Co‐production as a route to employability: Lessons from services with lone parents

Abstract

Policy‐makers claim to support personalized approaches to improving the employability of disadvantaged groups. Yet, in liberal welfare states, mainstream activation programmes targeting these groups often deliver standardized, low‐quality services. Such failures may be related to a governance and management regime that uses tightly defined contracting and performance targets to incentivize (mainly for‐profit) service providers to move people into any job as quickly as possible. This article draws on evidence from third sector/public sector‐led services in Scotland to discuss an alternative approach. These services co‐produced personalized support in partnership with disadvantaged service users (in this case vulnerable lone parents). We suggest that, in this case, street‐level co‐production and personalization were facilitated by co‐governance and co‐management in the design and organization of provision. We conclude by identifying lessons for future employability services.

Collaborative Innovation in Public Administration: Theoretical Background and Research Trends of Co-Production and Co-Creation

“…Finally, we need to mention co-governance and co-management as additional concepts that (could) add to the conceptual ambiguity and confusion around the terms of co-production and co-creation. In the context of creation of innovative, personalised public services, co-governance, and co-management are referred to as the framework that (dis)enables the synergy of different actors' knowledge and resources (Lindsay et al 2018). According to Lindsay et al (2018), co-governance and co-management both serve as important facilitators of co-production.…”

“…In the context of creation of innovative, personalised public services, co-governance, and co-management are referred to as the framework that (dis)enables the synergy of different actors' knowledge and resources (Lindsay et al 2018). According to Lindsay et al (2018), co-governance and co-management both serve as important facilitators of co-production. While co-governance features the level of definition of broad programme aims and priorities, co-management refers to the operational level, where materialisation of such broader aims occurs through joint management of resources, design, and delivery of public services.…”

Research approaches to networked employment services: A systematic review

“…This agenda is also focused on examining collaboration opportunities and barriers in addition to scrutinising how collaboration efforts are organised. The most significant issues include how networks link central and local government (Diamond, 2008), public services and users (Lindsay, Pearson, Batty, Cullen, & Eadson, 2018), employers (Klimplova, 2011), third sector organisations (Lindsay, Osborne, & Bond, 2014) and health services (Lindsay & Dutton, 2010).…”

Street-Level Practice, Personalisation and Co-Production in Employability: Insights from Local Services with Lone Parents

“…Brandsen and Pestoff (2006) identify potentially important facilitating mechanisms in the form of: 'co-governance', meaning governance mechanisms through which different stakeholders, drawn from relevant actors in the public, private and/or third sectors, pool resources and share decision-making in the planning of services; and 'co-management', referring to collaboration across stakeholders in the design and management of street-level services and the sharing of resources and expertise in the delivery of personalised support. An emerging evidence base points to such collaborative approaches to governance and management as laying the groundwork for co-production between service users and street-level professionals, by establishing norms that value equality of status between different stakeholders and the creation of opportunities to share assets and insights (Verschuere et al, 2012;Strokosch and Osborne, 2017;Lindsay et al, 2018b).…”