Value in service charges

Like a linked spreadsheet, there are layers to this meme…

First, those currently feeling the pinch of generating service chargeable estimates from your organisational budgets (or vice versa – but that’s for another day!), the dreaded ‘#VALUE!’ can be an occupational hazard.

Wider than that, is the real conversation around the value that’s derived from services. Whilst Value for Money is often talked of in organisations (not always in the right teams!), very few are able to evidence it within service charges. Sometimes this is because of a lack of information, sometimes through poor procurement and contract management, and sometimes due to failing to consider both sides of the value equation; quality and cost. 

Awful, non-delivering services can be cheap and terrible value. So can the gold standard of a service, if the service charge relating to it is sky high.  

Furthermore, value to many is a perception, not an absolute. Great services at fantastic value for what’s received can still be seen as poor value, if the customer perception is that the service isn’t required. Sometimes, that’s a gap in understanding – they haven’t had it explained to them what the service is performing. Often however, it is a gap because the customers have had no say in the scope and frequency of the service. This parent/child approach to managing properties has a huge impact here. 

Naturally, in all those cases, the result is customer dissatisfaction with the service charge. In most cases of the above however, the service charge team is also a customer of these issues; we often are not involved in conversations that can impact them, and therefore cannot advocate on behalf of the customer experience. 

Value for Money can be tricky, but all the examples above, in isolation, are resolvable. In creating solutions for these, better value can be derived, and customer perception of service charges can be changed. 

Housing Associations: "We provide value in our Service Charges"

The value: