1 / 22

Same or Different? Towards a Typology of Non-Profit Housing Organisations

Same or Different? Towards a Typology of Non-Profit Housing Organisations . 1 - Background: non-profit housing organisations. Quiet Revolution in Housing Supply.

lathrop
Download Presentation

Same or Different? Towards a Typology of Non-Profit Housing Organisations

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Same or Different? Towards a Typology of Non-Profit Housing Organisations 2nd Australian Housing Researchers’ Conference Non-Profit Housing Typologies Tony Gilmour

  2. 1 -Background:non-profit housing organisations 2nd Australian Housing Researchers’ Conference Non-Profit Housing Typologies Tony Gilmour

  3. Quiet Revolution in Housing Supply • Housing sectors: (1) private purchase/rentals (2) public housing (3) non-profit organisations = Community Housing Australia + Housing Associations UK • Housing affordability: global problem based on house prices vs. income. Has become policy issue in last decade • Governance: move to market solutions, inter-sectoral partnerships etc. Public housing ‘residualised’ • Non-profit benefits: responsive to communities, target high/medium need groups, mix public/private funding, build ‘social capital’ through volunteering, politically popular 2nd Australian Housing Researchers’ Conference Non-Profit Housing Typologies Tony Gilmour

  4. Broad Range of Non-Profit Organisations 2nd Australian Housing Researchers’ Conference Non-Profit Housing Typologies Tony Gilmour

  5. Theoretical Foundations • ‘New institutionalism’: brings organisations back to the centre as mediators of economic change (DiMaggio and Powell, 1983). However no Weberian ‘iron cage’! • Network theory: inter-dependence of organisations and institutions, applied to housing (Mullins et al, 2001) • Organisational fields: more than just a sector – need strong networks and forces of institutionalisation (eg professional bodies, regulation, funding) • Institutional isomorphism: organisations operating in same field tend to become more similar through coercive, mimetic and normative processes 2nd Australian Housing Researchers’ Conference Non-Profit Housing Typologies Tony Gilmour

  6. …. & Practical Challenges • Field definitions: hard to define: is there a ‘social housing field’ (public housing + non-profits)? International links? Changes over time? England vs. Australia? • Isomorphism disputed: critics in theory and practice: resistance to isomorphism? Symbolic not real change? Diversity increasing in England (Mullins et al, 2001) • International isomorphism: ‘super league’ of limited number of commercialised growth sector organisations. Similarities in England, Australia, US. Ideas spreading across borders through rich, emerging, networks How can we make sense of this complexity? 2nd Australian Housing Researchers’ Conference Non-Profit Housing Typologies Tony Gilmour

  7. 2 -Typologies:previous research and a new model for housing 2nd Australian Housing Researchers’ Conference Non-Profit Housing Typologies Tony Gilmour

  8. Typologies • Theory: a framework to classify related items in complex environments to correct misconceptions and help define topic boundaries (Tiryakian, 1968; Allmendinger, 2002). Can assist inductive theory building (Doty & Glick, 1994) • Examples: popular in organisational theory (Mintzberg, 1979; Porter, 1980) and planning (Blakely, 1997) • Non-profit housing: surprisingly rare use of typologies: Ireland (Mullins et al, 2003), Netherlands (Gruis & Nieboer, 2004), England (Housing Corporation, 2007) • Descriptors: criteria for classifying similar organisations. Which should we choose for non-profit housing? 2nd Australian Housing Researchers’ Conference Non-Profit Housing Typologies Tony Gilmour

  9. Possible Descriptors 2nd Australian Housing Researchers’ Conference Non-Profit Housing Typologies Tony Gilmour

  10. Business-centric entrepreneurial strategic flexible customer-driven Community-centric voluntary local flexible participatory State-centric equitable bureaucratic fixed consultative

  11. 3 -Case Study:Australian non-profits in the typological model 2nd Australian Housing Researchers’ Conference Non-Profit Housing Typologies Tony Gilmour

  12. Australian Community Housing Organisations • Source: Milligan et al. (2004) ‘A practical framework for expanding affordable housing services in Australia: learning from experience’ • Organisations: 7 ‘growth’ non-profits (3 set up by state or territory ■ + 4 independent/community ■). • Locations: NSW; Vic. (x3); WA; Qld.; ACT • Challenges: test typology model across different jurisdictions and detect patterns/trends 2nd Australian Housing Researchers’ Conference Non-Profit Housing Typologies Tony Gilmour

  13. Business-centric Community-centric 2007 1994 Established by State/Territory City West Housing (NSW) State-centric

  14. Business-centric Community-centric 2007 2002 Established by State Brisbane Housing Company (Qld.) State-centric

  15. Business-centric Community-centric 2007 2000 1998 Established by State/Territory Community Housing Canberra (ACT) State-centric

  16. Business-centric Community-centric 2007 Named St Kilda HA (1986-91) 1989-96 1986-89 Independent community housing organisation Port Phillip Housing Association (Vic.) State-centric

  17. Business-centric Community-centric Eastern Metro Community HA 1997-2006 Northside HA 1998-2006 2007 Foundation Housing 2006 Perth Inner City Housing 1987-1993 1993 Independent community housing organisation Foundation Housing (WA) State-centric

  18. Business-centric Community-centric 2007 1998 1993 Independent community housing organisation Community Housing (Vic.) State-centric

  19. Business-centric Community-centric 2007 Melbourne Affordable Housing 2003 Ecumenical Housing 1985-2003 Inner City Social Housing Co 2000-2003 Independent community housing organisation Melbourne Affordable Housing (Vic.) State-centric

  20. Business-centric Community-centric Summary A (Change over time) State-centric

  21. Effectiveness of the Model • Description: able to paint vivid visual image of organisations (ethos, change over time, mergers) • Analysis: summary charts give a broad interpretation of aggregate trends, eg commercialisation. Able to differentiate between different classes of organisation and of those in different jurisdictions • Discussion: tends to prompt rich debate by housing researchers and managers over ‘positioning’ • Weaknesses: subjectivity, lack of readily measurable quantitative criteria (eg size), more a map than a typology 2nd Australian Housing Researchers’ Conference Non-Profit Housing Typologies Tony Gilmour

  22. Further Research How can non-profit organisations supply more affordable homes for low and moderate income households? An international comparative study with special focus on institutional capacity • Unique feature of topic: brings organisational and network theory into housing, via an international comparative study • Key hypothesis: emergence of a new organisational field: cross-national ‘super league’ of growth housing providers • Typology strengths: facilitates comparisons between countries and over time. However, further deep case-study research needed (PhD studies 9 organisations/3 countries). Take care to avoid the typology freezing explanations 2nd Australian Housing Researchers’ Conference Non-Profit Housing Typologies Tony Gilmour

More Related