References

• Andersson, M., Svensson, L., Wistus, S., & Åberg, C. (2005). Om konsten att utveckla partnerskap. [The Art of Developing Partnerships]. Stockholm: Arbetslivsinstitutet.
   Google Scholar
• Arieli, D., Friedman, V. J., & Agbaria, K. (2009). The paradox of participation in action research. Action Research, 7(3), 263–290. doi: 10.1177/1476750309336718
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Austin, M., & Johannessen, A. (Eds.). (2015). Enhancing the quality of public social services through the involvement of users: The Norwegian HUSK projects. Journal of Evidence-Informed Social Work (special issue), 12(1).
   Google Scholar
• Beresford, P. (2005). Theory and practice of user involvement in research: Making the connection with public policy and practice. In L. Lowes & I. Hulatt (Eds.), Involving service users in health and social care research (pp. 6–18). Oxford: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Boydell, L. (2007). Partnerships: A literary review. Dublin: Institute of Public Health in Ireland.
   Google Scholar
• Boydell, L. R., & Rugkåsa, J. (2007). Benefits of working in partnership: A model. Critical Public Health, 17(3), 217–228. doi: 10.1080/09581590601010190
   Google Scholar
• Callard, F., & Rose, D. (2012). The mental health strategy for Europe: Why service user leadership in research is indispensable. Journal of Mental Health, 21(3), 219–226. doi: 10.3109/09638237.2011.651661
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caplan, K., & Stott, L. (2008). Defining our terms and clarfying our language. In L. Svensson & B. Nilsson (Eds.), Partnership – As a strategy for social innovation and sustainable change (pp. 23–35). Stockholm: Santèrus Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Carey, M. (2011). Should I stay or should I go? Practical. Ethical and Political Challenges to ‘Service User’ Participation within Social Work Research. Action Research, 10(2), 224–243.
   Google Scholar
• Davies, J. S. (2011). Challenging governance theory: From networks to hegemony. Bristol: Policy Press.
   Google Scholar
• DeChurch, L. A., & Marks, M. A. (2001). Maximizing the benefits of task conflict: The role of conflict management. The International Journal of Conflict Management, 12(1), 4–22. doi: 10.1108/eb022847
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dowling, B., Powell, M. & Glendinning, C. (2004). Conceptualising successful partnerships. Health and Social Care in the Community, 12(4), 309–317. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2524.2004.00500.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fawcett, S. B., Paine-Andrews, A., Francisco, V. T., Schultz, J. A., Richter, K. P., Lewis, R. K., … Lopez, C. M. (1995). Using empowerment theory in collaborative partnerships for community health and development. American Journal of Community Psychology, 23(5), 677–697. doi: 10.1007/BF02506987
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fleming, J., Beresford, P., Bewley, C., Croft, S., Branfield, F., Postle, K., & Turner, M. (2014). Working together – innovative collaboration in social care research. Qualitative Social Work, 13(5), 706–722. doi: 10.1177/1473325013506929
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fletcher, K. (2006). Partnerships in social care. A handbook for developing effective service. London: Jessica Kingsley.
   Google Scholar
• Garland, A. F., Plemmons, D., & Koontz, L. (2006). Research-practice partnership in mental health: Lessons from participants. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 33(5), 517–528. doi: 10.1007/s10488-006-0062-2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gjernes, T., & Bliksvaer, T. (2011). Nye samarbeidsformer – nye læringsformer. Sluttrapport fra evalueringen av forsøket Høgskole- og universitetssosialkontor (HUSK) [New collaborations – new learning. Evaluation of the HUSK program] NF-report7/2011. Bodø: Nordland Research Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Goldstein, L. S. (2000). Ethical dilemmas in designing collaborative research: Lessons learned the hard way. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 13(5), 517–530. doi: 10.1080/09518390050156431
   Google Scholar
• Hansen, R., & Bjerke, E. (2011). Dialogseminar som metode i evaluering av praksis [Dialogue seminars as evaluation method for social services]. In A. Johannessen, S. Natland, & A. M. Støkken (Eds.), Samarbeidsforskning i praksis. Erfaringer fra HUSK-prosjektet [Collaborative research in practice – experiences from HUSK] (pp. 140–155). Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.
   Google Scholar
• Higham, P. E. (2001). Developing an interactive approach in social work research: The example of a research study on head injury. British Journal of Social Work, 31, 197–212. doi: 10.1093/bjsw/31.2.197
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hodge, S. (2005). Participation, discourse and power: A case study in service user involvement. Critical Social Policy, 25(2), 164–179. doi: 10.1177/0261018305051324
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews. An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Larsson, A. C. (2008). You’re welcome to participate – but on whose terms? On empowerment and structural impact. In L. Svensson & B. Nilsson (Eds.), Partnership – as a strategy for social innovation and sustainable change (pp. 101–120). Stockholm: Santèrus Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lasker, R. D., & Weiss, E. S. (2003). Creating partnership synergy: The critical role of community stakeholders. Journal of Health & Humans Services Administration, 26(1), 119–139.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lasker, R. D., Weiss, E. S., & Miller, R. (2001). Partnership synergy: A practical framework for studying and strengthening the collaborative advantage. The Milbank Quarterly, 79(2), 179–205. doi: 10.1111/1468-0009.00203
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mary, N. L. (2005). Transformational leadership in human service organizations. Administration in Social Work, 29(2), 105–118. doi: 10.1300/J147v29n02_07
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mattessich, P., Murray-Close, M., & Monsey, B. (2001). Collaboration: What makes it work. Saint Paul, MN: Amherst H. Wilder Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Natland, S., & Dalen, H. (2015). Service users’ self-narratives on their journey from shame to pride: Tales of transition. Journal of Evidence-Informed Social Work, 12(1), 50–63.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perrault, E., McClelland, R., Austin, C., & Sieppert, J. (2011). Working together in collaborations: Successful process factors for community collaboration. Administration in Social Work, 35(3), 282–298. doi: 10.1080/03643107.2011.575343
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petch, A., Cook, A., & Miller, E. (2013). Partnership working and outcomes: Do health and social care partnerships deliver for users and carers? Health and Social Care in the Community, 21(6), 623–633.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Putnam, L. (1984). Productive conflict: Negotiation as implicit coordination. International Journal of Conflict Management, 5(3), 284–298. doi: 10.1108/eb022748
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roussos, S. T., & Fawcett, S. B. (2000). A review of collaborative partnerships as a strategy for improving community health. Annual Reviews Public Health, 21, 369–402. doi: 10.1146/annurev.publhealth.21.1.369
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, J. A., Iowers, P., & Larkin, M. (2011). Interpretative phenomenological analysis. Theory, method and research. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, L., Bratini, L., Chambers, D., Jensen, R. V., & Romero, L. (2010). Between idealism and reality: Meeting the challenges of participatory action research. Action Research, 8(4), 407–425. doi: 10.1177/1476750310366043
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Svensson, L., & Nilsson, B. (Eds.). (2008). Partnership – as a strategy for social innovation and sustainable change. Stockholm: Santèrus Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tew, J. (2008). Researching in partnership: Reflecting on a collaborative study with mental health service users into the impact of compulsion. Qualitative Social Work, 7(3), 271–287. doi: 10.1177/1473325008093702
   Google Scholar