Our approach; research findings and methods.
The Long Table
The Long Table is a format for discussion that uses the setting of a domestic dinner table as a means to generate public conversation.
Conceived in 2003 by Lois Weaver in response to the divided nature of conventional panel discussion, the Long Table allows voices to be heard equally, disrupting hierarchical notions of 'expertise'. The table model has been used to involve many participants in conversations, each respected for their own perspective and knowledge , and has been used by institutions and festivals worldwide with hundreds of people being invited to sit and share their views on myriad topics.
We have used the Long Table approach to discuss the development of a food hub in Clapton and it has been used by our Fairville partners to evaluate co production methods in their projects.
The Long Table conversations are recorded and observed during the evening to ensure the conversations are captured.
We can offer support with how to run a long table or other mechanisms for delivering effective co production. We continue to pursue these and other techniques across our projects.
Key Findings from the Clapton Social Care Pilot
With lessons for other co production projects
The evaluation found that there are challenges and considerations in implementing co-production successfully:
Power dynamics: Balancing power between service users and providers was at times challenging, requiring intentional efforts to ensure equality. In practice, the social services department did not allow social workers adequate flexibility and time to test the approach fully. However, care recipients, family and friends and community groups did engage well. There was inadequate time for further discussions with social services.
Resource Intensive: Co-production can require significant time, effort, and resources to facilitate meaningful participation and collaboration.
Cultural Change: Shifting to a co-production model requires changes in organisational culture and practices. This includes changes within state institutions to better engage with the initiatives, agency and know-how within communities. This takes time and deliberate effort and in this short space of time we did not completely get the transformation needed from social services.
Skill Development: Both service users and providers may need training and support to engage in co-production processes effectively.
This power of Mapping social care networks. As this was a great tool for encouraging people to broaden their netowrks and support structures. It also helped us see how different organisations in Clapton linked together and complemented each other.
Finding the right language and tone for co- production
A key aspect of co production is bringing all partners to work together. However we know that there are different levels of power and knowledge within all partnerships. Even in matters such as language people can be excluded from fully participating in discussions. Examples of barriers created by language can include:
- Different languages for example immigrant communities for whom English is not their first language.
- Technicality – using specialist words or abbreviations that are not in plain English or not explained to non professionals.
- Habit – talking in shorthand or using code eg the name of a building, person or process which is not widespread knowledge.
- Impatience or unwillingness to adjust – for example telling people who ask for clarification or simplification that they are being disruptive or that there is no time in the meeting. This also shames people into not asking again or not coming back to meetings.
- Culture – the need to ensure that all participants can engage in ways that make them feel comfortable. For some participants eg care recipients, traders meetings are not a culturally familiar space and they may feel unwilling to join in discussions so alternative formats need to be found. The projects in London have experimented with formats including 121 working, makings and showing films, lunches, etc
- Continuity - Sometimes the way things work is a lack of continuity in conversations – so a conversation begins between one group but is continued elsewhere in the partnership where perhaps there is no technicality or language gap or with different participants and by the time that conversation is brought back to the first group those participants do not feel the outcome as a result of the original discussion.
SOLUTIONS
- Use simpler language so that it is widely understood as an example we are making community led definitions of terms that we refer to in the research project
- Use glossaries to enable needed technical terms to be understood
- Allow more time for discussions eg at international partnership meetings in acknowledgement of the need for time to allow for translation and understanding
- Share basic information in advance of discussions to allow people to establish the core understanding of what will be presented thus allowing time in meetings for clarification and debate (with translation and support)
- Respect each and every participant and recognise their contribution whether that is professional knowledge or lived experience
- Use techniques and methods that ensure all participants in a process are involved and enabled to speak
- Actually ask everyone in a meeting to make a contribution (and warn them in advance so they can prepare).
©Copyright. All rights reserved.
We need your consent to load the translations
We use a third-party service to translate the website content that may collect data about your activity. Please review the details in the privacy policy and accept the service to view the translations.