Deconstructing the co-production ideal: Dilemmas of knowledge and representation in a co-design project with people with intellectual disabilities

ABSTRACT

Background: The co-production concept holds out the promise of forging new relationships between professionals and service users with intellectual disabilities. However, little empirical research explores the embodied practices of these projects occasion. We identify two key tensions intrinsic to such projects; the tension between expert/professional knowledge and lay/experiential knowledge, and between co-producers as different from or typical of the public they are representing.

Methods: We explored how these tensions were manifested and responded to in ongoing interactions by analysing video recordings of co-design groups where people with intellectual disabilities engaged in the production of Easy Read materials.

Results: We noticed the instability of participants’ claims to expert/professional knowledge and the challenges of attending to and mobilising participants’ experiential knowledge within the constraints of the group task.

Conclusions: Interactional dynamics were managed to preserve consensus and homogeneity within the groups, with the potential for reinforcing a limited identity associated with “intellectual disability.”

KEYWORDS:

• Co-production
• co-design
• intellectual disabilities
• discourse analysis
• Easy Read
• accessible information

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank colleagues who read through and made helpful and supportive comments on earlier drafts of this article; Ben Rampton, Glenn Robert and Paul Hamilton.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Author contributions

All authors have contributed to, seen, and approved of the manuscript and agree to the order of authors as listed on the title page.

Additional information

Funding

Deborah Chinn has been funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Trainees Coordinating Centre under grant PDF-2013-06-060. The article presents independent research funded by the NIHR. The views expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.