TY - JOUR
T1 - Engagement strategies that foster community self-determination in participatory research
T2 - Insider ownership through outsider championship
AU - On behalf of the KSDPP School Travel Planning Committee
AU - Salsberg, Jon
AU - Macridis, Soultana
AU - Bengoechea, Enrique Garcia
AU - Macaulay, Ann C.
AU - Moore, Spencer
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author 2017.Published by Oxford University Press.
PY - 2017/6/1
Y1 - 2017/6/1
N2 - Background. In order to maximize the benefits of community-based participatory research, effective ownership over the research process must be at least equally in the hands of the community. A previous social network analysis documented that the participatory research process shifted ownership from academic to community partners, but did not show what actions and strategies fostered this shift. Objectives. This study follows the trajectory of a community-academic partnership and asks, from the perspective of the project stakeholders, which actions and strategies over the lifespan of the research led to the observed shift in ownership and decision-making from the original external academics to the community stakeholders? Methods. Qualitative description using inductive thematic analysis. One academic and five community stakeholders identified as central in a previous social network analysis, participated in retrospective, semi-structured interviews. Results. Actions deemed to have fostered the observed shift in ownership included: existence of a strong champion; stimulating 'outside' ideas; emergence of core people; alignment of project goals with stakeholders' professional roles; involving the right people; personal qualities of the champion; trust-building; and active use of participatory engagement strategies. Conclusion. Although communities must take ownership over the research process to assure sustained action and change, a strong, trusted and accepted outside champion who actively enacts participatory engagement strategies can facilitate the participatory process and provide community stakeholders the time and support they need to achieve meaningful and sustained leadership roles. These findings have implications for how partnership research is designed and implemented, both in community and in clinical organisational settings.
AB - Background. In order to maximize the benefits of community-based participatory research, effective ownership over the research process must be at least equally in the hands of the community. A previous social network analysis documented that the participatory research process shifted ownership from academic to community partners, but did not show what actions and strategies fostered this shift. Objectives. This study follows the trajectory of a community-academic partnership and asks, from the perspective of the project stakeholders, which actions and strategies over the lifespan of the research led to the observed shift in ownership and decision-making from the original external academics to the community stakeholders? Methods. Qualitative description using inductive thematic analysis. One academic and five community stakeholders identified as central in a previous social network analysis, participated in retrospective, semi-structured interviews. Results. Actions deemed to have fostered the observed shift in ownership included: existence of a strong champion; stimulating 'outside' ideas; emergence of core people; alignment of project goals with stakeholders' professional roles; involving the right people; personal qualities of the champion; trust-building; and active use of participatory engagement strategies. Conclusion. Although communities must take ownership over the research process to assure sustained action and change, a strong, trusted and accepted outside champion who actively enacts participatory engagement strategies can facilitate the participatory process and provide community stakeholders the time and support they need to achieve meaningful and sustained leadership roles. These findings have implications for how partnership research is designed and implemented, both in community and in clinical organisational settings.
KW - Aboriginal health/native populations
KW - Culture and disease/cross-cultural issues
KW - Health promotion
KW - Prevention
KW - Public health
KW - Underserved populations
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85027178024&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1093/fampra/cmx001
DO - 10.1093/fampra/cmx001
M3 - Article
C2 - 28334802
AN - SCOPUS:85027178024
SN - 0263-2136
VL - 34
SP - 336
EP - 340
JO - Family Practice
JF - Family Practice
IS - 3
ER -