Sirmans, G.S., Sirmans, C.F. and Turnbull, G.K. (1999) Prices,
incentives and choice of management form, Regional Science and Urban
Economics, 29(2), pp. 173-195.
Somerville, P. and Steele, A. (1999) Making oneself at home: The
mediation of residential action, International Journal of Urban and
Regional Research, 23(1), pp. 70-87.
Spink, B. (1998) Housing management 1800 to 2000: A practice in
search of a policy. In: Cooper, C. and Hawtin, M. (eds.) Resident
Involvement and Community Action: Theory to Practice. Coventry: The
Chartered Institute of Housing, pp. 38-66.
Straub, A. and van Mossel, H. J. (2007) Contractor selection for
performance-based maintenance partnerships, International Journal of
Strategic Property Management, 11(2), pp. 65-76.
Svenska Kommunforbundet (1997) Kommunernas parker 1997 [The parks
of the local municipalities 1997]. Stockholm: Kommentus Forlag. (In
Swedish)
Swedish Government (1992) Lag om Offentlig Upphandling [Act on
public procurement]. SFS 1992:1528, Stockholm: Ministry of Finance. (In
Swedish)
Swedish Government (1997) Sjalvforvaltning [Self-management].
Governmental proposition 1996/97:119. Stockholm. (In Swedish)
Swedish Government (2000) En uthallig demokrati!: politik for
folkstyrelse pa 2000-talet: Demokratiutredningens betankande [A
sustainable democracy!: Politics for democracy in the 21st century:
final report from the democracy commission]. SOU 2000:1, Stockholm:
Fritzes. (In Swedish)
Turner, B. (1999) Social housing finance in Sweden, Urban Studies,
36(4), pp. 683-697.
Turner, B. and Whitehead, C.M.E. (2002) Reducing housing subsidy:
Swedish housing policy in an international context, Urban Studies,
39(2), pp. 201-217.
Yik, F.W.H. and Lai, J.H.K. (2005) The trend of outsourcing for
building services operation and maintenance in Hong Kong, Facilities,
23(1/2), pp. 63-72.
Zavadskas, E.K. and Vilutiene, T. (2006) A multiple criteria
evaluation of multi-family apartment block's maintenance
contractors: I-Model for maintenance contractor evaluation and the
determination of its selection criteria, Building and Environment,
41(5), pp. 621-632.
(1) 90% of all Swedish municipal housing companies are members of
SABO (SABO, 2007).
(2) In-house management, as used here, corresponds to what e.g.
Sirmans et al. (1999) denote 'own management'.
(3) Contractor management, as used here, corresponds to what e.g.
Sirmans et al. (1999) denote 'third-party management.
(4) The local manager system is comparable with what Sommerville
and Steele (1999) define as the building management model.
(5) The circulating team system is more in line with what
Sommerville and Steele (1999) call the area management model.
(6) Compared with to the typology of landlord-tenant agreements
suggested by Somerville and Steele (1999), the self-management processes
identified exemplify cooperative tenant management, while the processes
of supervised self-management and garden groups are more of
partnerships.
(7) As decreed in the public procurement act, Lag om Offentlig
Upphandling, (Swedish Government, 1992).
(8) Customer orientation is not necessarily connected with
decentralised organisational structures. It may also involve centralised
structures, such as efficient call centre services and tenant
questionnaires.
Therese LINDGREN (1) and Pal CASTELL (2)
(1) Department of Landscape Development, Swedish University of
Agricultural Sciences (SLU), P.O. Box 66, SE-23053 Alnarp, Sweden
E-mail: therese.lindgren@ltj.slu.se, tel: +46(0)40 415148
(2) Department of Architecture, Chalmers University of Technology,
Sven Hultins gata 6, SE-41296 Gateborg, Sweden E-mail:
castell@chalmers.se; tel: +46(0)31 772 23 31
Table 1. Types of resident involvement (6)
(drawn from Castell, 2006)
A Self- High autonomy
management and comprehensive
responsibility for
maintenance tasks
B Supervised self- Comprehensive
management responsibilities but
lower level of autonomy
C Garden group Only complementing
the housing
default maintenance of
the yard
Table 2. Summary of arguments for and against in-house and contractor
management
In-house Contractor
Benefits Continuity and clarity Avoids costly
in contacts with tenants investments in own
is trust-building machines
Important for the Clients know in advance
company's image and what they will get costs
what it
Own staff can be given No employer obligations
new tasks
Better control of staff Reshaping and
and work process reorganisation easy
Incentives for
development of cost- Easier to put pressure
saving improvements on contractors than on
in-house staff
Better quality due to
specialist skills
Disadvantages Need to have seasonal Needs time and expertise
employees or to in-vent to formulate good
a lot of tasks during contracts
the low-season (winter)
Harder to control the Less responsibility-
costs taking and loyalty
Table 3. Summary of arguments for and against local
manager and circulating teams
Local manager Circulating team
Benefits Tenants satisfied with Efficient work with
personal contacts skills specialisation
Efficiency in the and flexibility
landlord's contacts contacts
with tenants Instant improvement
Nice for staff to know when the team had been
and be known by the there
tenants
Better order and reduced
risk for vandalism
during working hours
Individual
responsibilities
facilitates performance
control
More constant upkeep
Disadvantages Too many contacts with Important to find
tenants slow up the work skilled team leaders
Difficult to recruit Might get weedy between
enough local managers maintenance occasions
with the right skills
Managers get stuck in
routines and lose
inspiration Costly
Table 4. Summary of arguments for and against self-management and
management without resident involvement
Management without
Self-management resident involvement
Benefits Friendly social More professional results
atmosphere in the physical
Nicer and more diverse environment
environment No resources wasted on
Reduced vandalism unsuccessful involvement
Reduced costs for the processes
company--input of new More predictable
labour resources
Simplified contacts with
tenants
Tenants have more
influence over their
living environment
Improves the image of
the company
Disadvantages Risk for conflicts Difficult to know the
between tenants resident's opinions
Risk for non-professional
and mismatched changes
Dependency on few real
enthusiasts-hard to
recruit enough people
Takes time and commitment
from managers
Need for good
facilitation--project
leading
The benefits of
coordinated area
planning are lost
Risk for perceived
stealing of work from
employees
Table 5. The two general management approaches
and their theoretical association to organisational
structures
(a) (b)
General Focus on customer Focus on efficiency
approach relations and and physical
and social issues environment
Organisational In-house Contractor
structures Local manager Circulating team
Supporting resident
involvement
Figure 1. Total dwelling stocks in (a) the Skane region
and (b) Goteborg, divided into four categories Coloured
parts are included in the survey.
(a) Dwellings in (b) Dwellings in
COPYRIGHT 2008 Vilnius Gediminas Technical
University Reproduced with permission of the copyright holder. Further reproduction or distribution is prohibited without permission.
Copyright 2008 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights
reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.
NOTE: All illustrations and photos have been removed from this article.