Enabling the space and conditions for co-leadership in co-design: an evaluation of co-facilitator training for culturally and linguistically diverse consumers

Abstract

Enabling the space and conditions for co-leadership in codesign: an evaluation of co-facilitator training for culturally and linguistically diverse consumers.

Creating space for theory when codesigning healthcare interventions

“…Process evaluation of codesign indicates that reflexive practice, coleadership models and reciprocal learning are valued strategies to support the inclusion of theory into a user-driven approach to healthcare codesign. 30 Strategies that require discussion, action and reflection beyond codesign meetings necessitate additional time and resource, which must be recognised and supported by leaders and researchers as an important part of preparing for and undertaking this study. 6,20 AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS…”

“…A reflexive approach that focuses on relationship building and reciprocal learning between codesign members and with researchers provides the basis for enabling facilitators and codesign groups to reflect on points at which the group have made critical design decisions or deviated from the initial ideas of members. 30 Observing video-recordings of codesign meetings may aid facilitators and members to consider and spot power imbalances, or moments where power shifted. 31 The use of theory in codesign and associated risks raise wider questions of the role of academic or clinician researchers who are tasked with facilitating a codesign process-what is the scope of their role, can academic/clinical subject matter experts facilitate, and what are the techniques that co-designers can employ to mitigate these risks?…”

“…Techniques to alert facilitators to power imbalances can be used to direct attempts to mitigate some of this risk. A reflexive approach that focuses on relationship building and reciprocal learning between codesign members and with researchers provides the basis for enabling facilitators and codesign groups to reflect on points at which the group have made critical design decisions or deviated from the initial ideas of members 30 . Observing video‐recordings of codesign meetings may aid facilitators and members to consider and spot power imbalances, or moments where power shifted 31 …”

“…When seeking to codesign patient safety interventions with culturally diverse communities and cancer service staff, we adopted a coleadership model in which a consumer cofacilitator partnered with an academic researcher in workshop facilitation. A central goal was to support the introduction of theory while privileging the voices of co‐design members 30 . Our approach also highlighted the value of building capability for codesign among members as part of establishing conditions for codesign to be successful.…”

Co-production: aspirations, challenges, and the way ahead for public health and health services research

“…Nic Giolla Easpaig and colleagues 4 present an evaluation of co-produced activities to enhance the safety of cancer care for culturally and linguistically diverse groups, which emphasises the importance of supporting and training lay people to participate fully in the coproduction of research. Page 5 argues that co-produced research needs to be guided by a clear and identified ethical framework, to guide its design and conduct.…”