Event report: How do we embed co-production across Scotland?
Wednesday, 20th November 2024, 10am - 12:30pm, online
This learning event brought SCN members together during Co-production Week Scotland to explore how we can meaningfully embed co-production into how services and support are delivered across the country.
We heard from insightful speakers and had some fascinating discussion, with network members bringing their ideas and perspectives.
Embedding co-production
This event report brings together our learning from the day around the opportunities of embedding co-production.
We know that co-production can be a transformative way of working: doing with, not to, in a way that can improve outcomes and support that meets people's needs by having them shape what services look like.
But, in a time of reduced resources and stretched capacity, how do we ensure that co-production isn't forgotten, or seen as something 'nice to have', but not essential?
That's where embedding co-production comes in.
Of course, seeing this ambition turn to a reality is a challenge itself, so we’ve developed the Co-production Guide with an entire section on where to begin thinking about embedding co-pro in your work.
Our speakers
Doreen Grove, Head of Open Government, Scottish Government
Doreen kicked off our event by reflecting on the policy environment that supports co-productive approaches we see across Scotland, but also how co-production supports policy development itself.
Co-production and open government share similar principles around openness, transparency, accountability and participation. These foundations mean both approaches are built on the ideas that it is vital that we reach people who are furthest from power and decision-making, with a focus on building capacity and confidence.
Doreen also reflected on the importance of honesty in how participative processes will work. While not everything needs to be co-produced, expectations should be clearly set to build trust and buy-in.
Co-production is a powerful way of getting people together with policy makers to work out solutions to this and set policy on the right track. And like co-production itself, policy development isn’t a straight line.
Anne-Marie Barry, Participation and Engagement Lead, CHSS
Anne-Marie reflected on the co-productive work that Chest Heart and Stroke Scotland have carried out, and how they have embedded it as an approach within their organisation. This embedding was developed in three main ways:
National advisory panel of volunteers which meets every 2 months with senior management and others. They were instrumental in changes to the FAST campaign by brightening up the campaign to be more optimistic - causing it to have more impact than it would have done without getting people with lived experience involved.
In regional assemblies, peer support groups across the country met up and gave inputs into how CHSS runs, what the policies are. This drove the work of the organisation by identifying priorities around support, including the need for carers, family and friends of folks with conditions also needing support. More here.
Members of the team became participation and engagement connectors, trained in co-production and different engagement methods, acting as ambassadors for participation to advise and support others to do genuine co-production. This resulted in a health club in Dundee being developed using co-pro with potential service users – carried out by one of the connectors using VOICE.
Annie-Marie concluded: “It's not easy to do and we have work to do to embed it in every part of the org, small team but wholly committed to the notion of embedding co-pro. Senior Management Team is invested which is critical.”
Breakout discussions
In our breakout groups, participants shared their reflections on the question: What are the challenges and opportunities for us in embedding co-production in our work and the way our organisations work?
Reflections from the discussion included:
Meaningful co-production: it needs to be more than lip service and bring about a true sharing of power where people feel like equals regardless of their background or experience.
Openness about the process: often the work taking place is not co-production but another form of engagement - this was seen as being okay as long as it was transparent and not described as co-production.
Happening in reality: sometimes people in power believe they are doing co-production but the power is not actually shifted or relinquished.
Diversity: reaching people that don’t normally come forward and looking internally at organisational structures to assess the diversity there is important.
Resourcing lived experience: there is often a legislative ask but no resourcing to actually implement it, especially within public authorities and statutory bodies.
Lived experience guidance: There is no guidance given on lived experience involvement processes and structures, and often not a suitable skillset held by staff to be able work with lived experience panels/experts by experience. Examples of where individuals with lived experience had been employed in public authorities and statutory bodies were shared. This was in the Borders area of Scotland and seen as an opportunity for this to grow in the future.
Co-pro language: the language of co-pro needs to reflect the practice – we’re using the words but are we doing it?
Co-pro skills: skills and resources are needed to deliver co-production – co-pro is difficult and lots of conditions need to be in place (like senior buy-in) for it to work properly. Need to recognise the limitations and boundaries we have and engage in fundamental conversations about this.
Expectations and timelines: we need to be open and honest with people about what is on the table to be changed, and what isn’t. Also, the speed of change – it can take years for some large organisations to change (particularly in the statutory sector) but co-pro can make people feel it should be happening now. How to introduce realism without making it seem impossible?
Working with very vulnerable people: it is an additional challenge to work with people who have low confidence or capacity, or chaotic lifestyles – this is particularly the case for national organisations who don’t have the same kind of links/networks as local organisations.
Communication: it’s often difficult to start with a blank page particularly with people who aren’t used to being asked their opinions. There should be a process of capacity building to allow people to develop the confidence and skills to make a contribution.
Visibility of co-production: it can sometimes be under the radar and so we need to identify where it’s happening (meaningfully) and how it should be a discrete aspect of the way we (and our organisations) work.
Remuneration: it is complex but very important to value people’s time. Respectful remuneration – conversations around this need to happen, but with awareness of long-term and ongoing budget requirement for this.
Where co-pro is happening: big pieces of work are happening in child protection, children with learning disabilities, children’s hearing system.
Trauma-informed practice: there is a need for trauma-informed training and practice, in addition to fundamental co-pro training more generally.
Representation: how much are we putting on to the volunteers/people with lived experience and are we supporting them at an appropriate level of participation? Small groups of people are sometimes felt to be ‘representing’ a huge group of service users or demographics by public authorities.
