RHP (Core principles)

Good relationships are core to effective co-design and teamwork.

Building relationships can involve:

• using cultural protocols to get to know each other and create connections

• taking time to get to know each other e.g. introducing ourselves and our relationship to the research

• understanding each other’s skills, identities, learning goals, hopes and expectations

• learning about, and respecting, life experiences different to ours

• checking in regularly with each other

• pre-briefing before and debriefing after research activities such as interviews, workshops or team meetings with conflict

• keeping in touch during quiet times (such as waiting for funding, a decision, a publication)

• repairing damage to relationships with time, consent and care

• sharing with each other and broader communities what’s happening, closing the loop

We don’t mean forcing anyone to disclose their lived or living experience or speak in front of a group.

Traditionally, knowledge gained by education has been valued over knowledge gained through lived or living experience, including cultural ways of knowing. In co-design, co-production and co-evaluation, we value all knowledge systems equally.

That doesn't mean professional or academic knowledge isn’t important, but it does mean that:

• decisions are made considering other forms of knowledge

• professionals don’t have the only or final say

Sharing decisions happens from start to finish when doing research together. This may include decisions such as agreeing on research priorities, the way the research will be done, how to address research challenges, naming the project, when the team will meet, where and how often., what the findings are, how the findings are shared and how the research will be reviewed.

Co-designing involves co-deciding.

When making decisions, it helps to:

• Know what decisions have already been made
  such as by the funder, timeframe, budget or activities

• Talk about how different decisions will be made and who makes them (e.g. the core team, an advisory group).

  Day-to-day decisions, for example, versus decisions that impact the approach, communities, ethics etc.

• Ensure everyone has access to the same information

• Give everyone time to think in and outside meetings, don’t force hurried decisions

• Build decision-making tools together

• Use simple language when we can

Researchers

Be cautious making assumptions about what decisions consumers and carers want to be involved in. You might ask questions like: do you want to be involved in this decision?

A lot of research is done as a core activity within a professional role. This typically means financial recognition and other forms of recognition (such as authorship, access to professional development, conferences) are available to conventional researchers.

If we’re asking consumers and carers to work with us either as core team members, partners or participants, we need to recognise their time, strengths and support needs to ensure they can stay involved and that we're not exploiting their labour. That means giving choices and ensuring we’re not coercing or expecting consumers and carers to volunteer their time.

As NSW Health note, recognition can be financial and non-financial and might mean:

• paid employment

• ad-hoc payment for activities (such as co-facilitating, reviewing)

• payment for out-of-pocket expenses (for example, parking)

• public, group or community recognition

• developing new skills (such as facilitation and leadership)

• presenting or writing things together

• a character reference for a job or scholarship

• nourishing food

• something else.

Researchers: Ask consumers and carers about what recognition means to them.