> But for example in some of work, community partners want to have
> stronger ties to researchers in academic settings, if the ties appear
> weak, we ask ourselves about the opportunities for these two "groups" to
> interact and engage, opportunities for them to create a relationship and
> then engage in discussions about how might such opportunities present
> themselves via work with the collaborative if we see the collaborative
> as a tool for helping to strengthen these relationships over time.
Okay, I think I understand, but let me pin down the example. You see
a set of numbers in your data tat show weak links between at least
some community organizations and university researchers. But the CBO
folks are saying (on a survey?) that they want stronger links, which
leads in turn to thinking about the opportunities for stronger
relationships. I'm sure I'm oversimplifying, but is that the pattern
you're describing?
We
> also have to examine what questions we asked and how that elicited the
> responses we received that might impact the strengths of relationships.
Wow! What a great question--and one that researchers so rarely ask.
You may be new to network analysis, but I'd say that you have some
fire power there. Have you figured out a way to answer this question?
This would be VERY important to share with colleagues--how to build
recursive loops into your process of data collection. I cannot begin
to tell you how few researchers are this savvy about how they know
what they know. This is cutting edge.
I would offer only a small suggestion, based on my experience with
university-community collaboratives. I would want to know what the
CBO folks think that researchers could do for them. The answer to
that one would tell you if the relationship they're looking for is
one-shot (like drop-off daycare) or a longer term series of projects.