Obstacles to co-producing evaluation knowledge: power, control and voluntary sector dynamics

Author:

Warwick-Booth Louise1,Cross Ruth1,Woodall James1

Affiliation:

1. Leeds Beckett University, UK

Abstract

Background: Despite literature recognising the huge potential of co-production as a positive approach to evidence creation, there is a dearth of evidence about how co-production principles can problematise knowledge exchange, specifically in evaluation work. Aims: To critically examine three evaluation projects commissioned by voluntary sector stakeholders to illustrate challenges in knowledge exchange linked to the co-production of evidence exchange. Methods: We critically compare the challenges experienced in co-producing evidence across three evaluations, reflecting on power dynamics, co-productive ways of working and emotions, which all impact upon successful knowledge exchange. Findings: In Project 1, internal monitoring data required for reporting was not shared. In Project 2, the commissioners’ need to evidence success resulted in limited knowledge sharing, with valuable learning about partnership issues and service delivery held internally. In Project 3, evidence demonstrating the failure of a local authority model of area management for community members was partially discredited by statutory stakeholders (state actors). Discussion and conclusions: Bias in evaluation reporting and academic publication can arise from current knowledge exchange processes, including co-production. Voluntary sector funding is problematic as stakeholders delivering programmes also commission evaluations. Knowledge exchange is influenced by vested interests arising from the political context in which data is gathered. Evaluators can face aggression, challenge and unfair treatment resulting in damaged relationships, and failures in knowledge exchange. The emotional elements of knowledge exchange remain under-reported. Varying and shifting power dynamics also limit knowledge exchange. Changing research practice, to support power sharing, needs further exploration to facilitate improved knowledge exchange.

Publisher

Bristol University Press

Reference28 articles.

1. Who is afraid of evaluation? Ethics in evaluation research as a way to cope with excessive evaluation anxiety: insights from a case study;Bechar, S.,2014

2. Distinguishing different types of co-production: a conceptual analysis based on the classical definitions;Brandsen, T.,2015

3. Using thematic analysis in psychology;Braun, V.,2006

4. Working with evaluation stakeholders: a rationale, step-wise approach and toolkit;Bryson, J.M.,2011

5. Designing and conducting mixed methods research;Creswell, J.W.,2011

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3