From time to time, I hear debates about “purpose,” whether in relation to the use of data and sometimes the very definition of social housing itself.
How often do we ask the same questions of the technology we use every day? What was it bought for? What problem was it meant to solve? And, crucially, is it actually doing what you need it to do?
Purpose-driven framework for tech
Over the past five years, Golden Marzipan and our associates have supported more than fifty housing providers to develop and implement digital, data, and technology strategies. We’ve worked with boards, executives, frontline teams, and suppliers across the country. We’ve seen what works, and what really doesn’t.
Along the way, we’ve met many brilliant people: thoughtful, committed, and genuinely motivated to improve services and innovate. But we’ve also seen a consistent pattern. Most senior decision-makers are not technologists, and many are understandably uncertain when it comes to data.
So many conversations with us begin with the same question – “So, which is the best system?”. It’s a question that carries hope for quick wins, magical insights, and rapid transformation.
But social housing is one of the most complex operating environments there is: multi-service, highly regulated, politically exposed, and shaped by years of incremental change. Organisations are already juggling hundreds of projects, enhancements, and application change requests. There is no solution neatly wrapped in a box with a ribbon on top. No single system will meet everyone’s needs.
Value for money era
For years, system architecture was treated as a purely technical matter: which housing management system to buy, which modules to switch on, which reports managers could access. This coincided with a shift from physical to digital record-keeping.
There was also a period when the focus was firmly on efficiency and reducing unnecessary effort, friction, and waste in service delivery. Systems were designed to eliminate avoidable work, including:
- rework and duplication
- waiting, delays, and queues
- chasing, follow-ups, and manual coordination
- unnecessary hand-offs between teams or systems
In reality, very few organisations today are running technology programmes primarily to improve value for money or reduce avoidable effort. Most investment is reactive, driven by regulatory pressure for better, more transparent data. Integration with suppliers and contractors remains weak. Only last year, we worked with a large provider still managing repairs through paper-based processes.
Modern technology estates are now made up of multiple specialist platforms: core housing systems, CRMs, contact centres, repairs and safety tools, analytics platforms, and tenant portals. The “truth” about a tenant or a home no longer sits in one place. It is assembled across many systems.
In the past, data was extracted into management reports through periodic, structured processes. Reports were retrospective snapshots, and decision-making inevitably lagged behind what was happening on the ground. Today, the same data is expected to do far more: support frontline decisions, provide regulatory assurance, drive performance improvement, and increasingly, enable transparency for tenants. This demands more sophisticated skills across the whole organisation, not just within data teams, but among managers and frontline colleagues too.
GenAi era
And now technology has moved on again. Generative AI is no longer experimental. It’s already being used by micro-businesses. Just this week, I exchanged a service request with a local SME care provider. I used ChatGPT to describe complex needs; they used it to shape a service offer and cost. We were done in half an hour.
That’s purpose in action: agency and shared understanding. Not just clever technology but focus and intent.
My concern with generative AI is that we are becoming dazzled by its cleverness and forgetting to ask why. What does it actually provide, in terms of efficiency and innovation, and at what cost to trust and resilience?
The brilliant people we meet already understand the purpose of their organisation and the services they provide to tenants. The challenge now is to align that purpose with the technology estate that supports it. That means more than choosing systems. It requires a willingness to redesign how operational teams really work and, in some cases, a willingness to change ourselves.
Social housing can no longer rely on buying off-the-shelf products and hoping they somehow add up to a coherent whole. If you want to think more seriously about purpose, our framework will test your assumptions and challenge your current strategy.
Why, Why, Why?
I’m reminded of my favourite piece of critical thinking:
I keep six honest serving-men
(They taught me all I knew);
Their names are What and Why and When
And How and Where and Who.
There are four more verses. Ask ChatGPT to explain more.
Prompt
What is the meaning of this poem [I keep six honest serving-men. (They taught me all I knew); Their names are What and Why and When and How and Where and Who.]
