Redefining ‘competition’ as ‘competitiveness’-the best value activities of registered social landlords

Public Money and Management

Volumn 22, Issue 2, 2002, Pages 25-30

  Mullins, David ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0036011394     PISSN: 09540962     EISSN: 14679302     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/1467-9302.00304     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Audit Commission (1999), A Balanced Account. The Audit Arrangements for Registered Social Landlords (Audit Commission and Housing Corporation, London).
2. Blair, T. (1997), Leading the Way. A New Visionfor Local Government (Institute for Public Policy Research, London).
3. Bowerman, M. and Ball, A. (2000), Great expectations: Benchmarking for Best Value. Public Money & Management, 20, 2, pp. 21-26.
4. Boyne, G. (Ed) (1999), Managing Public Services: From CCT to Best Value (Frank Cass, London).
5. Davis, H. and Walker, B. (1999), Perspectives on contractual relationships and the move to Best Value in local authorities. In Boyne, G. (Ed), Managing Public Services: From CCT to Best Value (Frank Cass, London).
6. DETR (1999), Best Value FrameworkforHousing (DETR, London).
7. Egan, J. (1998), Rethinking Construction: Report of the Construction Task Force (The Stationery Office, London).
8. Filkin, G. (1999), Building Capacity for Best Value (New Local Government Network, London).
9. Geddes, M. (1998), Achieving Best Value Through Partnership (Warwick Business School, Local Government Centre Best Value Paper No. 7).
10. Housing Corporation (1999), Best Value Guidance for RSLs (Housing Corporation, London).
11. Housing Corporation (2001), Regulatory Code for RSLs (Housing Corporation, London).
12. Martin, S., Davis, H., Bovaird, T., Geddes, M., Hartley, J., Lewis, M., Sanderson, I. and Sapwell, P. (2000), Interim Report of the Best Value Pilot Programme (DETR, London).
13. Martin, S., Bennington, J., Bovaird, T., Geddes, M., Hartley, J., Lewis, M. and Sanderson, I. (1999), Improving Local Public Services: Final Evaluation of the Best Value Pilot Programme (DETR, London).
14. Mullins, D. (1999a), Baseline Survey of Registered Social Landlords Best Value Activity (National Housing Federation, London).
15. Mullins, D. (1999b), Managing ambiguity: Merger activity in the non-profit housing sector. Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 4, 4, pp. 349-364.
16. Mullins, D. and Riseborough, M. (2001), Non-profit housing agencies. Reading and shaping the policy agenda. In Harris, M. and Rochester, C. (Eds), Voluntary Organizations and Social Policy in Britain (Palgrave, Basingstoke).
17. NCVO (2000), Best Value: A Guide for Voluntary Organizations (London).
18. Reading, J. (2000), How Groups Work. Management and Accountability in Housing Groups (National Housing Federation, London).
19. Taylor, T. (2000), Best Value: Adding Value (National Housing Federation and Housing Corporation, London).
20. Walker, B. and Srlbjanin, A. (1999), Analysis of RSL Plans from Best Value (School of Public Policy, Birmingham and Housing Corporation, London).
21. Walker, B., Mullins, D., Jones, A., Niner, P., and Spencer, K. with Mackay, C. (2000), The Evaluation of the RSL Best Value Pilots (University of Birmingham and Housing Corporation, London).
22. Walker, R. M. (1998), New public management and housing associations: From comfort to competition. Policy and Politics, 26, 1, pp. 71-87.
23. Walsh, K. and Davis, H. (1993), Competition and Service. The Impact of the Local Government Act 1988 (HMSO, London).
24. Walsh, K. (1995), Public Services and Market Mechanisms. Competition, Contracting and the New Public Management (Macmillan, Basingstoke).
25. Williamson, O. (1981), The economics oforganization: The transaction costs approach. American Journal of Sociology, 87, pp. 548-577.