asdm integrated draft
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/2/2019 ASDM Integrated Draft
1/28
1
Survey Data Analysis & Recommendations
Prepared for the Housing Department Management Team by:
Nadine Adams-AustinSarah Berman-HoustonGareth BoswellFayzan Rotherham
22 July 2011
-
8/2/2019 ASDM Integrated Draft
2/28
2
Table of Contents
Part A: Analysis of the data
1 Background ....................................................................................................................................... 1
2 Methodology ..................................................................................................................................... 1
3 Tenants' expectations, perceptions and gap scores across the 5 dimensions ........................ 3
4 Tenants' importance weightings across the 5 dimensions ......................................................... 5
5 Key expectations and gap scores within each dimension .......................................................... 5
6 A comparative analysis of key results across the 7 towns ......................................................... 6
7 Recommendations for performance improvement ....................................................................... 8
Part B: Evaluation of the Options1 Discuss the roles you played and how you used the CAUSE framework or other approachesto support your problem structuring ................................................................................................... 131.1
Alternatives .......................................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
1.2 Stakeholders .................................................................................................................................. 131.3 Uncertainties .................................................................................................................................. 131.4 External / Environmental ................................................................................................................ 132 Discuss the development of a value tree for the analysis of alternatives................................ 14 3 Explain the process of scoring and weighting you have used (and include a table or graphof values) ................................................................................................................................................ 144 Discuss the synthesis of information for each stakeholder or scenario and compare resultsacross stakeholders / scenarios .......................................................................................................... 145 Carry out appropriate sensitivity analyses and outline what you learned from these ........... 145.1 Staff/Unions/Residents stakeholder sensitivity analysis ................................................................ 165.1.1 Residents preferred option: Outsource the housing service to a local cooperative
housing association ............................................................................................................................. 165.1.2 Staff/Unions preferred option: A management buyout ............................................................. 165.1.3 Local tax payers preferred option: Outsource the housing service to a cooperativehousing association ............................................................................................................................. 16
5.2 Local and National government stakeholder sensitivity analysis ................................................... 175.2.1 Elected members preferred option: Option B: Outsource the housing service to alocal cooperative housing association ................................................................................................. 175.2.2 Local government preferred option: Option B: Outsource the housing service to alocal cooperative housing association ................................................................................................. 18
5.3 Housing Manager stakeholder sensitivity analysis ........................................................................ 185.3.1 Private company manager preferred option: management buyout .......................................... 185.3.2 Housing Service Manager preferred option: management buyout ........................................... 205.3.3 Local Authority Manager preferred option: Management buyout ............................................. 205.3.4 Bank Manager preferred option: management buyout ............................................................. 20
6 Recommend a course of action (this may be a decision, a need to consider furtheralternatives, a need to design a more robust or better compromise alternative etc ...) ................ 22
-
8/2/2019 ASDM Integrated Draft
3/28
3
7 Appendix A - Stakeholders ............................................................................................................ 237.1 Staff Representatives and Union Representatives ........................................................................ 237.2 Local Residents (service users) ..................................................................................................... 237.3 Local Residents (those who pay for services through the local property tax) ................................ 237.4 Elected Council representative ...................................................................................................... 237.5 The Scottish Government............................................................................................................... 247.6
Housing service manager............................................................................................................... 24
7.7 Local Authority Housing Manager .................................................................................................. 247.8 Local Cooperative Housing Association (HA) Manager ................................................................. 257.9 Private Company Manager............................................................................................................. 257.10 Bank Manager ................................................................................................................................ 258 Appendix B - Value Tree Analysis ................................................................................................ 26 9 Appendix C Scores and Weights ............................................................................................... 2710 Appendix D Performance Profile ............................................................................................... 28
-
8/2/2019 ASDM Integrated Draft
4/28
4
PART A: ANALYSIS OF THE DATA
1. Executive SummaryThis report has been prepared for the Housing Department to provide context and analysis for
the statistical outcome of a recent tenant survey. The report will present the relevant findings ofthe data, explain these findings in understandable terms, and provide recommendations for
responding to the needs of the tenant population.
A total of 550 questionnaires out of 2000 were returned, and have been analysed. Whilst
response rates have varied between towns, a suitable statistical test has confirmed that there is
no significant difference between the distribution of surveys returned compared with those
distributed. We can therefore be confident that an appropriate cross-section of customers is
represented by this data.
Gap scores have shown us that the major areas for performance improvement are Reliability
and Responsiveness. Some towns are more satisfied than others, however, and there is scopefor reallocating resources according to the varying degrees of their importance to tenants.
The towns of Erinlang and, to a lesser degree, Grantspey, require a large amount of strategic
attention in making the necessary service improvements. The survey has revealed that most
tenant dissatisfaction across the regions can be traced to poor staff performance. The
Department must address this issue if tenant satisfaction is to be improved.
As the intended audience is not of a statistical background, the body of this report has been
kept straightforward. However, details of the data, along with graphs and other materials, have
been added as appendices for those who desire to read further.
2. BackgroundA satisfaction survey has recently been circulated amongst a sample of the tenant population.The objective of this survey is to gain an understanding of current service quality, and to identifyareas for future improvement.
This survey is designed to identify the expected and perceived service levels among customersin 7 towns. Five service dimensions were surveyed:
Tangibles
Reliability
Responsiveness
Assurance
Empathy
The housing department wishes to use the survey results to identify the gaps in service levelsamongst the regions, and across the business as a whole. Rather than issue a simple
-
8/2/2019 ASDM Integrated Draft
5/28
5
satisfaction questionnaire, the department decided on a more sophisticated gap approach.Statistical methodology was therefore chosen as the optimal method for analysing the outputs ofthe survey.
This report investigates how customer perceptions align with expectations, identifies key servicegaps, and makes recommendations for how these gaps can be addressed.
3. MethodologyCustomer response did not always conform to expected standards. Some questionnaires did
not respond to certain questions and gave no weightings, some questions received several
responses, and some customer weightings did not add up to 100. Our methods for addressing
these inconsistencies are detailed below:
Nine data items had more than one value assigned to each dimension. However, these
multiple responses were in series such as 5,6 or 5, 6, 7. In order to capture the nature
of the response, we took an average of the values given.
42 of the dimension questions were left blank, close to 10% of the data set. Rather thanassume a value, and risk distorting such a significant amount of data, we reduced the
sample size for each question by excluding these null value types. This will be reflected
in the reporting.
Weight value was empty for 15 out of 550 data items. We discarded these from the
weightings analysis, as no logical assumption was possible.
One value was given as a character instead of a number. This response was excluded,
as no logical assumption was possible.
Where a range of weight values were given, the values were averaged and scaled out to
reach 100.
30 questionnaires showed cumulative weights that added up to more than 100%. 26
questionnaires showed cumulative weights that did not add up to 100%. For this, we
scaled the individual values out of 100%
4. Tenants' expectations, perceptions and gap scores across the 5
dimensions
Tangibles
Measures of tangibility comprised the physical condition of facilities, modernity of equipment,staff appearance and communication materials.
The data clearly demonstrates that quality communication material is the most importantcriterion in this dimension for respondents, and their expectations in this area have not beenmet. However, the physical appearance of both facilities and staff match customer expectations.
-
8/2/2019 ASDM Integrated Draft
6/28
6
The equipment provided exceeds expectations, making this a possible area for reallocation ofinvestment.
Reliability
Measures of reliability comprised timeliness of service, sincere interest in solving tenantsproblems, doing a job right the first time, keeping service appointments, and keeping accuraterecords. This is a primary area of concern, as perceived service quality falls far short of tenant
expectations across all measures of quality.
It is clear from the data that the service fails to meet expected standards of timeliness,efficiency, and genuine staff interest in its problem-solving duties. Accuracy of records faredslightly better in matching expectations, but there is still ample room for improvement.
Responsiveness
Measures of responsiveness comprised informing tenants of when work will be done, providingprompt service, staff willingness to help tenants, and never being too busy to respond to tenantrequests. None of these specific areas are currently satisfying customer expectations.
The data demonstrates that expectations exceed perceptions of quality in this dimension,sometimes by a good amount. The most common point of tenant dissatisfaction is that they arenot properly informed of when work will be performed.
Assurance
Measures of assurance comprised inspiring confidence in tenants, assuring confidentiality,being consistently polite and having sufficient knowledge to answer tenants questions.
The data shows that there are areas for significant improvement in this dimension. Althoughstaff courtesy and knowledge comes close to meeting expectations, tenants do not feel asconfident or informed as they expect to when interacting with the housing service.
Overall, customers have shown that their service expectations have not been met in thiscategory.
Empathy
Measures of empathy comprised informing tenants of what services are available, providingconvenient operating hours and office locations, having the tenants best interests at heart, andunderstanding tenants individual needs.
Tenants are satisfied with the convenience of operating hours. However, customers do not feelthey are given individual attention, or that their best interests are being looked after.
Perceptions do not meet expectation in these areas; in fact, the data shows that the servicegaps in this area are among the widest service gaps identified by the survey.
-
8/2/2019 ASDM Integrated Draft
7/28
7
4.1 Gap Scores Across Dimensions
Displaying weighted gap scores is a useful tool for quickly visualising the overall relationship
perceptions and expectations. The table below shows that whilst no dimension achieved
complete satisfaction amongst tenants, some areas are underperforming more than others. The
largest service gaps are seen in Reliability, Responsiveness and Assurance, in that order.
Dimension Average Expectation Average Perception Gap Score
Tangibles 5.6 5.22 -0.41
Reliability 6.5 4.9 -1.6
Responsiveness 6.53 4.98 -1.55
Assurance 6.4 5.1 -1.4
Empathy 6.5 5.4 -1.1
4.2 Confidence Interval (95%)Applying a confidence interval to these results enables a level of statistical inference about thelarger population. A standard confidence interval of 95% was applied to the data set, allowingus to draw the following inferences about the majority of the tenant population:
Dimension Confidence Interval (95%)Expectations
Confidence Interval (95%) Perceptions
Tangibles 6 5
Reliability 6.5 5
Responsiveness 6.5 5
Assurance 6 5
Empathy 6.5 5.4
Tangibles
The majority of customers expects an average score of 6 across tangible services, but givesactual service quality an average score of 5. Although there is room for improvement, this is
the most narrow service gap perceived by the tenant population.
Reliability
The tenants expectations of quality in this dimension are among the highest in the survey.Perceived quality levels fall far short of these expectations.
Responsiveness
-
8/2/2019 ASDM Integrated Draft
8/28
8
The tenant population also has quite high expectations around the responsiveness of theHousing Department, topping even reliability. Again, quality perception is exceptionally low inrelation to expectation, making this dimension a source of significant disappointment.
Assurance
There is a service gap for the majority of the tenants, but it is not a major point of dissatisfaction.However, the Department should be aware that they are not instilling the confidence they could
be in their customers.
Empathy
Most tenants have high expectation for the empathy of staff, but the perception of quality fallsquite short of these standards. The majority of the population feels a lack of empathy in certainservice areas, and the Department should focus on these points of contact.
5. Customer Weightings across DimensionsTenants were asked to assign relative importance weightings to each of the five dimensions,according to how relevant each factor was to their individual needs. After cleansing the data asexplained in the Methodology section, the weightings clearly demonstrate that reliability and
responsiveness are the most important factors to tenants, whilst tangibles are the leastimportant.
The weightings were also analysed on a regional basis. Again, reliability is the most importantaspect of service across all towns. Responsiveness is a close second, particularly in the townsof Bracklin and Grantspey. Assurance and empathy are important to all regions, particularly inthe towns of Arnmuir and Deebank.
6. Key expectations and gap scores within each dimension
Tangibles
Communication materials, equipment and facilities are clearly of high importance to the tenant
population. Tenants expect accessible and attractive tangible goods. The data shows that thisperformance in this area could be improved by roughly 50 percent. This is an area wherestrategic changes could make a difference. However, the gap scores show that this dimensionis performing well in relation to the others.
Reliability
This dimension contains a number of key tenant expectations. Accuracy of paperwork, and staffprovision of appropriate and timely service, stand out as the areas of greatest importance. Thedata shows that a great deal of improvement can and should be achieved here.
Responsiveness
The highest expectations in this dimension concerns department staff: prompt service,enthusiasm, and willingness to help tenants. The data demonstrates a service gap of roughly 25percent around these areas, with the highest gap occurring in the area of being kept informedby staff of work schedules. These scores clearly indicate that staff training would go a long waytoward improving tenant satisfaction levels.
-
8/2/2019 ASDM Integrated Draft
9/28
9
Assurance
The key expectation in this dimension is for tenants to feel assured of their confidentiality. Thesecond most significant expectation is that staff will be consistently polite. Gaps of 20 and 26percent, respectively, show that these areas fall short of customer expectations. Although theseare not the most significant service gaps, assurance is an area that the department would dowell to improve.
Empathy
Tenants expect that their best interests will be important to staff, but their perceptions in thisarea do not match these high expectations. The tenants also expect the department tounderstand their individual needs, but again, perceptions do not align with these expectations.On a positive note, the housing department is meeting tenant expectations in its schedulingrepairs and maintenance.
7. Comparative analysis of key results across the 7 towns
ArnmuirThe weakest service performance in the town of Arnmuir is in the dimension of Reliability. Mostdisappointing in this dimension is staff ability to get a job right the first time the data showsthat perception of this service area falls particularly short of tenant expectations. The other areain the Reliability dimension that tenants find particularly unsatisfactory is staff interest in solvingtheir problems.
Another dimension that showed very low perceptions in relation to expectations was Assurance.Tenants expected to feel confident in the Departments abilities, and they expected staff to beconsistently polite. These factors in particular scored badly in the survey.
Low scores were also given to Responsiveness. The most significant service gaps in this
dimension concerned being informed exactly when work was to be carried out, and staff beingtoo busy to respond to their questions.
However, whilst the tenants in Arnmuir are dissatisfied across all dimensions, their perceptionsare the closest to expectations of all the towns surveyed. Although there is room forimprovement, the Department does not have far to go to bridge the service gap in Armuir.
BracklinThe tenants in Bracklin reported satisfaction with more areas than any other region.
Perceptions aligned with expectations in communication materials, sincere interest of staff, staff
knowledge, and work being performed at convenient times. These tenants were also the
closest to being completely satisfied with Tangibles.
However, the dimension of Responsiveness is a major weakness in Bracklin. Tenants are
equally unhappy with all aspects of this dimension. The second worst performing dimension is
Reliability. Of particular concern is getting a job done by the time it is promised, and getting a
job done right the first time. These two factors fall equally short of expectations.
-
8/2/2019 ASDM Integrated Draft
10/28
10
CambusAlthough the data shows ample room for improvement of services, the tenants of Cambus are
not hugely dissatisfied. In fact, their expectations are exceeded by the quality of Tangibles.
Reliability performance scored the worst, especially in the area of getting a job done right the
first time, and done by the time it is promised. Dissatisfaction with the sincere interest of staff
accounts for a large service gap as well. However, this is somewhat mitigated by the fact that
Reliability received a particularly low importance weighting.
The dimension of Responsiveness also shows poor perceptions against expectations. The
major pain points are being informed exactly when work is carried out, and receiving prompt
service
Cambus tenants weighted Assurance the lowest of all the regions.
DeebankThe tenants of Deebank report the highest expectations of Tangibles. Happily, these high
expectations are exceeded by the quality of Tangibles.
The Deebank population is the least disappointed by the quality of Reliability, and are the
closest to being satisfied by promptness of service and staff attitude. They are also reasonably
satisfied with Responsiveness. They have high expectations of Assurance, along with high
perceptions. In fact, the data shows that Deebank has the lowest service gaps in the Assurance
dimension. Deebank has the highest perception of office location convenience.
Although the Deebank tenants are fairly content, there are areas that need attention. In the
Responsiveness dimension, tenants show poor perceptions of promptness of service, and
being informed exactly when work will be carried out.
And although Assurance performs well in general, improvements can be made in staff
knowledge and assurance of confidentiality.
ErinlangThis town is dissatisfied with everything, and by quite a lot, although they are almost satisfied
with the quality of Tangibles. However, Tangibles was given only a medium amount of
importance by tenants.
Perceptions of Reliability are exceptionally low in relation to expectations. The worst scorers
are the sincere interest of staff, and getting a job right the first time. These two areas showed
equally bad perceptions.
The second worst performer is Responsiveness. Being informed of exactly when work will becarried out, and receiving prompt service showed particularly wide service gaps.
The tenants of Erinlang are the most dissatisfied with service quality of any population in theregions. This town requires a high level of Department attention.
-
8/2/2019 ASDM Integrated Draft
11/28
11
ForthsideTenants in Forthside are satisfied with tangibles, for the most part, but the data shows at least
some dissatisfaction with everything else.
Perceptions of Reliability are the lowest, and account for the lowest gap score in the data set.
The lowest perceptions against expectations are reported around sincere interest of staff, and
getting a job right the first time.
Responsiveness also scored very low. The Forthside tenants have high expectations for
prompt service, and perceptions do not come close to matching these expectations. Tenants
also reported wide service gaps around staff being too busy, and less than willing, to help with
their questions and concerns.
GrantspeyThe population in Grantspey is satisfied with the quality of Tangibles, but dissatisfied by a good
bit with everything else.
The worst service gaps are in the dimension of Reliability. In particular, the sincere interest of
staff, and getting a job right the first time, were scored quite low by tenants. There are also
quite low perceptions in the dimension of Responsiveness - being informed exactly when work
will be carried out, and staff too busy to respond, are the worst performers in this data set.
Grantspey also identifies major service gaps in Empathy. Most problems here concern staff
attitudes, and staff understanding of individual needs.
8. Recommendations for Performance Improvement
The data is remarkably consistent across the regions: all towns report their primary dimensionsof dissatisfaction to be Responsiveness and Reliability. Deebank is the one exception, with thepoorest performing dimensions being Reliability and Assurance.
Tangibles show the highest perceptions against expectations, satisfying and even exceedingexpectations in some regions. Cambus and Deebank clearly receive over-investment inTangibles, evidenced by exceeded expectations in these towns. The fact that perceptionsexceed expectations is clearly demonstrated by the positive weighted gap scores. Thisinvestment can and should be reallocated to staff training and/or recruitment, as the majority of
service gaps concern the quality of staff competence and attitude.
The town of Deebank in particular seems content with most dimensions, whilst Erinlang tenantsare highly dissatisfied with the quality of service they receive from the Department. If possible,a staff exchange should take place between these two regions. This would allow morecompetent staff members from Deebank to model best service practice for Erinlang staff in alive environment whilst improving service for Erinlang tenants.
-
8/2/2019 ASDM Integrated Draft
12/28
12
The data also shows that getting a job right the first time and informing tenants of maintenanceschedules are major problems in most towns. At its heart, these issues demonstrate a lack ofconsideration for the customers experience. In fact, the tenants may not be perceived ascustomers at all, an attitude which would account for some of the low scores across Reliabilityand Responsiveness.
The Department must create a customer-focused service culture amongst its operations staff.This includes implementing a Customer Experience programme which maps contact points,identifies appropriate behavior, and builds accountability into performance evaluation. In short,the Department must see itself as a business, and treat its staff like professionals. Holding staffto a high standard, and rewarding them appropriately, will improve measures of service qualitymore effectively than a simple round of compulsory staff training.
Along the same lines, in order to function at an optimal level the Department must regularlyassess customer perceptions and reallocate resource accordingly. For example, the town ofCambus gave Assurance a low importance rating, which indicates that Department spend in thisarea would go further toward customer satisfaction if it were reallocated to another town.Deebank, for example, reports quite low perceptions of Assurance, and would benefit from thereassignment of a particularly knowledgeable staff member.
-
8/2/2019 ASDM Integrated Draft
13/28
13
PART B: EVALUATION OF THE OPTIONS
1. Problem structuring and Stakeholder modelling
The CAUSE framework was used to support problem structuring. It also provided guidance in
evaluating the four options currently under consideration by the Housing Department:
Option A: Staff training
Option B: Outsource the housing service to a local cooperative housing association
Option C: Outsource the housing service to a private sector company
Option D: A management buy out
1.1 Stakeholder Modelling
After careful analysis of the brief provided by the Department, eleven distinct stakeholders in
four categories were identified (see Appendix A Stakeholders). Each stakeholder has unique
priorities and primary considerations, making it necessary to explore the four options from
multiple perspectives. Modelling of these perspectives was performed as indicated below:
Gareth
o Staff Representatives and Union Representatives
o Local Residents (service users)
o Local Residents (those who pay for services through the local property tax)
Nadine
o Elected Council representative
o The Scottish Government
Sarah
o Management buy-out Housing Service/Local Authority Housing/Housing
Association/Private Company Manager
o Bank Manager
Fayzan
o Analyst and facilitator
Each author had an established role from the outset of the evaluation process. This gave each
key decision maker an equal voice in the decision analysis.
1.2 Uncertainties
Defining the roles for the group made the brainstorming of uncertainties easier, as each teammember was positioned to contribute from their unique viewpoint. This is discussed is more
detail in the next section.
1.3 External / Environmental
Our analysis included discussion of how wider environmental factors could affect the decision
making process. For example, although we did not consider other Local Authorities to be
relevant stakeholders in our analysis, we do recognise that they will have an impact on policies
-
8/2/2019 ASDM Integrated Draft
14/28
14
produced by the central Scottish government, which may in turn affect the Housing Department.
However, every action and decision by a variety of external group and individual presents the
risk possible knock-on effects for the Department. The decision was taken to focus our analysis
on the known perspectives and priorities of the primary stakeholders.
2. Developing a value tree for the analysis of alternatives
By playing the defined roles, each author was able to ensure that the root of the value tree wascomprised of the key uncertainties. These uncertainties were then split into the appropriate sub
categories. This ensured that the each node of the value tree was relevant to, and understood
by, all stakeholders.
We debated the most appropriate composition, such as nodes representing uncertainties, or
nodes representing stakeholders. However it became clear that this problem required
uncertainties. The final output is shown in Appendix Value Tree Analysis.
2.1 Scoring and weighting process
Please see Appendix C Scores and Weights, which contains the final scores we reached. For
all the uncertainties, we chose to use a Local Scale for our reference points, where 0
corresponds to least important and 100 to the most important.
Role play assisted in VISA Step 3 Set Scores. Each team member provided insights from the
stakeholders that they represented, which in turn allowed us to arrive at a considered view as to
the local scale for each uncertainty.
To facilitate a discussion for VISA Step 4 Set Weights, each team member separately
produced weights for the uncertainties, which the facilitator then merged for further review in a
group discussion to arrive at a final consensus. The final weights that we arrived at can be seen
in the diagram in Appendix B - Value Tree Analysis.
Discuss the synthesis of information for each stakeholder or scenario
and compare results across stakeholders / scenarios
To enable opinions to be more fully formed and considered, we conducted the Part B assignment over
multiple group meetings. In preparation for each meeting the facilitator requested that the other team
members prepare appropriate input for group reflection that highlighted the positions of their
representative stakeholders. At this point we had produced:
Scores, see Appendix C Scores and Weights
Weightings, see Appendix C Scores and Weights with the diagram in Appendix B - Value Tree
Analysis
Please see Appendix D Performance Profile, which shows a breakdown of Best and Worst
uncertainties for each of the four alternatives. At this point the two alternatives Outsource thehousing service to a local cooperative housing association and A management buy out clearly
appear to be two options that are worth considering further.
Carry out appropriate sensitivity analyses and outline what you
learned from these
Once we had reached Step 5 - Analyze Value Tree, using sensitivity charts etc. enabled each team
member to produce results that reflected the aspirations of their stakeholders. This showed that it was
-
8/2/2019 ASDM Integrated Draft
15/28
15
possible for one stakeholder to imply that the results showed in their favour, when in actuality charts
needed to be compared alongside representations for all the views of the other stakeholders.
-
8/2/2019 ASDM Integrated Draft
16/28
16
Staff/Unions/Residents stakeholder sensitivity analysis
Residents preferred option: Outsource the housing service to a local cooperative housing
association
The sensitivity chart indicates that having taken adjusted each
criteria weight according to the preference of residents, the
preferred option is to outsourcing to a local cooperative housing
association.In this situation, the best interests of the residents are deemed
to be met, these being management of service gaps, to deliver
a high quality service by addressing all service needs. This
option is well suited to achieve this objective, considering that
the residents have direct representation in the appointed
housing association, which precludes poor communication of
service needs and facilitates a rapid response to any service
quality issues in the shortest possible time.
Staff/Unions preferred option: A management buyout
A management buyout appears to favour the best interests of
the staff and the associated unions.A principal concern for all staff, and by default, the unions is job
retention as the housing service undergoes ownership and
management change. Although TUPE regulations are expected
to protect these rights, thereby providing assurance to the
staff/unions at the initial stages of a change in the business
ownership, there is no long-term guarantee that the status quo
will be maintained. Many employees in this service will remain
in the department over the medium to long term, and this
uncertainty therefore creates a significant uneasiness in the
ranks of personnel employed by the local authority.
A management buyout thus empowers the employees to manage their own future and imparts a sense of
job security in that the future of their employment is placed firmly in the hands of those whom they already
rub shoulders throughout the working day, and who shall therefore empathise with them most over job
security issues.
Local tax payers preferred option: Outsource the housing service to a cooperative housing
association
Local taxpayers have many interests in the decision to improve
service delivery, beyond the obvious management of service
gaps and service quality delivered in fulfilment of service needs.
From the perspective of the tax payer, there are deeper
concerns such as the budget allocation of government funding,
and their own contributions through tax payment which they
expect to be managed optimally to deliver the best servicepossible in the short to medium term.
In the short term, the operating budget is a sure indicator of
where these funds are allocated to and maintenance of full
control over the management of funds shall assure these
remain allocated to deliver optimal results.
From the perspective of the tax payer, local authorities may, either through historical experience or as a
result of distrust in politicians, not be the best custodians and administrators of these funds. Local
-
8/2/2019 ASDM Integrated Draft
17/28
17
authorities may also not have the best interests of the taxpayers at heart when decisions are made in
respect of resource allocation and control, considering that the actions are not directed solely by the
taxpayer, but more so by government policy, over which the tax payer may feel they have insufficient
representation and/or immediate control.
Outsourcing this service to a local cooperative thus resonates well with the interests of the taxpayer,
considering that fund allocation and control is more focussed on the tangible service needs of the
customer, thus amounting to effective short and medium term administration of the tax payers
contributions.
Local and National government stakeholder sensitivity analysis
Elected members preferred option: Option B: Outsource the housing service to a local
cooperative housing association
Elected members have a number of conflicting priorities and
concerns, with a need to ensure that the cuts required of central
government are delivered, and a seemingly conflicting need to
influence residents in such a way that they perceive an improvement
in quality, which in the short to mid-term could impact on future local
election decisions. Hence, there is an underlying political focus on
any key decision being made.
Budget options are therefore highly important, whether on a local
level in terms of dictating exactly how much money is available for
any of these options and identifying cost savings, or in terms of
looking at alternative options beyond the four given such as finding
alternative funding from external sources or building a case for more
funding from government because of specific causes.
It should be noted hence that regardless of the results indicated from
the management software, it is likely to be used as a contributing
factor to the final decision politically, and elected members would be
seeking out more information, for instance looking at what is
happening in neighbouring regions, risk factors associated with each
option, and possible political repercussions of choosing any one
option, before proceeding.
As part of being seen to represent and consider the needs of local
residents, elected members would also be interested in accounting
for service needs. Elected members will also be reluctant to take any
option which will regarded as a relinquishment of control, unless they
could fully demonstrate how this would deliver improved service
quality and reduce costs with minimal risk to the council (and indirectly to local residents taxes).
Staff-related concerns would be of less concern to elected members. While it would be beneficial to have
staff and unions on side, neither party can argue against the need to save money and provide a higher
quality service, from the findings of the resident survey. One possible viewpoint is that current staff have
helped to contribute to the current perception of the councils services, and if they are unwilling to admit tothis problem, then no amount of union argument or training being made available will help improve the
situation.
From these priorities, the software shows that the preferred option would be to outsource the housing
service to a local cooperative housing association. Depending on the nature of the councils
arrangements with the housing association, there may be scope for an element of control to be kept,
especially considering that the local authority will be assisting with set up costs and contributing to the
Housing Associations annual costs.
-
8/2/2019 ASDM Integrated Draft
18/28
18
However, as indicated above, it is believed that elected members would want more information about this
option before committing further, as it would be important to them to be able to communicate the benefits
and savings to be achieved by following this route, and they would want to assure themselves that in the
current political and economic climate that residents would be broadly in support of their option choice
or that they had appropriate plans in place to be able to deal with any opposition.
Local government preferred option: Option B: Outsource the housing service to a local
cooperative housing association
The local council as a whole will be directed the priorities of the
elected members, given its function to help deliver elected
members strategies and visions over a political term. The main
point of difference for local government is that it would also have
to consider operational issues and staff concerns. For instance,
losing any staff as a result of making training mandatory, or
through some of the options, will incur costs and time.
There may also be implications to service quality if Option 1
were chosen for instance the organisation might have to
consider how a temporary dip in service quality could be
managed while change and improvements were being
embedded. So for local government, while staffing issues wouldbe less important than the other areas, it would not necessarily
be zero weighting.
With this extra consideration, the software also shows Option B as the recommended option. As local
government decisions would then be expected to go for approval by the senior management team(s) and
/ or elected members, a robust case would need to be developed to take this option forward if it was
supported by the elected members, notably, assertions such as the, Housing Association should in
theory at least be able to provide high levels of service quality to tenants, would need to be substantiated
further.
Housing Manager stakeholder sensitivity analysis
Private company manager preferred option: management buyout
The private company manager is concerned with Budget
both the capital budget and the operating budget rate high on
the list of priorities. With the exception of setup costs which
figure highly, Political Needs and their sub-criteria do not
factor into this managers decision making process.
Staff-related concerns do figure into the decision, but only at
a mid-weight ranking. The private company manager is not
overly concerned with the residents perception of quality
and service gaps are only important in that the bare minimum
must be done in order to retain the customer base.
As for Management sub-criteria, the major areas of concern
are the business plan and budget allocation. Both of these
rank quite highly. Managing service gaps is a factor, but not
a major one. The important Stakeholders are the shareholders this category gets the maximum
weighting. The bank is important as well, but to a lesser degree. Residents weigh in only slightly.
Taken together, the software predicts that a management buyout would seem the best option to the
private company manager. There are simply too many aspects of this business that that he/she has no
experience with, no time for, and no interest in. In his/her professional opinion, the requirements of this
-
8/2/2019 ASDM Integrated Draft
19/28
19
project would be best served by retaining human resources which possess the required knowledge,
experience and commitment to its objectives.
-
8/2/2019 ASDM Integrated Draft
20/28
20
Housing Service Manager preferred option: management buyout
The housing service manager is highly concerned with all
aspects of budget, political needs, local authority
government, staff and residents. He/she is less concerned
about the Scottish Government, but it does have some
weight as a consideration. As for Management, he/she is
highly concerned with managing service gaps and budget
allocation, but is not so concerned with the business plan.The only stakeholders this individual really values are the
residents shareholders and the bank do not factor in at
all.
The preferred outcome is a management buyout. Given the
complexity of the business and the number of factors that
are of serious concern, simple staff training will not suffice,
and a private company is not an appropriate environment
for a project with so many political needs and public stakeholders.
Local Authority Manager preferred option: Management buyout
The local authority manager has
one overriding priority cope withthe impending budget cuts whilst
ensuring that enough money
remains to cover the considerable
responsibilities of the local
authority.
This individual is greatly
concerned with all aspects of the
budget, giving these criteria a
heavy weighting. Political needs
are a consideration as well, but
taxation, possible savings and initial setup costs are the most important of these. Staff and residents get
middle weighting. They are a consideration, but this manager has a huge amount of staff and customers
across a range of public services.
The management practices of this particular business are not of great concern either. They do rate, but
only in as much as they get the most value for money and keep the customers happy enough not to
cause issues. The residents are the only stakeholders who figure in this scenario, as meeting residents
expectations is an important indicator of this Managers job performance.
The preferred outcome is a management buyout, as this represents a viable chance to save considerable
money and reduce the local authoritys burden of service, whilst maintaining staff consistency for the
tenants.
Bank Manager preferred option: management buyout
The bank managers priorities are simple: budget, business plan,shareholders and, of course, the bank. Criteria around staff,
residents and service quality do get some weight, but only as far as
they are managed enough to achieve sufficient return on
investment.
Due to the bank managers relatively limited scope of interest, this is
a simple decision. As long as the business plan is strong and the
budget is well-managed, he/she will support the management
-
8/2/2019 ASDM Integrated Draft
21/28
21
buyout. This aligns with the fact that the bank as already expressed interest in backing this project.
-
8/2/2019 ASDM Integrated Draft
22/28
22
Recommend a course of action (this may be a decision, a need to
consider further alternatives, a need to design a more robust or
better compromise alternative etc ...)
Having arrived at Step 5 -Analyse the Results, and having
reviewed each of the stakeholders sensitivity analysis, we arrive
at the XY Chart. This presents a very simplistic view of theresults. The XY Chart conclusions are also corroborated by the
Appendix DPerformance Profile, which shows a break down
of Best and Worst uncertainties for each of the four alternatives.
From these charts and the above sensitivity analyses, enables us
to draw two key conclusions:
Alternatives to be immediately dismissed
The two alternatives: Staff training and Outsource the housing
service to a private sector company have much lower overall
scores, were not selected by any individual sensitivity analyses and should be immediately discounted.
Alternatives to be considered further
The remaining two alternatives Outsource the housing service to a local cooperative housing
association and A management buy out achieved very similar scores. This can be concluded both from
individual stakeholder sensitivity analyses, where team members were permitted to change weights, to
reflect their stakeholders opinions, in addition to the overall XY Chart. Therefore, we suggest that the
key decision makers within the Local Authority should review these findings, and combine with additional
insights from elsewhere, which should include:
More detailed financial analysis
Consider ways that the stakeholder needs can be adequate met and measured, such as allowing
the Local Authority some amount of control over ongoing operations.
The research findings detailed in Part A of this report clearly indicated that the dimensions of Reliability
and Responsiveness are of the greatest importance to tenants. It is understood by the analysis alreadyundertaken, that in theory outsourcing to a local cooperative housing association would be best approach
for improving service quality such as in these areas. Also local and national governments may expect to
have greater control over a local cooperative housing association, rather than a management buy out
company. It is stated that residents perceive that service quality such as Reliability and Responsiveness
would not actually improve from a management buy-out, and with operating budgets being cut, this may
be expected to further negatively impact this performance.
Therefore taking the above points holistically into account, we recommend that the option to be pursued
should be that to outsource to a local cooperative housing association.
-
8/2/2019 ASDM Integrated Draft
23/28
23
Appendix A - Stakeholders
Staff Representatives and Union Representatives
Option A
o Provide additional staff training focussed primarily on those areas where the largest
service quality gaps have been identified through your own analysis. The training will be
focussed on how staff can realistically improve the service they provide tenants given
existing budget constraints. Such training will not necessarily incur a high cost as it is
thought that much of the training can be done in-house and that staff can be released
from their day-to-day activities in small groups so as to minimise disruption.
Option C
o Staff currently working in the housing service would need to apply for their jobs with the
successful private bidder and there are no guarantees as to how many would be
employed or what terms and conditions would be. Understandably the local trades/labour
union is concerned about the impact on its members of this option (although only around
40% of housing service staff are union members)
Option D.
o It is anticipated that most staff would transfer over to the new organisation after the buy
out but this is not guaranteed.
Local Residents (service users)
Option C
o tenants have expressed concerns that the private company would be able to raise rents
as it wanted
Option D
o Local residents are concerned that quality of service may not improve given that it would
be the same management and the same staff as at present
Local Residents (those who pay for services through the local property tax)
Option A
o Still in council control so continuing impact on taxes
Option B
o the local authority would pay an annual contribution to the HAs running costs of around
500k
Option C
o The cost savings to the housing service however under this option are considerable
Option D
o Might be less burden on shareholders
Elected Council representative
Option B
o The HA should in theory at least be able to provide high levels of service quality to
tenants. Most of the existing housing service staff would automatically be transferred to
the HA with existing terms and conditions. However, there would be the option for staff
who did not want to transfer to take voluntary redundancy. The local authority estimates itcould incur a one-off cost of between 250k and 350k for this. In addition, the setup
costs to the local authority for this option would be relatively high (around million) as
the authority supports the new HA to get established (offices, IT systems etc) and the
local authority would pay an annual contribution to the HAs running costs of around
500k.
Option C
o Elected representatives serving on the local authority have also expressed concern about
the lack of control over the private company
-
8/2/2019 ASDM Integrated Draft
24/28
24
o The cost savings to the housing service however under this option are considerable
Option D
o Elected representatives have argued that the local authority would have no future
influence over local housing policy which could cause major problems for economic
growth and development, tourism and so on.
o From this it appears that the elected official will be directly responsible for the housing
budget allocated, and by shrinking the budget too far, may break the viability of the
private company.The Scottish Government
The Scottish Government provide grants to each LA for social housing. Therefore they will wish
to have influence over how each local authority prioritise spending such as on social housing
Housing service manager
The housing service currently has an annual operating budget of around 1.5 million which goes on staff
costs, operating costs and the cost of property repairs. Under current economic conditions, the service
anticipates that its operating budget is likely to be cut considerably over the next few years putting further
pressure on the service in terms of quality and service. Any budget cuts are likely to lead to a reduction in
staff numbers although it is hoped this can be done through natural wastage rather than redundancy. The
capital budget allocated to the service for property upgrades and new build is likely to fall to zero.
Option A.o The Departmental manager is aware that staff training will not necessarily address all the
gaps identified. The manager is also aware that such training is not necessarily a
guarantee of improved performance and quality as some staff have been very reluctant to
accept any responsibility for the service quality gaps identified.
Option D.
o Existing management and staff of the housing service to organise a management buy
out. This would involve the existing management team paying the local authority an
agreed amount for the existing housing stock. The new service would then be
responsible for providing the service to local tenants and the local authority would have
no more involvement. It is anticipated that most staff would transfer over to the new
organisation after the buy out but this is not guaranteed.
o The manager needs to build a business plan that anticipates budget cuts, by seekingalternative revenue streams (such as renting properties privately), and planning for staff
reductions
Local Authority Housing Manager
Option B
o The HA would be run by a Board made up of people nominated by the local authority to
ensure good governance and also by elected representatives of the tenants who would
therefore have a direct involvement in the running of the service. The HA should in theory
at least be able to provide high levels of service quality to tenants. Most of the existing
housing service staff would automatically be transferred to the HA with existing terms and
conditions. However, there would be the option for staff who did not want to transfer to
take voluntary redundancy. The local authority estimates it could incur a one-off cost of
between 250k and 350k for this. In addition, the setup costs to the local authority for
this option would be relatively high (around million) as the authority supports the new
HA to get established (offices, IT systems etc) and the local authority would pay an
annual contribution to the HAs running costs of around 500k.
Option D
o There is also a risk to the local authority that if the new service is not financially viable in
the medium term and goes out of business, the local authority will have to pick up the
pieces.
-
8/2/2019 ASDM Integrated Draft
25/28
25
Local Cooperative Housing Association (HA) Manager
Option B
o The second option is to outsource the entire service to a local cooperative housing
association (HA). HAs are non-profit organisations run by their tenants but employing
professional staff to carry out the day-to-day activities of the service and also to provide
professional management.
Private Company Manager
Option C
o The third option would be to outsource the entire service to the private sector. This would
be done through an invitation-to-tender process whereby private companies would bid for
the annual payment they would require from the local authority to provide the service.
The local authority would then pay that fee each year to the successful bidder to provide
the service for the next 5 years. It is not clear, given the current recession in the UK, what
level of payment private firms might require but a guesstimate is that it could be as low as
250k. The private company would also retain the rental income generated by the
housing stock from providing the service.
Bank Manager
Option D
o A Scottish bank has already indicated it would consider providing the funding for the buy-out. Its not known what the current value of the housing stock is but an informal estimate
is between 10-15 million.
-
8/2/2019 ASDM Integrated Draft
26/28
26
Appendix B - Value Tree Analysis
This diagram depicts the value tree that our group collectively built, showing our key uncertainties, and
how that breaks down into sub-sections. The weights that were defined in VISA Step 4 Set Weights,
are also shown.
-
8/2/2019 ASDM Integrated Draft
27/28
27
Appendix C Scores and Weights
For all the uncertainties, we chose to use a Local Scale, where 0 implies least important and 100 is
most important.
We took the combined views of all the stakeholders to arrive at the decision, as to how each uncertainty
would be impacted by the four alternatives. It should be noted that at face value, some scores might not
immediately seem logical, however within the context of our arguments become clear. For example, the
impact of the Unions as an uncertainty, are least important to the Staff Training option, as weconsidered the unions would approve of this, whereas the alternative to Outsource to a third party, might
cause significant disquiet within the Unions, therefore making this most important.
The weights that we collectively arrived at, are shown in the above diagram in 5 Appendix B - Value Tree
Analysis.
-
8/2/2019 ASDM Integrated Draft
28/28
Appendix D Performance Profile
Although there is a lot of volatility which can mask differences between the four alternatives, its easy to
see which alternatives come out best and worst, with the results shown in the following table. We can
draw the following conclusions from this:
All options have a similar number of uncertainties that come out Best
Staff training and Outsource the housing service to a private sector company have significantuncertainties that come out worst
Overall Outsource the housing service to a local cooperative housing association and A
management buy out appear to be two options that are worth considering further.
Alternative # of uncertainties,
considered Best
# of uncertainties,
considered Worst
Difference between
Best and Worst
Staff training 4 -13 -9
Outsource the housing service to
a local cooperative housing
association
4 -1 3
Outsource the housing service to
a private sector company
6 -7 -1
A management buy out 4 -3 1