“From above, the world looks simple and connected, but when you land, you see its complexity. Co-production in research is much the same: perspective shapes understanding.”
Let’s be real! Co-production in research isn’t all sunshine and rainbows. Sure, it can lead to amazing breakthroughs and more meaningful work, but anyone who’s actually done it will tell you: it’s complicated. There are real pitfalls here – from power imbalances to ethical grey areas – that can trip up even well-meaning projects. In this blog, I’m going to look into both sides: the benefits, and the very real harms and challenges
The bright side: How co-production strengthens research
- Making research more useful and meaningful:
When we involve the people who are affected by an issue in the research process, we make sure we are focusing on the things that really matter to them. This helps the research stay grounded in real life, not just in theory. As a result, the findings are more likely to be useful and something people can put into practice to make positive changes.
- Building confidence:
When people actively contribute to research, we show that their experiences and ideas are valuable. This helps build their confidence and strengthens their sense of control over their own lives. By sharing their knowledge and shaping the work, participants can feel more empowered, and their involvement can lead to positive changes for both them and their communities.
- Building trust and strong connections:
Working together with communities helps build trust between everyone involved. When people feel listened to and respected, they are more likely to share their honest experiences and ideas. This creates better conversations and a deeper understanding of the real problems and needs. Trust also makes it more likely that any changes or projects started through the research will succeed and last over time.
- Helping people grow skills:
When people take part in research, they often learn new skills and gain useful knowledge. This experience can make them feel more confident and better prepared to get involved in future projects. It also gives them more tools to speak up for themselves and their communities, helping them create positive changes over the long term.
- Gathering a wide range of ideas and experiences:
People who have experienced a problem firsthand often see it from a different angle and come up with solutions that researchers might not consider. Their unique perspective can uncover insights that wouldn’t be found through traditional research methods alone. The diversity of experiences enriches the research, adding more layers of understanding. Whether it’s through interviews, surveys, or data analysis, involving people with lived experience can make both the qualitative and quantitative results more detailed and meaningful, helping to capture a fuller picture of the issue.
- Encouraging positive change:
When research shines a light on the real issues people face, it can help raise awareness and inspire action. By sharing stories and experiences in ways that others can easily understand, research can help bring attention to problems that need fixing and support efforts to create fairer, stronger communities.
Beyond good intentions: The real harms and the challenges of co-production
- Managing fairness and real involvement:
If co-production isn’t handled carefully, researchers might still hold most of the power, while participants feel like their voices don’t really matter. Sometimes people are invited to join just to make it look like everyone was included, without giving them real influence. When this happens, it can lead to frustration, disappointment, and a breakdown of trust between researchers and the community. In other words, power dynamics and tokenism
- Protecting people’s emotional well-being:
Taking part in research, especially when it deals with difficult or personal topics, can sometimes bring up painful memories or emotions. If not handled carefully, this can cause distress or even retraumatise participants. It’s important to create a safe and supportive environment where people feel comfortable and where their emotional well-being is always a priority.
- Respecting privacy and confidentiality:
Protecting people’s privacy in research is crucial, but it can be challenging in co-production. For instance, if a participant prefers not to be identified by others in the group, you need a process that respects this choice – such as using online meeting tools and pseudonyms. It’s also essential to ensure everyone fully understands what they are agreeing to, without jargon or technical language, and that their personal information remains secure. Even with the best intentions, maintaining confidentiality can be complex, so careful planning is key. Always prioritise participants’ needs.
- The need for time and resources:
Co-production can take a lot of effort, money, and time. Building strong relationships, training participants, and making sure everyone is actively involved all require careful planning and resources. This can be a challenge, especially when there are tight budgets or deadlines. Sometimes, these demands may make co-production difficult to carry out within the limits of a project.
- Balancing differences:
It can be challenging to ensure researchers and participants share a clear understanding of what the research aims to achieve. Different expectations can lead to frustration or conflict if outcomes don’t meet everyone’s hopes. Addressing these expectations early and maintaining open communication are essential for avoiding disappointment and ensuring a smoother process.
Unclear roles and responsibilities can also cause confusion or tension between academic researchers and collaborators. Without agreement on who is responsible for what, misunderstandings arise, making collaboration harder. Disagreements about research direction, expected outcomes, or time commitments can slow progress and create frustration. These unresolved issues affect not only the project’s success but also trust and cooperation among all involved.
- The risk of losing true collaboration:
Sometimes, researchers or institutions might use co-production as a way to make their own plans or ideas seem more legitimate, even if those ideas were decided before involving the community. This can go against the spirit of true collaboration, where everyone’s voice matters equally. It can also harm the community by making them feel like they’re being used or not really listened to.
- Challenges with institutional frameworks:
In co-produced research, issues like who gets credit for the work, who owns the data, and how to protect participants’ privacy can become more complicated. With multiple people involved, it’s important to clearly define these aspects to avoid misunderstandings or conflicts down the line.
Moreover, many institutions have ethics guidelines that aren’t always designed for participatory or collaborative research models. These traditional frameworks can create unnecessary bureaucratic hurdles, slowing down the process or making it harder for researchers and participants to work together effectively.
- Challenges after the project ends and exploitation concerns:
Once a research project is completed, there can be a sense of abandonment or disappointment if there’s no follow-up or continued involvement. If communities don’t see any lasting benefits or further engagement, they might feel like their contributions were not valued.
Short-term collaborations can unintentionally make communities feel used, especially if they’ve been involved in multiple research projects before. For communities already experiencing research fatigue, this can reinforce a sense of exploitation, where they are asked to contribute but see little real change or lasting impact.
Beyond awareness: Practical considerations
Co-production only delivers on its promise when we approach it thoughtfully. By anticipating challenges and putting safeguards in place from the beginning with transparency and fairness, we can minimise risks while maximising the benefits for all participants. Ultimately, success comes down to one simple principle: valuing people as much as outcomes.
- Set up open and clear communication:
Right from the beginning, it’s important to make sure everyone involved knows exactly what’s expected of them. Work together to define roles, goals, and what everyone hopes to achieve. By having these conversations early on, everyone will be on the same page, which helps avoid confusion or misunderstandings later. This also sets the stage for trust and a more productive collaboration.
- Focus on ethical standards:
It’s essential to put strong ethical practices in place from the start. This includes making sure that participants fully understand what they are agreeing to through a clear and thorough informed consent process. Additionally, it’s important to take steps to protect their well-being, ensuring they feel safe and supported throughout the research. Safeguarding their privacy and keeping their information confidential is also crucial to maintaining trust and respecting their rights.
- Provide fair recognition and compensation:
It’s important to value the time and effort participants put into the research by compensating them fairly. This can include financial payment, but also ensuring their contributions are publicly recognised. Acknowledging their input not only shows respect but also helps build trust and encourages future participation.
- Offer proper support and training:
To ensure participants can fully engage in the research, it’s crucial to provide them with the training and resources they need. This may include explaining the research process, teaching them new skills, or offering guidance on how to share their experiences effectively. By empowering participants with the right tools, skills, and knowledge, you not only improve the quality of the research but also make the experience more meaningful and rewarding for them.
- Encourage self-reflection among researchers:
It’s important for researchers to regularly reflect on their own perspectives and biases. This helps them become more aware of how their views might shape the research process. Researchers should also consider the power dynamics at play and strive to create a fair and respectful partnership with participants. By being mindful of these factors, researchers can ensure that everyone is treated equally and that the research process is as inclusive and balanced as possible.
- Be flexible and responsive:
It’s important to stay open to change and be ready to adjust the research process based on what participants say and any new issues that come up. This shows that you’re truly committed to the principles of co-production, where participants’ input is valued and the process is adaptable to their needs. Being flexible not only improves the research but also strengthens the trust and collaboration between everyone involved.
At its best, co-production in research isn’t just a fancy buzzword; it’s about doing things with people, not to or about them. Sure, the upsides are obvious: you get better insights, people feel heard, and the work stands a chance of making a difference. But let’s be honest, it’s messy. Power gaps don’t vanish just because we call it “collaboration or co-production.” Good intentions won’t stop people from feeling sidelined, burnt out, or even exploited if we’re not careful.
So, how do we do it right? Pay people for their time, not just in lip service. Be ready to hand over the steering when it matters. And ask the hard questions: Who’s really calling the shots here? Are we just ticking boxes, or are we building something fair? Because when co-production works, it doesn’t just change the research, it changes who gets to shape what counts as knowledge. And that’s when things get interesting.
(Author: Janahan Sivanathan, Sanctuary Operations Manager at King’s College London, member of the Lived Experience Advisory Board (LEAB) at the ESRC Centre for Society and Mental Health)
* Photo credit: Janahan Sivanathan; photo title: Janahan’s Skydive.
