As housing providers face growing regulatory, financial and operational pressure, Peter Francis, Group Executive Director (Operations) at Fusion21, considers what leaders must get right to deliver with confidence at scale.
For housing leaders, the challenge is no longer simply knowing what needs to be done. It is whether their organisation has the governance, capacity and supply chain confidence to deliver multiple priorities at once, with the sector facing pressure from several directions.
Awaab’s Law has sharpened expectations around the speed and quality of response to hazards in social homes, while the Decent Homes Standard continues to evolve. Decarbonisation remains one of the biggest long-term investment challenges facing the sector. Alongside this, landlords are still managing core compliance responsibilities across areas such as gas, electrical and fire safety, asbestos and lifts.
None of these pressures sit neatly on their own. Each one places demands on budgets, people, contractors, governance and resident communication. The leadership challenge is to step back from the immediate pressure and make decisions that will still hold up in the years to come.
Peter said: “There has been a lot of short-term pressure on the sector over the last few years, but leadership is about making the difficult long-term investment decisions. Organisations need to step back and look at how similar, but sometimes separate, programmes of work are coming together. The question is how they plan that work over a longer period, in the most efficient way, while achieving best value and the greatest public benefit.”
That shift matters - a single failure affecting one resident can quickly become a reputational, regulatory and operational issue. At the same time, unresolved repairs, disrepair claims and complaints can absorb staff time and draw attention away from the work needed to fix problems at source.
The answer is not simply to move faster. It is to build delivery confidence before work begins.
Fragmentation is now a strategic risk
In many organisations, retrofit, repairs, planned maintenance and compliance have traditionally been treated as separate workstreams. This can create risk when programmes start to overlap.
For example, a landlord may be dealing with damp and mould in one home, planning decarbonisation works in the same area and managing separate compliance programmes through different contracts. If those activities are not connected, organisations risk treating symptoms rather than causes.
Peter added: “If someone reports damp and mould, you can go in and complete a repair to directly address the issue. But if the underlying cause is the building itself, that does not fix the problem. The question should be whether that property needs to be brought into a wider investment programme so the root cause is addressed. If you look at programmes of work in silos then there's a real risk of duplicating work, or doing work which is unnecessary or counterproductive to future investment plans.”
This is where a more joined-up approach can make a practical and commercial difference. By looking across planned works, compliance, repairs and long-term asset investment, organisations can make better decisions about what should be done, when, and by who.
Early engagement must be treated as governance
Early engagement is often seen as a procurement task. In reality, it is a leadership and governance issue.
Before going to market, organisations need to know whether their proposed delivery model is realistic.
Peter warned: “People sometimes go into procurement and wait for the market to tell them how the contract should work. That is where problems can begin. You need to understand the market, the delivery model, the cost and the supply chain before you start the procurement process.”
The issue is not only whether a contract can be procured. It is whether leaders have clear oversight of how workstreams connect, where accountability sits, and whether the supply chain has the capacity and skills to deliver.
At Fusion21, our frameworks are designed to simplify that process without losing the rigour needed at the front end. Through ongoing engagement with suppliers and members, we can help organisations understand market appetite, capacity, cost pressures and delivery options much earlier.
Peter added: “The strength of using frameworks as a route to market is speed, but that speed does not come at the cost of the early stages of the procurement lifecycle. The real strength is in how the framework has been established in the first place - the scope, the pricing, the specification and the supplier qualification.”
That matters because the right procurement route helps identify and address issues at the outset, before they become more expensive to resolve. The earlier issues are identified, the less likely organisations are to face poor competition, aborted procurement or unexpected cost increases.
Cost certainty and control
For housing providers managing tight budgets, confidence is not only about appointing suppliers quickly. It is about knowing that the price agreed at the start bears a close relationship to the cost at the end.
Our frameworks are structured to support cost certainty through agreed pricing mechanisms, benchmarking and indexation controls. This gives organisations greater confidence in financial planning and control.
Peter said: “We want people to have confidence that if a programme is priced at a certain level at the start, it does not become something very different by the end because the pricing was not right or costs have slipped through the contract. We are focused on lowest cost and best value, not simply the lowest price on paper.”
The pressures facing the sector are national, but delivery is local. Housing providers need models that can be repeated across different programmes, geographies and property types, while still reflecting local need.
Fusion21’s gives members access to a wide range of frameworks, suppliers and delivery options. This national reach, combined with local delivery insight, helps members move more effectively and with less friction.
“There is not a single solution for every enquiry. Different programmes need different supply chains, different pricing mechanisms and different delivery models. The value is in identifying the right tool for the problem and applying it quickly and efficiently,” added Peter.
This also matters for the supply chain. Contractors need long-term visibility and certainty to invest in people, training and capacity.
Short-term, fragmented programmes make it harder to plan, while better coordinated programmes create a stronger basis for workforce investment, pricing and more resilient delivery.
Social value has to be built in early
Delivery confidence is not only about completing works on time and on budget. It is also about making sure public money delivers wider benefit for communities.
Peter said: “The question should be: what are the fundamental issues we are trying to address through this contract? If that conversation happens early, social value can be meaningful. If it happens halfway through, it risks becoming misaligned.”
We work with members and suppliers to embed social value from the outset, linking procurement activity with community priorities and long-term impact. As a not-for-profit organisation, we are focused on creating value beyond frameworks, including employment outcomes, apprenticeships, green skills and community benefit.
This approach has supported the creation of more than 16,600 employment outcomes, generated more than £300 million in social impact and saved members £424 million through the procurement process.
At its best, procurement is not simply a route to market. It is a way of turning public investment into measurable public impact.
For housing leaders, compliance, investment, repairs, retrofit and resident engagement cannot be treated as separate pressures to be managed one at a time. They must be treated as connected parts of the same leadership challenge.
Peter added: “The sector is under significant pressure, but there is also an opportunity to take a more strategic view. The aim should be to align programmes, reduce duplication, improve outcomes for residents and make sure public investment delivers the greatest possible impact.”
To find out how Fusion21 supports housing providers to build delivery confidence at scale and align programmes with market capacity, explore our frameworks and integrated delivery approach.