When two worlds collide: critical reflection on co-production

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to report the findings from reflexive data collection on the evolving co-production research relationship between the two “worlds” of community and academia: people with lived experience and their community intermediaries and academic researchers. It reports analysis of reflections on experience as the different partners explore and evaluate their own experiences of co-productive research within the context of substance use recovery co-production research. Design/methodology/approach The research uses reflexive data from perspectives of an intermediary community partner, academic partners, and community researchers on experiences of a series of co-productive research projects. The aim is to identify thematic features of the co-productive experiences from different positions and through the process of adaptation to a co-productive relationship. Findings This paper outlines what has been learnt from the experience of co-production and what has “worked” for community and academic partners; around the nature of co-production, barriers to performance, and its value to participants and the wider recovery research agenda. Originality/value This paper reports a unique perspective on a developing methodology in health and social care, contributing to a growing body of knowledge pertaining to experiences of co-production research.

Clarifying the mechanisms and resources that enable the reciprocal involvement of seldom heard groups in health and social care research: A collaborative rapid realist review process

“…The third article presented three case studies from Australia highlighting learnings in research with highly marginalized young people Reflective articles: Three articles including a reflective article on developing and sustaining an emancipatory research project between Irish, Ugandan, Tanzanian and South African partners; a UK reflective article on co‐producing research with an intermediary community partner; a reflective article identifying methods to engage hard to reach patients in patient‐centred outcomes Grey literature: Three grey literature articles/reports, including an Irish‐based report on what was learned from an emancipatory research partnership involving community and university partners to capture the experiences of Travellers and people with experience of the asylum process in respect to access of public services .…”

“…The review found that engagement with seldom heard groups needs to occur in safe, accessible and inclusive spaces . Ensuring spaces are accessible needs to be guaranteed by undertaking an audit at the start of the research, which should be monitored and reviewed throughout the project .…”

“…Making funding resources available to community partners to facilitate engagement within community spaces was an important mechanism identified to enable seldom heard participation. This would cover costs for (a) transportation, (b) making food available during activities and (c) having care supports available (e.g childcare and social care) . Kaiser et al in particular, outline how a monthly fee was agreed and arranged with community partners to cover such costs.…”

“…The majority of papers and reference panels stressed that early engagement with community partners was a key enabler to shape the research process from the outset . The reference panel with Pavee Point reinforced this point.…”

“…Providing ongoing education to researchers that includes the active involvement of community partners was stressed. This was seen as important to enable a shared understanding of the broader contexts for which the research is being undertaken . 44 The use of innovative and flexible modes of engagement was also identified .…”