Methodology

Studies of urban spatial patterns, social housing, tenant participation models and organisation life have been linked to power and conflict paradigms. Low (2006) and Foldvary (2002; 2006), for instance, discussed power though economic considerations. Jacobs (1999) viewed housing policy through a power and conflict perspective. Throughout the literature review competing interests have been noted in relation to the dual nature of participants attempting to balance self-interest with that of the common good. Olson (1965; 2000) and Ostrom‟s (1990) are relevant here to power issues implicit in the need for collective action within the owner corporation. Ostrom found that where livelihoods were threatened, collective resources were shared. However Olson (1965) considered that the larger the group, the greater the likelihood of free riders or non-contributory members. McKenzie (2006a; 2006b) in particular has noted competing interests within owner corporations and the tendency for individuals to free-ride. Where free-riding occurs, the vacant space left by free-riders becomes available for others to fill. Structural power was also taken into consideration particularly in relation to the formation of

Page 86

the owner corporation by people who may have little on-going interest in the organisation. Clegg et al. (2006) also consider a framework within which decisions, failure to make decisions and determination of issues as worthy of discussion is power-based within organisational settings. A number of different paradigms need to be explored to best fit for the owner corporation.

3.3.1 Managerial rationalism

Managerial rationalism, a paradigm often associated with organisations, assumes that the behaviour of members can be controlled and predicted using rational management techniques during process implementation and change. Effective implementation requires a combination of (good) rational--management and technical competence. This perspective is an important aspect in light of the owner corporation‟s ability to make and implement governing laws. Implicit in the managerial rationalism construct is the notion that implementation is linear, involving logical stages based on strategic intent, pre-planned and implemented in a logical sequential way. According to Campbell (1996) personal aspirations are assumed to be synonymous with those of the organization, an assumption that fits with collective action assumptions at the cost of individual need. In this paradigm, changes are implemented as a consequence of the strategies laid down by managers. However change is rarely linear within organisational contexts (Lewin 1951). Lewin‟s discussion of force field analysis considers that for any change to occur, force or power needs to be applied to effect a change in equilibrium and therefore resistance to change or conflict may follow. Good management combined with technical expertise may contribute to the smooth running of an owner organisation. However, it is reliant on synonymous aspirations of contractually bound owners, and does not address the emotional attachment to the idea of „home‟ and considerations of ontological security that reside there10_{. The resistance,}

depicted as conflict in the literature review, therefore conforms to the linear structure of managerial rationalism.

3.3.2 Social interaction

Organisations, including owner corporations, are made up from collections of individuals who interact with each other. The social interactionist paradigm sees organizations as social systems or cultures that socialize individuals to conform to sets of norms, beliefs and values (Handy 1997). Because individuals possess

10

Page 87

diverse goals and motivations, disputes over objectives and priorities may arise. Here the conflict paradigm raises its head again. In social interactionism, the behaviour of members is perceived as unpredictable, while being influenced by the organization's underlying culture. Values and norms are not specified but embodied in procedures, rituals, and exercise of power. Hirschheim (1983, p. 279) asserts that organizations „... are not rational and manifestly rule following, they are social arenas where power, ritual and myth predominate‟. The key assumption of the social interactionist perspective is that procedures and by-laws, and implied states of being do not function independently of their environments but gain meaning in the cultural and organizational context.

Barth (1989) suggests that since societies and cultures are not static, bounded units, the presumption of disorder should be the starting point, and then goes on to explain any order that occurs. Osborn and Van Loon (2004, p. 95) ask „why should we view society as a whole‟; and „why should we assume a tendency towards conformity and integration‟. Barth (1989, p. 132-134) argues instead that we should start with the presumption of disorder and then try to explain „the trend towards some partial order‟. In attempting to explain trends of order and disorder, Barth identifies „streams‟ of discourse. Within the literature review streams of discourse are centred around contracted ideas of governance, contractual mechanisms, stakeholder relationships and organisational capacity. Thus the approach taken is a constructivist approach and Giddens‟ work of a contractually governed society in which actors are both enabled and constrained becomes a fitting approach for this thesis.

3.3.3 Applying an interpretive approach

An interpretative approach allows investigation of power and conflict within the owner corporation. Clegg et al. (2006) has stated that power is embedded in human action. It becomes „the means of getting things done‟ (Giddens 1993, p. 272). Owner corporations have a legislated mandate for „getting things done‟. The negotiated meanings of Giddens‟ (1984) space and time can also be framed within the interpretative approach. Within the organisational confines of the owner corporation, each person is time bound in relation to their influence at either the scheme set up stage or the ownership stage, with notions of owned locales to be negotiated. Structuration theory provides an explanation for the clash of integration practices enacted between the groups of players shown in Figure 5. Figure 5

Page 88

provides a visual view of the key elements of „structuration‟ as discussed to date. The relatedness of structuration theory and the power and conflict paradigm relevant to the strata industry can be explained through though Figure 6.

In Figure 6, „structuration and strata‟, the power and conflict paradigm is over laid on the key components of Giddens‟ (1993; 2000) structuration theory, discussed earlier in this chapter. Because interaction is mediated over different time periods, the actor‟s position may move between structure and agency depending on individual situations over time. That is, at the buy-in stage, the developer has the enabling legislation on side. The rituals associated with real estate purchase contracts favour the developer rather than the owner. The contractual power relationship between the developer and the prospective purchaser is therefore on the side of the developer and real estate agent. Negotiation over contract terms is limited to price. The owner corporation structure has already been set up by the developer, and the prospective owner has no say over who the other governing body participants are. The arrow is therefore one directional since the purchaser is constrained by the developer‟s terms.

Owner Corporation Owner

Owner Corporation Strata Manager

Owner & Owner Corp; Strata Man

Developer Purchaser Specialised knowledge Shared meaning Mutual knowledge

Rules & resources Allocative/ authoritative (Domination)

Intended & unintended consequences Structure _Agent Reflexive monitoring of action Competence P as t Pr e se n t Fu tu re Infinite Space Integration practices Meaning (Signification) Norms, values Rituals (Legitimation) Social relations Mo dified f ro m B ria nd & B ell ema re (20 06 )

Legislation & Policy Makers Owner & Owner Corp; Strata Man Non profit organisations

Page 89

Once the owner has title to the real property within the scheme, the owner corporation becomes a member of the governing organisation defined in the governing legislation. The owner corporation is set up to give the power of determination (within the developer specified confines) to the individual owner. The owner retains the ability to influence the owner corporation as an act of agency, but may also stand for a position on the committee of management. Here there are both enabling and constraining influences at work. Power plays are possible as rules are negotiated, so the arrow is multi directional. The strata manager is appointed by the owner corporation and therefore retains the ability to endorse or reject his contracted position. However the owner corporation is reliant on the strata manager as an expert in the industry. Both the strata manager and the owner corporation have the ability to both enable and constrain. Within legislation, the committee hold the power, yet power is a negotiated ground and the contracts signed between the two will outline the rules of engagement and thus positions of power. Therefore the arrow is multi-dimensional.

The literature review uncovered structural influences through the Australian Tax Office Ruling IT 2505, linking the owner corporation (and hence their employed experts) to the non-profit sector. Creating owner corporations as non-profit participants establishes their place of power within the taxation and grants systems. Therefore the next arrow indicates a one directional structural influence. Lastly, policy makers at state and federal levels have the ability to create legislation and regulation that both enables and constrains the owner corporation and therefore the individual owners. At the same time, individual owners, owner corporations and strata managers have the ability to lobby policy makers to ensure appropriate legislation and policies are enacted. There is a drive towards consensus, yet the ground is contested. Therefore the arrow is multidirectional, indicating both an enabling and constraining influence.

In Figure 6, Structuration and Strata power is exercised across the full range of action and interaction. Whereas Figure 5 Structural Influences and the Strata

Environment depicts direct influences between two or more players, Figure 6

shows the coercive influences on legislation and policy makers in greater detail. These industries are represented by professional bodies that advocate positions with government and to whom government may offer concessions. Each player‟s decision cements the decisions by others to exert power over the individual owners.

Page 90

3.4 Conclusion

This chapter has discussed the ontological and epistemological aspects of the research. Power and the contestation of power are critical to understanding organisations. Within the strata development, much of the power relationship lies within the contract terms and legislation at various stages throughout the past, present and future phases of the organisation. The exploration of power dynamics in this thesis are considered through two key actor groups, that of the owner corporation committee, and that of the strata manager, where there is a strata manager contracted to the organisation. I have provided a diagrammatic representation of the role that power plays within the owner corporation. This diagram illustrates how power plays differ between the „leaves of time‟. In the past phase of the organisation, the power rests with the developer - the prospective purchaser has limited ability to negotiate terms. In the present, a range of power plays exist between owners and the owner corporation; between the owner corporation and the contractual relationship with the strata manager; between the owner corporation and the non-profit sector; and between policy makers and the owner, owner corporation, strata manager and their associated industries.

What is missing in academic literature is an appreciation of structure and agency as it applies to the strata environment11. The Foucauldian view of power was rejected as too limiting. An agency view on its own did not apply to the owner corporation. Structuralist views likewise did not explain the legislation designed to provide agency to owners. Both enabling and constraining forces were observable within the owner corporation. I argue that both structure and agency have a role to play for owner corporations. Thus structuration theory fits well within housing and organisational contexts. The concepts of organisation, governance, participation, expertise and the contract environment are constructed realities that can be placed within Giddens‟ (1993) theoretical framework.

The rules, integrated practices and reflexive monitoring of action all have their role to play. This thesis provides a framework for contextualising the owner corporation within the structure and agency debate. It provides an explanation of the agency employed by various actors and how they are also constrained by structural forces.

11

As highlighted in the literature review, a number of people have applied structuration theory to the real estate industry with Foldvary (2006) incorporating the strata environment via

‘condominiums’ into the overall real estate framework. As such, his work is focussed on sale of property rather than the lived experience resultant from the real estate market.

Page 91

This thesis addresses the problem of strata title on two levels. First, it identifies a practical problem and then provides an explanation of what is occurring and why. In doing so, linkages between various organisational aspects are highlighted. Second, it represents an attempt to apply sociological theory to the strata environment.

An epistemology based on constructed reality was identified and viewed through a power and conflict paradigm. The power and conflict paradigm has been central to several streams of housing literature. Shifts in power were seen as useful in explaining structuration theory within this chapter. The next part of this thesis considers the actual methods taken to locate material and participants. It provides the framework for the thematic analysis of transcripts.

Page 92