Community: The Authentic Lie
Community: The Authentic Lie.
I must admit, I have shamelessly stolen part of the headline from Pandora Sykes’ intriguing publication for the Pound Project: The Authentic Lie. ‘Seeking an authentic self in a hyper curated world’ It’s an extremely interesting piece, specifically on ‘womanhood’ for those looking to pick apart the real from the fake. You may ask why I would read such a piece. The answer is that men don’t learn much about women from men and I’m incurably curious.
Why does authenticity matter? Does it have a place in a world, Build-to-Rent included, when everything is ‘hyper curated’? Does the sector really understand what it says when it talks about community, or is it a convenient aphorism; part of the essential BTR marketing lexicon? Where does exceptional customer service and experience end and community begin? Does it begin? Ever?
The world has a remarkably loose interpretation of ‘community’. It can be anything from a bunch of NFT super nerds creating dubious digital monkey art at one end of the spectrum, to the Awá tribe in the Eastern Amazon Forest at the other, and a whole lot in between. So, does anything go? And if it does, has it become essentially meaningless? Is our postmodern culture now unable to discern the real from the simulacra as Jean Baudrillard asserts?
I ask these questions because it’s clear to me that we simply don’t ask enough of them. We accept what we’re told without interrogation and then pass it on. Our thinking is not robust enough. As an example: it took at least three years before BTR ‘experts’ stopped referring to the ‘growth of the PRS’ following its steady fall in numbers which began in 2016. As far as I’m able to tell, this wasn’t deliberate misinformation, just a casual acceptance of what was assumed. But sometimes it’s convenient not to ask those questions of ourselves. That’s the point at which we move from passive acceptance to active invention.
About twenty months ago, supremely irritated by the co-living hyperbole, I wrote a piece entitled “Co-Living: The End of the Affair” In it I wrote the following:
“Communities are formed organically, over time by disparate individuals with some common interests, mutual goals and social imperatives. They are sustainable and sustained by long-term investment into that community. The individuals concerned hold a form of social equity”
I was not convinced that synthetic, highly curated constructs, identified by the Co-Living curators as ‘community’ had any truth or authenticity. Fast forward to today, and a number of those synthetic communities are in administration and the ‘affair’, for them at least, has come to an end.
Underlining my interpretation of community, an article in the American Journal of Public Health identifies community as:
“a group of people with diverse characteristics who are linked by social ties, share common perspectives, and engage in joint action in geographical locations or settings”
That doesn’t sound like 400 renters in a 35-storey building to me. However sophisticated the ‘engagement’ might be.
So, back to authenticity: does it matter that a BTR community is a ‘real’ community, or one carefully crafted by skilled communicators and customer service experts as a simulacrum if the investor outcomes are the same? i.e. strong overall metrics. The short-term conclusion may be no. But, in my view that will be at the expense of integrity which, in turn and over time, will devalue BTR credibility. That could be crucial. Especially as, amongst other things, BTR will have to deliver unimpeachable ESG credentials in the very near future.
It’s possible in larger mixed-tenure schemes that genuine community could begin to evolve and exhibit the key elements of community: empowerment, human rights, inclusion, social justice, self-determination and collective action. (Sue Kenny 2007) But it will take time and it must consist of a diverse renter base demographic.
It’s not difficult to see why the Single-Family Housing metrics are better than those of BTR. The schemes themselves are smaller but are often embedded in a mix-tenure environment and a wider, more mature neighbourhood. These are perfect conditions for real community to exist and thrive. It’s naturel, organic and self-perpetuating. SFH is, in a way, truer to BTR principles than BTR is from a societal perspective.
Don’t think for a moment that any of this is critical of the day-to-day operational managers that do a fantastic job. Evidence from Homeviews suggests BTR is making a positive and meaningful difference to the rental experience. Expertise from the hospitality sector has raised the quality of customer experience and customer service to extraordinarily high levels. This has impacted on the wider PRS where the National Residential Landlords Association is determined to see their members raise standards. A win-win for renters and the sector as a whole.
But crucially, this is not community.
Trust is a key element of BTR and SFH, especially given the deep distrust that has festered in the PRS for years. What the sector offers is a completely new covenant with the renter. A mutually beneficial relationship where the renter is valued as a customer and where we are honest with them. Trust is hard earnt and easily lost which is why I feel we must be scrupulous in our use of language and the authentic manner in which we promote the sector.
But whatever I think or say may be irrelevant if Baudrillard is right and that post-modern culture has lost all contact with the real world. Given the current crypto and NFT frenzy we may even be beyond what Baudrillard hypothesises. Social media has provided a platform for a post-truth world and it’s tempting to say if you can’t beat ‘em, join’em. But this is just a phase which we will later look back on. When we do, we will see and seek reparation from all those who casually shaped the truth to suit the narrative. When that time comes, I’d like to think BTR and SFH is not one of them.
Richard Berridge. 5th January 2021
Print 