The promise of seamless integration and innovation through open APIs in social housing systems is appealing, but all too often, it’s not fully realised.
At Shaw Consulting, we recently faced resistance from a well-known housing IT provider when trying to integrate a scheduling solution. Despite finding the ideal solution, the IT provider refused integration, prioritising its own competing product; this kind of resistance highlights the barriers to truly open integration in our sector.
Following a LinkedIn post on this problem and the subsequent online debate, we ran a series of polls to gauge the sector’s sentiment around APIs. The results confirmed what we know; the promise of open APIs isn’t being realised.
Poll results – Challenges integrating new solutions
We asked, “Have you faced challenges integrating new solutions into existing housing systems?” 100 per cent of respondents said yes. This underlines the extent of the problem and the urgent need for change.
The promise of open APIs
When housing system providers talk about open APIs, they promise seamless integration and limitless opportunities for innovation. Open APIs are supposed to allow housing providers to tailor their systems to meet specific needs, enabling them to create applications that, say, improve housing management, enhance tenant services or streamline operations.
In theory, open APIs should enable smoother data flows between platforms, break down silos and improve efficiency. They should help housing providers modernise their systems and offer better transparency. However, the reality is often far from this ideal.
The reality – A far cry from open
Many housing system providers claiming to offer open APIs provide only limited access. They allow developers to access basic functions but withhold the key features necessary for full integration. A platform may give access to basic scheduling or communications tools but the real value, such as core system features, is often locked down.
This selective access is problematic. Housing providers are forced to work around these limitations or abandon the IT provider’s system for one that offers full integration. This is exactly what we faced in our project, where the IT provider resisted integrating a better solution in favour of its own product.
Poll results – Open APIs in housing systems
When we asked, “What do you think of open APIs in housing systems?”, 40 per cent said they had “some limitations”, 40 per cent said they “fell short” and only 20 per cent thought that open APIs “gave them what they needed”. This shows that while open APIs hold potential, they often fail to meet expectations.
Why IT providers resist openness
Why do providers resist open APIs? It’s all about control. The more open their API is, the more they risk losing control over their platform. By keeping key features exclusive to their system, they lock housing providers into their platform, despite the existence of better alternatives.
For example, an HMS might restrict access to advanced reporting tools or analytics, ensuring that housing providers stay on their platform, even if it’s outdated. This creates a barrier for developers who could offer better solutions if the APIs were truly open.
Furthermore, this control extends beyond technology. IT providers may tie customers to long-term contracts, making it difficult to switch to more open systems. This ‘lock-in’ strategy harms housing providers (and their tenants) because they are ultimately left with inefficient systems.
Poll results – API openness and recommendations
When we asked, “Would you recommend a housing system provider based on the openness of its APIs?”, 44 per cent of respondents said “definitely” and 38 per cent said “maybe”. However, 13 per cent were “unlikely” and six per cent said “not at all”.
These results show that openness in APIs is important but it’s not always the deciding factor. Housing providers need practical solutions that meet their needs and, if an IT provider’s API doesn’t deliver, it can’t be fully recommended.
The impact on innovation
Selective openness directly stifles innovation. Housing providers are limited because they can’t access all the features necessary to create the best solutions. And without the freedom to innovate, they end up recycling outdated systems, rather than creating new, efficient ones that could improve tenant services and operations.
Moreover, when IT providers market their APIs as open but limit access, it feels deceptive. This lack of transparency erodes trust and harms their reputation.
Poll results – Open APIs and innovation
When asked, “How well do you think open APIs foster innovation in housing?”, 64 per cent said “essential”, 21 per cent said “important” and 14 per cent said “somewhat”.
These results confirm that most people in our sector believe open APIs are crucial for innovation and improving services. If our sector embraces the true potential of open APIs, it could transform housing systems. But to do so, we must first break down the barriers to collaboration and openness.
Moving towards true openness
For the housing sector to benefit from open APIs, IT providers must move beyond the limited openness that currently exists and offer full access to their systems’ capabilities. This would allow developers to create integrated solutions that work for everyone.
Transparency is also key. If providers need to withhold access to certain features, they should be upfront about it. But ultimately, we need the ability to work with all system functionalities, not just those providers choose to share.
And….
The promise of open APIs is tremendous but to realise that potential, we must overcome the barriers created by providers who are unwilling to embrace true openness. Collaboration, not competition, is the way forward.
It’s time for the sector to move towards true openness – where ‘open API’ means exactly that, and innovation can flourish without unnecessary restrictions.
Chris Shaw is the managing director of Shaw Consulting.
