier to have one housing voice at the table when dealing with the myriad problems in deprived neighbourhoods. Maybe the government has a point.

So, isn't it time we got our act together? The changes in our world have opened up an opportunity to improve our collaboration skills. We all know how to compete and have done so very successfully over the past 15 years but collaboration, like partnership, requires different skills. It requires us to be more generous with each other, to build trust, and to improve communication.

A plethora of small and medium-sized housing associations is seen as a major inconvenience to the government. Maybe it has a point

If we want to survive, and I'd guess most of us do, we have to behave differently.

Organisations are like individuals: we are proud of our uniqueness. This makes us emphasise our differences rather than recognise the shared objectives we hold.

However, provided that organisations do not fear the loss of identity (through merger and so on), the strength of a team approach cannot be underestimated.

This is demonstrated by the launch of the Procurement for Housing buying group. This initiative allows us to use our joint purchasing power to produce substantial savings that all of us can benefit from. Another example comes from Liverpool, where a group of 35 housing associations banded together and formed an organisation called Fusion 21 to create the buying power needed to push down costs on refurbishment and repairs for all the associations involved in the scheme.

Procurement for Housing will initially look at the procurement of energy, telecoms and office supplies. Bulk purchasing can save millions of pounds for all who take part in such a scheme. As a concept this is not new and makes lots of sense. What it does is reinforce the value of collaboration.