Hybridity, diversity and the division of labour in the third sector: what can we learn from homelessness organisations in the UK?

Buckingham, Heather

doi:10.1332/204080511x583832

Cited by 20 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…(2012: 52) One key consideration might be the impact of involvement in specific kinds of social control activities on the 'institutional culture' of service provider organisations (Gregory, 2015). The argument has been made that, under the banner of interventionism, some homelessness organisations have become simply a 'tool' or 'arm' of government, losing sight of their ethos, values and need for independence (Buckingham, 2011). Particularly for faith-based organisations, adaptation to secular and Government agendas has sometimes been argued to represent unacceptable 'mission drift', even amounting to 'functional atheism' (Greer and Horst, 2014).…”

Section: Charactermentioning

confidence: 99%

Controlling Homeless People? Power, Interventionism and Legitimacy

Watts¹,

Fitzpatrick²,

Johnsen³

2017

J. Soc. Pol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is intense debate over the legitimacy of interventions which seek behavioural change on the part of street homeless people. 'Hard' measures, such as arresting people for begging, are particularly controversial, but 'softer' interventions such as motivational interviewing have also prompted objections on grounds that they are paternalistic. At the same time, the 'non-interventionist' stance of some service providers has been accused of perpetuating harmful street lifestyles. Inspired by Ruth Grant's philosophically informed interrogation of the ethics of incentives, we propose a normative framework for application in this field. Via systematic exploration of Grant's three 'legitimacy standards' (legitimate purpose, voluntary response, effects on character), and an additional outcome-focussed fourth (effectiveness, proportionality and balance), we attempt to unsettle any intuitive assumption that noninterventionist approaches are necessarily more morally defensible than interventionist ones. We also, however, explicate the high ethical and empirical bar required to justify social control measures.

show abstract

Section: Charactermentioning

confidence: 99%

Controlling Homeless People? Power, Interventionism and Legitimacy

Watts¹,

Fitzpatrick²,

Johnsen³

2017

J. Soc. Pol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Billis, 2010;Evers, 2005). However, the hybridisation resulting from contractual requirements was also exacerbating the 'division of labour' between the contracted and non-contracted TSOs (see Buckingham, 2011): some had become highly proficient at winning and delivering government contracts; whilst others were focusing their attentions on meeting relational needs, for example. However, the hybridisation resulting from contractual requirements was also exacerbating the 'division of labour' between the contracted and non-contracted TSOs (see Buckingham, 2011): some had become highly proficient at winning and delivering government contracts; whilst others were focusing their attentions on meeting relational needs, for example.…”

Section: Concluding Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Capturing Diversity: A Typology of Third Sector Organisations’ Responses to Contracting Based on Empirical Evidence from Homelessness Services

Buckingham¹

2012

J. Soc. Pol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The impacts of government contracting on third sector organisations (TSOs) have attracted much discussion; however, the diversity of the organisations that comprise the third sector means that these impacts in fact vary considerably between TSOs. In order to better understand this complexity and to analyse and articulate TSOs' experiences more effectively, it is useful to think about different response types. Based on empirical evidence from a study of homelessness TSOs in two South East England local authorities, this paper presents a typology of organisational responses to contracting. The four types identified are: Comfortable Contractors, Compliant Contractors, Cautious Contractors, and Community-Based Non-Contractors. The varied experiences of these different types of organisation with regard to contracting are described in the paper and point to the need for greater precision and differentiation within academic debates, and in the formulation of social policy relating to the third sector.

show abstract

“…In the United Kingdom, this process was shaped significantly by the introduction of the Supporting People programme in 2003, which favoured ‘larger, professionalised voluntary organisations and social enterprises’ (Buckingham , p. 244). Although standardisation improved the efficiency and effectiveness of services in some respects (Buckingham , p. 248), it also led to the marginalisation or ‘squeezing out’ (Buckingham , p. 14) of services that provided more for what could be called ‘non‐standard’ clients (see below).…”

Section: Partnership Working In Stoke‐on‐trentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Changing homelessness services: revanchism, ‘professionalisation’ and resistance

Scullion

Somerville

Brown

et al. 2014

Health Soc Care Community

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper argues that the increasing international salience of homelessness can be partially explained by reference to the revanchist thesis (involving processes of coerced exclusion and abjection), but the situation on the ground is more complex. It reports on interviews with 18 representatives of 11 homelessness service providers in one city in England. As Cloke et al. found, these providers tended to be either larger, more ‘professional’, ‘insider’ services or smaller, more ‘amateur’, ‘outsider’ services. However, this does not mean that the former were necessarily more revanchist and the latter less so. Rather, the actions of both types of organisation could, in some cases, be construed as both advancing and counteracting a revanchist project.

show abstract

Hybridity, diversity and the division of labour in the third sector: what can we learn from homelessness organisations in the UK?

Cited by 20 publications

References 31 publications

Controlling Homeless People? Power, Interventionism and Legitimacy

Controlling Homeless People? Power, Interventionism and Legitimacy

Capturing Diversity: A Typology of Third Sector Organisations’ Responses to Contracting Based on Empirical Evidence from Homelessness Services

Changing homelessness services: revanchism, ‘professionalisation’ and resistance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About