Jocelyne Bernier, Melanie Rock, Michel Roy, Renald Bujold, Louise Potvin
{"title":"Structuring an inter-sector research partnership: a negotiated zone.","authors":"Jocelyne Bernier, Melanie Rock, Michel Roy, Renald Bujold, Louise Potvin","doi":"10.1007/s00038-006-5071-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To document and analyze the initial steps in building a health research partnership. To enable a greater appreciation of what these processes entail and also to provide guidance in negotiating the inevitable tensions between parties with different aims and objectives.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This case study is based on participant-observation and document analysis. It employed three general analytic strategies: developing a case description, relying on theoretical propositions and thinking about rival explanations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The development of a research partnership framework entails a complex negotiation process marked by tensions: one of representing the interests of the various parties; and one establishing the basis for collaboration. Some factors can facilitate these processes: acknowledging the specific interests and organizational culture of the various organizations involved; designating a mediator to develop a climate of trust; and mitigating the inequalities among partners, in a process which requires considerable efforts over a rather long period of time.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The process of structuring the relations among the associated partners does not end with negotiating a partnership accord. Denying this would be tantamount to denying the political nature of a research partnership, and denying those involved any autonomy in future research projects.</p>","PeriodicalId":21877,"journal":{"name":"Sozial- und Praventivmedizin","volume":"51 6","pages":"335-44"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s00038-006-5071-0","citationCount":"18","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sozial- und Praventivmedizin","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00038-006-5071-0","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 18
Abstract
Objectives: To document and analyze the initial steps in building a health research partnership. To enable a greater appreciation of what these processes entail and also to provide guidance in negotiating the inevitable tensions between parties with different aims and objectives.
Methods: This case study is based on participant-observation and document analysis. It employed three general analytic strategies: developing a case description, relying on theoretical propositions and thinking about rival explanations.
Results: The development of a research partnership framework entails a complex negotiation process marked by tensions: one of representing the interests of the various parties; and one establishing the basis for collaboration. Some factors can facilitate these processes: acknowledging the specific interests and organizational culture of the various organizations involved; designating a mediator to develop a climate of trust; and mitigating the inequalities among partners, in a process which requires considerable efforts over a rather long period of time.
Conclusion: The process of structuring the relations among the associated partners does not end with negotiating a partnership accord. Denying this would be tantamount to denying the political nature of a research partnership, and denying those involved any autonomy in future research projects.