Our 2022-25 strategy committed to:
- increase public involvement in how we make decisions, and
- listen to and involve a diverse group of people in our work
One way we are doing this is by setting up a Community Committee to advise the HRA Board. The Board is a group of Directors that make decisions about the organisation’s direction and oversee its activities and finances.
This committee builds on the important work of the Community Insight Group, which worked to improve the experience of members of our Research Ethics Committees, the Confidentiality Advisory Group and members of the public who inform and influence our work through public involvement activities.
Anne-Laure Donskoy, a member of the HRA's public involvement network and former Community Insight Group, and Becky Purvis, HRA’s Director of Policy and Partnerships, reflect on how they worked together on this process.
How has public involvement informed and influenced this work?
Anne-Laure DonskoyWhen a new committee is announced in any organisation, it is easy to feel a little sceptical, a kind of 'oh, no, not another committee'. However, the new Community Committee has a different pedigree, born out of the former Community Insight Group which brought together the different communities of people who support the work of the HRA. This development is thus both a bottom up and an organisational decision, showing that 'higher up' can and do listen. I had been part of the Community Insight Group as a member of the public, keen to support the shaping up of the new group which I believe has real potential.
This has meant being involved in the membership recruitment, in both the long and short-listing processes. The long listing entailed going through a high volume of applications a few times whilst following selection criteria with great care and attention. Short listing is a collaborative effort which focuses on finding the right balance of people in terms of background, motivation, expertise (in the very broadest sense), insight and of course enthusiasm. Time will tell as members find their feet, get to know each other, shape up the committee’s remit and goals, and start working as a group.
Becky PurvisPublic involvement shaped the idea to create the Community Committee in the first place!
We have long wanted to increase the diversity of voices and perspectives in our decision-making because we know that results in better decisions.
It was through working with members of the public and our community that we developed our plans for the committee.
We have worked closely with our Community Insight Group to develop the plans for the committee, including consulting more widely, and agreeing how we should establish it.
It was very important that we also involved one of the people who had helped us develop these ideas in the selection process. Anne-Laure brought her perspectives on what the committee can achieve, and insights as someone who is involved in our work. She helped us to shortlist the applications, develop the questions that we asked the people we met with and make the final decisions over who we would invite to join the committee.
What’s gone well, and what hasn’t gone well?
Becky PurvisWe had lots of applications – people had heard about and wanted to join the committee – which is great!
Shortlisting was tough. We had lots of applications from people with different experiences and perspectives and were conscious that any application process favours people who are used to applying to things.
Anne-Laure joined staff who work with different parts of our community to shortlist the anonymised applications. We selected a longlist of people to invite to meet with us. She helped us to have good discussions about how to approach shortlisting such different applications in a fair and consistent way.
We tried to keep the interviews informal and support people to take part, sharing the questions in advance and aiming to have a conversation, not a grilling. We were very conscious this could be a difficult or uncomfortable process for people we need to listen to and learn from. Anne-Laure helped us to think about how to frame our questions, and what good answers should like, drawing on her insights into the skills and experience that people will need to work with us.
Anne-Laure DonskoyA positive was being sent printed copies of documents and being listened to
Something less positive was there was slight tension at times about whose diary was influencing the timetable for meetings which frequently changed.
What have you learnt?
Anne-Laure DonskoyIt is always a relief when consensus among people of very diverse perspectives is found. This time was no different, but I realised that I can indeed trust my judgment.
There is always scope for process improvement, but this can only happen if more time is allowed early on though, something the organisation needs to work on.
Becky PurvisThe word ‘committee’ is potentially off-putting for some people, and a formal application process favours people who have experience of applying to things. We have tried to make the process accessible – and Anne-Laure and others who have been involved have really helped us to think this through – but we are still asking people to complete an application form and come for an interview.
So, high on the to do list for our new Committee is how to bring more different voices into the HRA, by doing things differently.