ÐÇ¿Õ´«Ã½

This sounds like the kind of talk one would expect from a marriage guidance client talking about the breakdown of a romantic relationship. But it could also be the voice of a social housing professional who's in a partnering relationship with a contractor, talking to psychologist Howard Thomas.

  In what is thought to be the first arrangement of its kind, Thomas is working with Gosport borough council and property services contractor Connaught on how to resolve the problems and disputes that arise in a close working relationship. The Hampshire council chose Connaught 18 months ago as its partner to refurbish 150 properties over five years. Both parties meet Thomas, who was introduced to Gosport by a consultant when they started their partnering arrangement, about three times a year.

The sessions involve roleplay, analysing characteristics that may help or impede how the partnership works and discussing the difficulties of each others' jobs.

Thomas' business, the Coaching Practice, is based in Bath and specialises in businesses and sport organisations such as cricket and rugby clubs. The link with social housing may not seem obvious, but Thomas explains that teamwork is essential to any organisation. "You have to pull together," he says, "and you can only do this by coming together for a shared objective."

The relationship between social housing providers and private contractors is usually fraught with distrust and a lack of communication. "Traditionally the relationship between the client and the contractor is incredibly adversarial," admits Phil Clift, Gosport's special projects officer. "The client beats the hell out of the person who is going to do the work. The contractor listens subserviently to what you're saying, then as soon as you leave the room, all hell breaks loose." So Gosport decided it was worth giving the idea a try.

Group therapy
The meetings take place at Connaught's Surrey offices. Motivational posters of rowing squads and handshakes line the office's walls. The purpose of the pictures is to make people start thinking about how they interact with others before a single word has been uttered – a kind of corporate, American-style team-building approach which may be rather bemusing to British public-sector employees.

The Gosport-Connaught session involves a cast of eight: Thomas, three surveyors from Gosport council and two directors, a project manager and a site manager from Connaught. Thomas has a commanding presence and a teacher-like authority that immediately grabs the attention of the group, but his giant stature is balanced by softly spoken tones. He does not analyse each person's personality, much to the relief all concerned, but begins by asking the participants what changes they want to see within their own organisations. Once he has established each person's priorities, Thomas goes on to explain that ingrained attitudes can affect a project's success. Clift agrees. Reflecting on the attitudes found within local authorities, he says: "There is a culture in which things are done in a set way – we need to leave that culture behind and embrace a new one."

Thomas also explains that everyone's behaviour is governed by three parts of their personalities, and impacts on the people around them. According to the psychological theory that he goes on to explain, these three parts are made up of the parent, child and adult elements of the personality. The parent represents the blame part of the personality and the child represents the emotional part of a personality, both through defiance – "I don't care, I want, I wish" – or through physical characteristics such as tears, temper tantrums, laughter and teasing. The adult is the referee between the parent and child. Conflict in any relationship stems from the fact that a different part of the personality is being acted out by individuals and people can only change it if they want to.

Having established these notions in simple language that avoids the temptation to collapse into incomprehensible psycho-babble, staff are asked to get into groups of three for roleplays which put this theory into practice. In this way they can learn to apply the theory to their daily routines.

There’s a general lack of trust on both sides within this sector, and the issue is how you break down those barriers

Each group acts out a conflict situation, with one person playing the "victim" who gets blamed for things going wrong, one playing the "persecutor", screaming and shouting and one person acting as the "rescuer", the one who resolves conflict by taking on the responsibility themselves. The groups are given 10 minutes to sort out their roles and then the performances begin.

"I told you that window needed fixing and it's still not been done – WHY?," screams one of the participants, peppering his words with the odd expletive for realism's sake. "It's not my fault, the sizes were all wrong," comes the meek reply. The scene progresses as the persecutor's shouts get louder and the victim's voice falters increasingly by the second. Then enter the rescuer, who tells the persecutor that he will sort out the mess, and promptly turns to the victim and asks him "What can I do to make this situation better?"

Thomas gives feedback on the performance. It serves, he says, as an example of how the rescuer's actions, rather than helping to sort out the problem, just led to the problem being brushed under the carpet, as neither the victim nor the persecutor actually discussed what could be done to prevent such situations arising in the first place. Staff nod in assent.

As the people in the room throw themselves into their roles, it is surprising how uninhibited and enthusiastic they are. Clift points out that although they haven't done roleplays before, they have all discussed the issues surrounding the problems they encounter each time they meet, so no one is phased by the idea of performing.

By the end of the day there is a real buzz in the room. Participants seem to understand what it is they want to achieve and what they need to do to make the partnership work.

Clift says the sessions with Thomas have proved invaluable. Although neither party is willing to divulge the cost of the exercise, it is thought to run to thousands of pounds – this might seem a large amount in the short term, but the aim is to reap longer-term benefits. Clift says: "We are on a level playing field. There is no mystery for me, as a client, as to what I can expect from a partnering project and there is no mystery for the tenants as to what they can expect. Without a doubt the change has been for the better.

Culture of communication
"Thomas is like a team coach and we're looking to develop a coaching-based culture within the organisation, not fear-based. This is about increasing enjoyment and learning levels, and about how we perform as a team – both within our own authority and with our partnering organisations. Now, I can jump in my car, drive up the road to the heating contractor and discuss any problems with them. Before, this would have been seen as a sign of weakness by the contractor – and they may have tried to gain financially from any problems or difficulties they perceived."

But what is Connaught gaining? Regional director Steve Oldbury explains that, to do the job well, people need confidence in dealing with partners. He says that's what the sessions deliver: "Self esteem and empowerment are important – you want to feel good about yourself."

Mike Roberts, Connaught's head of partnering, adds: "There's a general lack of trust on both sides within this sector, and the issue is how you break down those barriers. For example, traditionally you have two people checking the work on site: one from the client's side – the local authority or housing association – and the other from the contractor's side. Why do we have to have two people checking the same thing? We should all be able to work as one team."