Co-ideation and co-design in co-creation research: Reflections from the 'Co-Creating Safe Spaces' project

Numerous frameworks for defining and supporting co-created research exist. The practicalities of designing and conducting co-created research are clearly important, yet the utility of these frameworks and their operationalisation within local contexts and involving a diversity of stakeholders and interests are currently not well-researched.

Using an instrumental case study approach, we examined the utility of a published systematic framework designed to improve clarity about co-creation as a concept and approach. The framework is explored based on the first two processes that correspond to our own work to date: co-ideation and co-design.

Our study showed that diverse stakeholders bring challenges regarding research priorities, methods, language and the distribution of power within co-creation processes. Co-creation activities were incremental, adaptable, responsive and made best use of established relationships, structures and collective leadership to meet the competing demands of funders and human research ethics committees, while ensuring the meaningful participation of multiple stakeholders.

The findings highlight the iterative, fluid and deeply relational nature of co-created research. Rather than seeking to categorise these processes, we argue that the social relations of research production that provide the structures within which all co-created knowledge is generated are more important drivers of effective knowledge mobilisation and implementation. Thus, close attention to these social relations is needed in co-created research.

People with lived experience of emotional distress and/or suicidal crisis, including academic researchers, service and peer workers, carers and advocates were involved in the co-ideation and co-design of this research. All authors identify as people with lived experience, from both academic and nonresearch backgrounds.