Co-Creation for Housing
The Future of People-Driven Communities
Why?
We have this question lingering in our minds: “Do developers design properties to be the best place to live, or to be the best place to sell?” We think our community needs a more active role in how modern properties are designed and built. Enter Co-Creating!
Co-Creation Defined
Wikipedia, the source of all knowledge and information on the Internet, defines “co-creation” as, “a management initiative, or form of economic strategy, that brings different parties together (for instance, a company and a group of customers), in order to jointly produce a mutually valued outcome.” For the purposes of this article, we’re going to simplify that into two parties: A Rent + Equity holding group (let’s call it Provito) and a group of customers (let’s call them Community).
This article will explore a grand total of four potential models of co-creation and how they relate to our two parties here, valuing who has overall power in the relationship and what that relationship actually looks like. The four models are listed below as Submitting, Tinkering, CoDesigning, and Decentralization. As always, we appreciate your feedback on what you think is the best potential model! Check the end of the article for ways to connect with us.
Exploring Four Models Within Provito
Submitting (Provito has homes, Provito decides their design)
This model is based purely on control by the holding company, Provito, which definitively holds all decision making powers. When a property in one of the communities comes available, a Community member tours it, signs a lease, and enjoys whatever is existing within the property. From this point, when the Community member meets their obligations towards Provito — such as paying rent on time, attending community meetings, or whatever has been decided — they receive their piece of monthly equity and the world continues to spin as it always has.
The benefit to this model is purely in it’s simplicity. When it comes time to open new developments to community members, it’s agreed upon internally based off of Provito research. The drawback to this is that for a model that looks to be based on the say of the community, they really don’t have any ability to input ideas. All design choices for Community members are solely considered by the holding company.
Tinkering (Provito has homes, community has small say in their design)
This second model begins to allow Community members to have some say in the overall look and feel of the physical space. Consider this option to be similar to “starter home” builders. Community members have the option to pick certain characteristics of their home, such as flooring colors, paint choices, and the style of cabinets in their house (unless they’re taking over a recently opened home, obviously). Provito still determines overall layout of the home, in terms of bed and bath locations and structure, but the Community member feels as though their input has shaped the overall home. This micro-focused level of detail ensures that each community is slightly unique.
On a macro level, Community members meeting their obligation towards the overall Community have input on the company as a whole in addition to their equity stake, but only from a purely Town Hall-style. When it comes time to open new communities, members will be able to place their input on places they would like to see! Referencing an earlier article about Jack and Diane, should the time come when they want to settle close to their grandkids, they would get to vigorously suggest that the next community be in, say, San Diego, giving them an immediate option for relocation from their current community in, say, Austin.
CoDesigning (Provito has homes, community has large say in design)
CoDesigning is designed as an expansion to the Tinkering model, where, on a micro level, Community members have a vastly larger amount of direction in the style of their home. Compare this level to something along the lines of a custom home builder. While Provito maintains the house is structurally sound, the rest of the design is essentially in the hands of the Community member, sans a certain amount of guidance.
On a macro level, this style of Community engagement also directs the company in a massive way. New communities are now voted on by community members, with Provito providing guidance on neighborhoods within that city that may appeal most to Community members. This creates a style of management where the impact of each Community-member’s investment into the overall community is strongly felt. Provito has the responsibility to the community of making sure research into new communities is done properly, new homes are built strongly, and the community is maintained.
Decentralization (Community decides most aspects of community)
The final stage of Co-creation is Decentralization, where the community has the most overall say in nearly all aspects. The home decisions fall to the community member, as do home locations and even community locations. Consider this model to be similar to a rural farm community, where each person has chosen their own spot and own home, however the city (or holding company in this case) has decided on where to map streets.
On a macro level, the Community owns the entire game. As long as they meet obligations to Provito, they control the decision making power by virtue of Herd Mentality. Meetings are set by Provito to allow the Community members to discuss and decide on important issues.
Potential Challenges
Each model creates a certain number of challenges for both the holding company and the health of the overall Community. The Decentralization model, for example, leaves almost no control to the holding company, which simply becomes a financial sword that the community can swing around all willy-nilly (technical term). A single community member, feeling more aggressive than the rest, can vie for membership control by virtue of convincing neighbors to follow his/her idea. On the other hand, the model of submission proposes the opposite, where a Community investment is used as the holding company sees fit, with no obligation to the member or overall Community beyond providing a rental environment for the community. While both the Collaboration and Submitting models can build a scenarios for the community, they seem to lack a resilient balance that we’re working towards.
Wrapping up
We believe, at least at this time, that the true magic lies somewhere in the middle, with the holding company and Community members holding near equal say in the overall shape of the company and Community. This allows each party to be responsible to the other in the shape of monetary and communal investment (meeting renter obligations). Each community feels unique, and each renter feels like their investment dollar is going further than it previously had.
We’re curious what you think! We’ve received some very in depth feedback and criticism, and we read every word of it as we continue to shape this model. If you had control of the company, which form of Co-Creation would you roll with?
Reach out to us on the socials, or comment on this article. We need to hear from you as we continue to grow this bad boy. Even a thumbs up or down is a good comment.
Instagram: @ProvitoRE
Facebook: @ProvitoRE
http://weprovito.com
