Unpacking perspective: The power of co-analysis

The benefits of collaborative analysis approaches and why more should embark on this process.

Co-production is a word that many in the third sector are familiar with. It is often employed by third sector organisations, at least at some rung of Arnstein’s ladder of participation.  Arnstein’s ladder of participation is a model of participation developed by Sherry R Arnstein, to depict and explain degrees of participation during a given activity.

The method of co-production is commonly practiced in the design, delivery and evaluation of services, initiatives, projects and policies.  However, co-production often stops there. Collaborative analysis is a lesser-known approach within co-production practices and involves collectively analysing data alongside stakeholders.

There is merit to the claim that conducting collaborative analysis is more complex. However, that is not a reason not to do it.  There are of course, different levels of collaborative analysis that you can employ. Below, I have adapted Arnstein’s Ladder of Participation to include collaborative analysis levels.

Collaborative analysis provides an extra layer of rigor, perspective and depth to the analysis of findings. Team members who come from different perspectives and that have had different lived/living experiences, can offer a greater level of richness than a team of homogenous researchers.  

This year, I led the Change Team of the National Collaborative in the co-analysis of their public consultation findings to inform the continued improvement of the Charter of Rights for People Affected by Substance Use.  The National Collaborative analysis team,  which comprised of individuals with lived and living experience, participated in every stage of the analysis. From bias documentation and reflexive journaling, to concept and code identification, the generation of themes and feasibility analysis. The important distinction with collaborative analysis is that it is researcher guided, rather than solely conducted and directed by the researcher. To use the words of Arnstein, Change Team members were partners in the analysis who had delegated power.

The analysis report that was produced as an output of this process is available here.

Collaborative analysis is still emerging within the third sector with few practitioners employing it, but this needn’t be the case (NVivo pun intended). Collaborative analysis (particularly at the partnership and delegated power rungs) works at re-distributing the power imbalance that can stand between researchers and ‘research subjects’ to create an equilibrium. The idea that researchers occupy a space over and above those about whom they are seeking to understand becomes levelled and reciprocal.  Individuals taking part become empowered, recognise their importance, share ownership and learn new skills.

How to practice collaborative qualitative analysis

Asking yourself the following questions can be a helpful start to embarking on collaborative qualitative analysis.

• What are your timelines? Are they rigid or flexible?
• What do you need to find out and who could add value to the analysis?
• What method of qualitative analysis would you and your team like to conduct?
• Does the team need to receive training and guidance to confidently carryout the analysis?
• Is the analysis ask -particularly without addressing training needs- exploitative?
• Will you be using any analysis tools such as NVivo?
• Is your team an appropriate size to handle your sample?  

Happy collaborating!

End of page.