Why using a reasonable adjustment policy can genuinely support your EDI approach

Reasonable adjustments: Not a ‘woke’ concept, just good housing practice

Reasonable adjustments shouldn't feel new or uncomfortable to anyone working in housing. In reality, most of us already do it every day, and we just don't always call it that. For example, meeting a tenant at home because travelling to the office is difficult, or slowing a conversation down when someone is anxious or overwhelmed. If you’ve booked an interpreter so someone fully understands their tenancy or the conversation you're having. Even rearranging an appointment around care responsibilities. None of this feels political. It feels like being a decent housing professional. And yet, somewhere along the way, equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI) has become labelled as something separate from ‘real’ housing work. As if it's an add on or even a distraction from frontline pressures. My own view is that reconnecting EDI to reasonable adjustment mindset is one of the most effective ways to change that narrative. 

Why reasonable adjustments matter to our EDI journey

When we talk about EDI, it can sometimes sound abstract, like its strategic and value led, all with well meaning, but it's actually disconnected from the realities of housing delivery. At leadership level, there's often a genuine question about where EDI sits; is it a moral imperative? Is it a regulatory requirement? Or is it something that actually improves services and outcomes? For me, EDI becomes most powerful when we stop treating it as a separate agenda and root it firmly in everyday housing practice. That's exactly where reasonable adjustments come in.

At its simplest, this approach recognises that people don't all experience our services in the same way. Tenants, leaseholders and licensees come to us with different needs, circumstances and barriers. Some are linked to disability or protected characteristics, others to language, health, social class, life events, or temporary crisis. Those needs aren't fixed, and our response shouldn't be either. A reasonable adjustment is just a sensible proportionate change to remove a barrier. It might be how we communicate, where we meet, how much time we allow, or how flexible we are with the process. It isn't about special treatment or lowering standards, it's about fairness in practice.

This matters because it connects EDI directly to service quality and organisational outcomes. When colleagues are supported to make thoughtful human decisions, engagement improves, escalation reduces and services work better for everyone. That isn’t inclusion for inclusion’s sake, that just good housing management.

From policy language to lived behaviour

Across the housing sector, there is no shortage of goodwill when it comes to EDI. With national bodies, sector partners and individual landlords having invested significant time and effort into doing the right thing. The challenge hasn't been intention, it's been translation.

Too often, EDI sets strategies, action plans and training decks while frontline teams are dealing with complex tenancies, rising demand and limited capacity. Sounds familiar?

When the deal is framed mainly around compliance or morality, it risks feeling detached from day-to-day practice.

A reasonable adjustment policy used well, brings EDI back to where culture actually lives: in everyday decision making. It helps staff move from ‘what does this policy say?’ to ‘what does this person need from me to engage fairly with our service?’

Where inclusion becomes practical

In my experience, the strongest inclusive cultures don't come from constant reminders about terminology or theory. They come from empowering staff to respond proportionately and humanely to individual circumstances.

A reasonable adjustment mindset encourages simple but powerful questions:

• Does this person need information provided differently?
• Is the way we deliver this service unintentionally creating a barrier?
• What small change could make a big difference to their ability to engage?

The strength of this approach is that it applies across all protected characteristics and beyond them. It also recognises factors such as social class, digital exclusion, literacy and lived experience, which don't always feature strongly enough in EDI conversations. This is where EDI becomes relevant to everyone.

Making the business case, not just the moral one

As a sector, we've often leaned heavily on the moral case for EDI, while underplaying the operational and economic benefits.
When reasonable adjustments are bedded into service design:

• Tenants engage earlier and more effectively
• Complaints are less likely to escalate
• Staff spend less time firefighting misunderstandings
• Trust in landlords improves
• Outcomes become more sustainable.

That isn't ideological. It's practical. Organisations that get this right often see stronger tenancy sustainment, improved staff confidence and healthier relationships with communities. Reasonable adjustments don't slow services down, they make them work better.

“Culture is built on permission, not perfection” – Matthew Arnold 

Another important shift is recognising that inclusive culture doesn't come from getting everything ‘right’. It comes from giving people permission to think, adapt and respond. A reasonable adjustment mindset tells colleagues, ‘You don't need the perfect script. You need awareness, empathy and the confidence to act.’

That reduces fear around saying the ‘wrong thing’ and replaces it with curiosity, accountability and learning. Over time, that's how culture evolves, it evolves quietly, consistently and authentically.

The ‘So what?’

So what does this policy really mean? Well at its core, this policy is about making sure our services work for real people, not idealised ones.

It explains how we identify and respond to individual needs so tenants can access our services fairly and get the right support to manage and sustain their home. Those needs may relate to disability, language, health or personal circumstances, and they can change over time.

A reasonable adjustment is simply doing something differently to remove the barrier. It isn't special treatment. It's fairness. 

The policy supports colleagues to make sensible, proportionate decisions so no one is disadvantaged, services remain accessible and we continue to meet our legal, regulatory and organisational responsibilities, without losing sight of what really matters, people.

If we want EDI to be taken seriously across our organisations, we need to lead it differently. That means moving beyond statements of intent and giving colleagues the clarity, confidence and permission to make reasonable adjustments as part of everyday practise, not as exceptions that require justification. It means asking whether our policies, processes and performance measures actually support fair access in reality, not just on paper.

When we consistently frame reasonable adjustments as good housing practise rooted in fairness, outcomes and service quality, EDI shifts away from labels and towards impact.

The challenge for us all is simple but important: 

Are we designing services around how people actually live? Or around how systems are easiest to run?

If we choose the former, reasonable adjustments becomes the bridge between EDI ambition and operational delivery and inclusion becomes something we do, not just something we say.