Chapter I: Introductory Classification of Management

The Sub-Committee desire to point out that until the advent of the Woman House Property Manager there is no evidence that any special form of Management was considered necessary for the poorer classes of house property.

A very general impression has been prevalent that the Management suitable for better class property (that is, roughly, property let under Agreement in Quarterly and Yearly tenancies) was also suited to tenement and small house property let out in weekly tenancies. In fact, no other system of management existed until Miss Octavia Hill took up the management of weekly tenancies and inaugurated a system of her own.

When well-built properties are in occupation of selected tenants whose financial and social circumstances ensure that the property will be maintained, with few exceptions, in good condition, the work of management is reduced to a minimum and is chiefly occupied with rent collecting and simple and regular requirements in the way of upkeep and repairs. The assumption in the past that nothing more ought to be needed for property of lower grades has too often led to concentration on the more difficult collection of rents, with a minimum attention to repairs. No attention has been paid to economic and social conditions, and the net result has been the production of the slum.

The Sub-Committee believe that the introduction of a suitable form of management, insisted on by some recognized authority, could have prevented the creation of slums in the past. They further believe that it may do so in the future, and that it can, with special effort, eradicate much that is evil in present bad areas. Miss Octavia Hill’s System put into practice the theory that slums could be eradicated and advanced the proposition that management could be made a means to this end. She, the first Woman House Property Manager, and workers she trained, all of them also women, introduced Social Economics into the business of House Property Management. The Sub-Committee feel strongly that many social evils might be avoided by the adoption of Social Economics into business generally. The distinctive mark of Miss Hill’s System is the consideration of the personal, human factor as an integral part of the business. The Sub-Committee can find no justification for condemning this principle as unbusinesslike.

The Sub-Committee have considered the work done by Miss Hill and those who have succeeded her, by visits, and they have read reports of the work in various cities and towns in England and Scotland, in Holland (see _Women’s Local Government News_, February and March 1921) and in America (see _Good Housing that Pays_). They find there is evidence of many slum areas redeemed. Improvements by rebuilding have almost necessarily accompanied the work in nearly every case, but there are striking instances of the maintenance of the original old property in excellent sanitary condition. On the other hand, evidences of new properties falling into disrepair for lack of management are not wanting.