From Co-Production to Co-Ownership: Elevating Collaboration in Innovation Practice

The term co-production has become increasingly popular in innovation, research, and service design. But as expectations grow around inclusivity and shared power, many organisations are beginning to explore what lies beyond co-production: co-ownership.

At The Innovation Office, we often help organisations move from participatory intentions to deeper, more equitable forms of collaboration. Co-ownership is not simply a new buzzword - it’s a shift in mindset and structure, where stakeholders aren’t just involved, but invested. In this post, we explore how to evolve co-production into co-ownership and why this matters for long-term innovation success.

What’s the Difference Between Co-Production and Co-Ownership?

Co-production is a process where service users, community members, or stakeholders are actively involved in designing or delivering a product, service, or research project. It typically focuses on sharing power during the creation phase.

Co-ownership, by contrast, extends this commitment - ensuring those same collaborators retain a meaningful role in decision-making, accountability, and benefit-sharing beyond initial design. It’s about who holds the outcomes, not just who helps shape them.

Think of it like this:

• Co-production: “Let’s build this together.”

• Co-ownership: “Let’s share what we’ve built - and what it becomes.”

  
  

Why Co-Ownership Matters in Innovation

1. It strengthens impact and legitimacy

   When communities or partners co-own the outcomes, they're more likely to sustain, promote, and iterate on them. The work lives on beyond a project’s end date.

2. It supports inclusion with integrity

   Co-ownership guards against extractive participation, where voices are “heard” but not materially empowered.

3. It builds systems capacity

   Creating structures where power is distributed nurtures leadership, innovation, and resilience across sectors and communities.

4. It aligns with funder expectations

   Increasingly, funders and research councils (e.g. UKRI) are expecting deeper partnerships and demonstrable legacy-building.

   
   

Practical Pathways to Co-Ownership

Moving from co-production to co-ownership isn’t about a single tool - it’s about embedding values into governance, funding, and practice. Here are some ways to make the shift:

1. Shared Governance Structures

Set up steering groups or boards where community or partner voices have equal decision-making authority. Ensure these structures are resourced and accessible, not symbolic.

2. Transparent Benefit-Sharing

Clarify who gains what - from intellectual property to financial benefits or ongoing delivery opportunities. Where appropriate, use joint licensing or cooperative models.

3. Long-Term Resourcing Models

Build sustainability plans that include all co-producers. This could involve seed funding for community-led continuation, joint funding bids, or training to build delivery capacity.

4. Co-Authorship and Attribution

In research or toolkit development, credit partners as co-authors or co-creators - not just “participants”. This builds visibility and professional capital.

5. Ongoing Evaluation Loops

Don’t just measure impact on behalf of communities - include them in defining, gathering, and interpreting the data. Co-owned evaluation drives continuous improvement.

Example: Community-Owned Evaluation Frameworks

A community development trust, co-design a neighbourhood wellbeing framework with local residents and stakeholders. But they don’t stop at co-production. They build co-ownership into the delivery model:

• A local “data collective” is formed, trained, and funded to gather and interpret insights.

• Decisions on priorities and investment are made collaboratively through community assemblies.

• The trust embed the model in their strategic plan, ensuring resident-led insight remained a core governance mechanism.

  
  

Barriers to Watch For

• Tokenism dressed as inclusion

  If co-ownership is claimed but decisions and resources remain centrally controlled, trust is lost.

• Lack of capacity-building

  Co-ownership requires time, skills, and confidence. Without investment in all partners, the model falters.

• Misalignment with institutional systems

  Procurement, legal, or finance processes may struggle to accommodate shared ownership models. These systems need redesign as much as the programmes themselves.

  
  

From Participation to Power-Sharing

True innovation requires more than new ideas - it requires new relationships.

Co-ownership is not always easy, but it offers a more credible, ethical, and sustainable path for organisations seeking to deliver impact with rather than for others.

At The Innovation Office, we support organisations to build and embed co-ownership in their innovation and research work - creating partnerships that last and outcomes that stick. Let’s explore how we can help you go beyond co-production.

Keywords: co-production, collaborative innovation, stakeholder engagement, research partnerships, co-owned innovation