Skip to Main Content

Dimensions at TMU: Inclusive Excellence in SRC

Community-Engaged Research

How to Build an Authentic Relationships

Building an authentic relationship between academic researchers and all stakeholders in the CBR project who are participant researchers themselves is core of CBR requires a different approach than the traditional university ethic principles. Partnership is one of the most important principles in CBR. It is a relationship for the learning and development of all versus objective interaction for the benefit of the researcher (Wood, 2021). Academic researchers are parts of the team to identify problems, seek out long-term solutions collaboratively, and co-generate knowledge with other stakeholders. 

Wood (2021) describes three cycles in building relationships with community partners to reflect the iterative process of CBR.

I. Critical reflection on positionality and learning how to do CBR

II. Forming partnerships through critical reflexive dialogue, identifying individual and collective strengths and resources in a collaborative, multi-stakeholder team.

III. Generating and disseminating knowledge for change

Source: Community-Based Research with Vulnerable Populations : Ethical, Inclusive and Sustainable Frameworks for Knowledge Generation, edited by Lesley Wood, Springer International Publishing AG, 2021.

Community Researchers and ethical considerations

Managing dual roles as community members and researchers, insider-outside tensions, working with ethics review boards, time investment, resource and funding challenges, the cyclical, iterative nature of community-based research, community representation, protection, and commitment, and ownership and dissemination of findings are a few of the ethical issues that arise in CBR (Mikesell et. al., 2013). From an academic standpoint, the close relationships that form with participants and community research partners are frequently unsettling. The power imbalance between academic researchers and community partners may prevent connections from being built via the trust that is necessary for community-based research (Minkler & Wallerstein, 2008). Research subjects in CBR are treated as equitable community partners who make positive contributions to the process, which blurs the boundaries between objectivity and subjectivity (Flicker et al., 2008b). Moreover, developing trust, and engaging community members takes more time than a traditional research approach. Not giving enough time will be seen as disrespectful to the community partners. CBR must be flexible and creative when developing methodology with different community members, which includes data collection process, the research approach and ways to disseminate findings. For example, community members may prefer non-traditional dissemination strategies such as video clips, websites and artworks, but the funders may not accommodate these strategies (Flicker et al., 2007; Martz & Bacsu, 2014).