Social Economy and Sustainability Research NetworkPartenariat sur l’économie sociale et la durabilitéBridging, Bonding, and Building / Renforcement des liens et des capacités

Partners in Research

www.msvu.ca/socialeconomyatlantic

ByLeslie Brown

Mount Saint Vincent University

International Forum on the Social and Solidarity EconomyPanel on collaborative and partnership research Palais de congrès, MontréalOctober 19, 2011

Map of the 4 Atlantic Provinces of Canada

Context

1. Partnership was funded by SSHRC

2. SESRN as an intentional creation, a (time-limited) community of practice covering large geographic distances & a highly diverse membership

3. SESRN focus on partners from the grass-roots

4. Influenced by the particular qualities of the SE as an arena of activity based on particular sets of values such as participation/inclusion, solidarity, autonomy, and citizenship

Context

Expectations from the SE community partners

“My experience with this work is that it is quite inclusive and respectful. Not only does this approach work, it is a necessary approach when dealing with community groups”

(emphasis added, Daughton , 2011)

Iterative processes for a collaborative & sustainable research

partnership

BEHAVIOUR

PLANNING OUTCOMES

Ongoing self-assessment

A Critical Factor in Success

For SESRN, success in ‘getting the research and dissemination done’ was integrally linked with ‘following the appropriate processes’, ‘maintaining respectful relationships’, and ‘mutual learning’.

Node Steering Committee

(Node office) Mt. St. Vincent

University

SN1Steering

Committee U New

BrunswickSN6 Steering Committee Community

Sector Council & Memorial U

SN5 Steering

Committee St Mary’s U

SN2 Steering

Committee U Prince

Edward Isl

SN3 Steering

Committee Mt St

Vincent U

SN4 Steering

Committee U de

Moncton

Management Committee

Figure 2: Governance Diagram

Ad Hoc Committees

Development of a PartnershipComment from an academic partner

…we made a conscious decision right off the top not to rush things, and we took the better part of a year to [build the partnership]. The other thing … was that we decided to trust one another and to just share the money up front and put it in the hands of local committees [sub-nodes] who then did what they needed to do with it… I think these two decisions made this project a success.

Development of a Partnership

Comment from a community partner:

“Personally, I think that the main partnership-building success was that there was attention paid to the meaningful participation of all partners from the very beginning … engagement wasn’t just lip service”

Recognizing Challenges & Addressing Them

1.Building & sustaining a community of practice and negotiated equality (bridging, bonding, allocating resources)

2.Workload, workflow, and balancing the various priorities (i.e. focus on processes & the work itself)

3.Accountability and record keeping (internal and external accountabilities ; multiple

criteria for judging success)

Recognizing Challenges & Addressing ThemAn academic partner spoke about workload &

accountability:“But being rooted in the community organization and having to do research that is sensible to them, that makes a difference to them, is key to how you then conduct the whole thing, and in the pressures you then have, because there is responsibility and accountability to them, to deliver something that they can show they spent their time wisely … [and] because it is asking a lot of them in voluntary time. “

Recognizing Challenges & Addressing Them

A community partner commented:“I’ve really been interested in the different priorities between community and academic research and how there isn’t an easy balance in meeting everyone’s needs. … I wasn’t really happy about that at times, but it was a really good opportunity to understand why it is the way it is and to think about how you take these two different needs (the need to publish and the need to do) and blend them into something that achieves the best we can, and reflect the different focuses.”

Time to talk and get to know one another.

Time for FUN! Here we enjoy a dance performance.

Legacy

Products (available and on the way)

Professional, political and social networks

Policy development and links with governments

New organizations within the SE; individual and organizational capacity and careers

Participation in new CURAs and in smaller collaborative projects

Legacy - Policy

• A recognition of the value of collaborating in order to influence policy through research + now have linkages

• A reinforcement of an appetite for being involved in policy making – now with the vocabulary of co-construction, and knowledge that in other provinces strides are being made

• Debates about the nature of social enterprise and the need for enabling policies

• ACCSE (and its links within each province) as an organization that is helping to move a policy agenda forward

Knowledge Mobilization and Dissemination -Impacts on team members and their practice

One community partner reported (academics agreed):

“It truly did give us a window into what goes on with the SE community … It allowed us access to, and to share information with, a whole breadth of people who were doing work in sectors that apply to us … It created a whole new network of people who can provide us with information and opportunities we didn’t have before.”

Knowledge Mobilization and Dissemination -Impacts on team members and their practiceTwo comments from students:

“[It was] helpful, especially, to participate in negotiating how to work with academics as well as community practitioners… how they could achieve their own goals … but contribute to something larger”

AND

“I delivered papers at 2 international conferences …”

Development of a Partnership

Questions to consider:

• WHAT is a CURA? (or other partnered research)

• WHO is to be included within the partnership?

• HOW should the partnership work?

• What is the PURPOSE OF PARTNERING in research, and what are the anticipated outcomes?

• TO WHOM is the alliance accountable? (note implications for measures of ‘success’)

To conclude

Four Qualities that SESRN emphasized:

Partnerships appropriate to the objectives

Engaged collaborative scholarship

Participatory Action Research methodologies

Reflection and self-evaluation

CHUTZPAH (audacity!)

Thank you!

You can reach me, at

leslie.brown@msvu.ca

Peruse http://www.msvu.ca/socialeconomyatlantic

Social Economy Space http://dc.msvu.ca:8080/xmlui/handle/10587/9

Postscript

Why Collaborate in Research?

Key Dimensions of Partnerships

Qualities to Seek and to Monitor

Why Collaborate? Examples of positive impacts

1. Obtain reliable and valid data

2. Leverage additional resources

3. Build capacity within universities and in the community

4. Connect people and connect institutions (social capital); facilitate action

5. Wider dissemination and mobilization of knowledge

6. Personally and professionally rewarding

KEY DIMENSIONS (How partnerships

should work)QUALITIES TO SEEK AND TO MONITOR

1. Values & Principles guiding the partnership

Consensus on these values and principles (including principles for decision making)

Consensus on overarching research themes and questions Respect diversity and divergent opinions (e.g. re. definition of

the SE); developing some shared language

2. Control over processes (governance AND research)

Shared as widely as possible and as team decides is appropriate Representative, participatory, and decentralized governance Participatory Action Research Methodologies Clarity of roles and responsibilities achieved via MOUs, detailed

project proposals, and ethics applications

3. # of partners Manageable number (smaller numbers work better) Appropriate to the objectives Adequately funded

4. Interactions within the partnership

Frequent, rooted in face-to-face as much as possible (especially in the early days) but also using available technologies

Appropriate to the needs of the network

5. Communications (internal & external)

Guided by an agreed-upon communication plan Frequent Bi-lateral and Multi-lateral Respectful

KEY DIMENSIONS (how partnerships

should work)QUALITIES TO SEEK AND TO MONITOR

6. Flexibility / Adaptability

Willingness to adapt and change as network develops and agrees on processes for doing this – iterative process

7. Trust Trust based on relational is likely to be the strongest Fortified by clarity of roles and expectations

8. Learning Jointly generated collaborative learning Research results shared

9. Benefits and outcomes

Mutual and/or compatible Supporting one another in making space / time for particularized

benefits to be realized too

10. Monitoring Self-evaluation of process and of deliverables / products / outcomes in relation to goals and commitments

Responding to the results of these self-evaluations