While most of the housing world is being turned upside down by politics, policy and technology, one aspect of our profession plods along, apparently untouched by all this churn and change. Martial-sounding job titles like "housing officer" are still widespread, and even in some of the most forward-looking organisations also continue to refer to themselves as "landlords". But do these terms really describe the roles and relationships we want in 2011? And what could we use instead?
Presumably, the word "officer" stems from a municipal and national service-era past, when housing management was all about top-down authority and enforcement. I recall a mature colleague in my first job at a London council, who personified this world. He had a huge poster of a World War Two Hurricane fighter behind his desk, and refused to divulge even his initial to residents, let alone be addressed by his first name.
Interestingly though, it's providers of sheltered housing for older people who've led the way in finding more contemporary job titles over the last decade. Most have now dropped the distinctly jail-flavoured "warden" for a variation on themes of "scheme manager", "supported housing co-ordinator" and the like. So this can't just be a generational thing.
The golden rule of all job titles is that they should describe what the person actually does – preferably without the use of brackets. Taking it from the top, this seems fairly straightforward. A chair chairs board meetings, the chief executive is the most senior employee and a director directs policy and performance. So far; so good. But then you get into a messy mix of officers, assistants, administrators, advisers, champions, workers – and if you're truly unfortunate, the ghastly, drone-tinged operative.
It seems there's a deep-rooted, hierarchical unease about acknowledging what most housing staff really do – they manage. They manage complex human, legal and technical situations. They manage tight but substantial budgets and turnovers. They manage sensitive and demanding relationships. And on the whole, they manage all this very well, in sometimes testing environments. But in old thinking and culture, manager tends to mean seniority and often indicates supervision of subordinates. It all sounds rather stiff, military and so last century.
Perhaps employers are wary of using the word manager in case it sparks off American-style job title inflation, which can see even the most modest role proudly portrayed as vice president.
We need to look beyond our sector, at what other industries do. There's an appealingly quirky computer games company called Ninja Theory, where everyone's job carries the Ninja suffix, so you have technology ninjas, designer ninjas and even a non-executive ninja. Top marks for egalitarian style, but maybe not quite right for housing.
Take a look at the last letter or email you received from your bank, building society or mobile phone provider and you'll see that many companies in these areas have dispensed with job titles all together, and just use functions like customer support or account management. Not so personal, but this does imply teamwork and passes the "does what it says on the tin" test.
If the current proposals for flexible tenancies, 80% market rents and benefits reform go ahead as planned, then housing organisations could soon find themselves serving a much more diverse range of customers, with very different perspectives and expectations. The term landlord, with all its feudal undertones, just doesn't feel right for this new world. So it's time for this and other stubborn shibboleths like housing officer to quietly retire.
Housing Ninjas: start thinking.
Ian Hembrow is a freelance and senior consultant with the Bridge Group
This content is brought to you by Guardian Professional. Join the housing network for more like this direct to your inbox.
