There are (at least) two ways to tell the story about research methods. The first is to present it as a neat flow of what was done, to how many people and how the resultant data was analysed. However, there is an alternative story, one that is much more messy and problematic, of organisations that did not fit into the size boundaries that we had established for micro, small, medium and large providers; of clashing norms of research between community researchers and academic researchers. In this chapter and the next we offer a bit of both. We provide the broad outline of how we did the research, who we spoke to, what data collection and analysis processes were involved and the participatory approach we took to involve people with experience of care services as co-researchers. We also discuss the ways in which the research changed as a result of unexpected practices and dilemmas presented when we left our desks for the case study sites. In the next chapter we discuss how we sampled the 27 organisations which took part in the study.

The research took a co-produced approach, involving people with experience of using and delivering services as co-researchers in the project. Patient and service user research involvement is becoming more embedded into the health and social care system as part of a broader ethical commitment to research as a co-productive process (Durose et al, 2015; Flinders et al, 2015). There is a growing consensus around the need to develop a more rigorous approach to understanding the impact of service user researchers – one that challenges all involved to reconnect with the potential of what can be gained and to recognise why service users are being included (Roy, 2012; INVOLVE, 2013). The benefits of involving service users as researchers, such as increasing individuals’ skills, strengthening communities and gaining relevant insights for service change, have become strong themes reinforced within national policy and, as such, are often taken for granted (Flinders et al, 2015). This chapter outlines the study's methodological approach and discusses how taking a co-productive approach changed the research process. Drawing on the study's experience of training and researching alongside people with experience of local care services, the chapter makes links to current debates about participatory approaches and practices.