As a parent of two older teenagers entering adulthood, I can't help but notice the similarities between life at home and the state of the housing sector.
There comes a time when it's no longer appropriate to tell your offspring what to do. You have to stand back, see what happens and hope that the years of guidance and investment you've put in pay off in the choices and directions that your children follow – and so it is with social housing.
There's little doubt that the top-down approach to regulation and inspection adopted a decade or so ago called some of the poorest-performing organisations to account. It also helped to drive up standards elsewhere. But with the idea of co-regulation now well established – and growing numbers of experienced and talented resident mystery shoppers, inspectors and scrutiny panel members raring to go – housing providers need to show they can manage themselves as mature social businesses.
There are still moans about the idea of customer-centred regulation being abandoned in England with the demise of the Tenant Services Authority. This does feel like a step backwards, but like it or not the Localism Act has given the new regulator a completely different remit: focusing on economic standards, with only a backstop role on consumer issues.
Boards, councillors, staff and residents now have to show they're up to the challenge of providing successful homes, communities and services on their own. Some see this "light touch" approach as a charter for poor performance and an invitation for providers to just coast along with little incentive to change, improve or respond to customers' needs.
Others view it as finding a more flexible, strategic touch that gives housing associations and councils the chance to work things out locally, reaching their own decisions about what's best.
One thing's for sure: the days of prescriptive, formulaic, input-focused regulation and outside inspection targeted on service failure are over. Social housing providers have benefited from billions of pounds of public and private investment, and more good-practice and benchmarking information than anyone could read or remember.
Now it's time to show that they can find their own way in the world – albeit one facing economic strife, welfare reform and spending cuts.
The best organisations are already pulling away fast from the old notions of being told what to do. They're making the most of co-regulation with well-resourced customer scrutiny, far-sighted community investment and some radical re-thinking of the relationship between landlords and residents.
Others need to follow suit, working with residents, partners and the local community to deliver what people want – not waiting for the regulator to tell or correct them.
It's been suggested that housing can learn from the triage team in the healthcare sector; providers can agree with residents which services are fit for purpose, which need improving and which are no longer beneficial or worthwhile.
Let's not forget that housing providers were doing good things for many decades before anyone thought of regulation or inspection. And if all else fails, there's still a place for some old-fashioned, public naming and shaming.
The main focuses today are value for money and equality and diversity. Will locally based systems, free from proactive consumer protection, pay enough attention to each of these critical aspects? Will the Homes and Communities Agency trust housing providers' judgements about what their customers deem to be best use of resources? And can tenant panels, scrutiny groups, boards and council committees adequately reflect and promote the needs of diverse communities?
It's nice to imagine that in 10 years time we'll look back and see that our offspring have turned out all right – despite all their inherited flaws.
Ian Hembrow is a senior consultant with The Bridge Group
This content is brought to you by Guardian Professional. Join the housing network for more comment and analysis – and the latest job vacancies – direct to your inbox
