The participants comprised a Workforce Development Workstream in a Children’s Trust. This group comprised 20 senior managers and some senior leaders from seven different organisations who worked together in the Children’s Trust, including: the police, children’s services, connexions, the primary care trust, voluntary sector organisations, further education and the locality safeguarding board. 10 of the managers agreed to participate in the workshops, of these there was 50% attendance at each event (five – six people attending each). The research tools did not need to elicit the ‘truth’ of the collaborative situation, they needed to explore different versions and perceptions of the truth as expressed in personal experience. Any exaggeration, embellishment or omission is construed as part of the individuals interpretive endeavour (Denning, 2005:181), and contributes to the dilemmas and contradictions. From the epistemological position of multiple truths, ‘crystalisation’ (Richardson 1994:523) rather than triangulation was appropriate. From this perspective, many methods and many voices are seen to create different perspectives like different sides of a crystal. They create a coherent whole, but viewing the research through any side of the crystal will reveal a different truth. Through the design of long and creative workshops I aimed to get to the ‘reality’ of the situation through reflection, rather than a surface interpretation and response. The developmental workshops commenced with activities that would gradually introduce the participants into the data sharing and analysis process. Individual
The participants comprised a Workforce Development Workstream in a Children’s Trust. This group comprised 20 senior managers and some senior leaders from seven different organisations who worked together in the Children’s Trust, including: the police, children’s services, connexions, the primary care trust, voluntary sector organisations, further education and the locality safeguarding board. 10 of the managers agreed to participate in the workshops, of these there was 50% attendance at each event (five – six people attending each). The research tools did not need to elicit the ‘truth’ of the collaborative situation, they needed to explore different versions and perceptions of the truth as expressed in personal experience. Any exaggeration, embellishment or omission is construed as part of the individuals interpretive endeavour (Denning, 2005:181), and contributes to the dilemmas and contradictions. From the epistemological position of multiple truths, ‘crystalisation’ (Richardson 1994:523) rather than triangulation was appropriate. From this perspective, many methods and many voices are seen to create different perspectives like different sides of a crystal. They create a coherent whole, but viewing the research through any side of the crystal will reveal a different truth. Through the design of long and creative workshops I aimed to get to the ‘reality’ of the situation through reflection, rather than a surface interpretation and response. The developmental workshops commenced with activities that would gradually introduce the participants into the data sharing and analysis process. Individual
204264.docx