Co-Design: Sharing Power, Not Just Gathering Opinions

Co-Design: Sharing Power, Not Just Gathering Opinions

Published: Friday, 29 May 2026
Category: Advocacy & Systems Change
Reading time: 7 minutes

"We co-designed this with clients!"

You ran one workshop where people stuck Post-it notes on a wall. Then you went away and designed the program however you wanted.

That's not co-design. That's consultation theatre.

Real co-design means people with lived experience have actual power in decisions. Not just input. Not just feedback. Power.

It means they're at the table from problem definition through to implementation and evaluation. It means when there's disagreement, their voice has equal or greater weight. It means you might end up with something completely different from what you planned.

And if that scares you? That's the point. If you're still in control, it's not co-design.

Let me show you what real co-design looks like—and why it matters so much that we get it right.

What Co-Design Actually Is

The Core Principle

"Nothing About Us Without Us"

A disability rights movement principle that applies across all co-design.

If you're designing services for people, those people must be meaningfully involved in designing them.

Not as consultants providing feedback.

As partners with decision-making power.

Co-Design vs. Other Approaches

Consultation: "We've designed something. What do you think?" Power: You decide, they comment

Involvement: "Help us explore options. We'll decide which to pursue." Power: You decide, they inform

Co-design: "Let's design this together, as partners." Power: Shared decision-making

Community-led: "You design, we'll resource and support." Power: They decide, you enable

Real co-design is collaborative from start to finish, with genuine power-sharing.

Why Co-Design Matters

1. Better Services

People with lived experience know:

• What actually helps

• What barriers exist

• What's been tried and failed

• What assumptions professionals make that are wrong

• What matters most

Services designed with them work better than services designed for them.

2. Dignity and Rights

People have the right to participate in decisions affecting them.

Co-design isn't a favour. It's respecting fundamental rights to self-determination and participation.

3. Reduced Waste

How many services have been designed, funded, launched... and not used?

Often because they don't meet actual needs.

Co-design reduces this because you're designing with the people who'll use it.

4. Power Redistribution

Services have traditionally concentrated power with professionals and funders.

Co-design redistributes power to the people services are meant to serve.

This isn't just about individual services. It's about challenging who gets to make decisions about communities.

What Real Co-Design Looks Like

All Stages, Not Just One

Co-design throughout:

1. Problem Definition Not: "We've identified that parents need parenting classes." Co-design: "What challenges are you facing as parents? What would help?"

2. Solution Development Not: "Here are three options we've designed. Which do you prefer?" Co-design: "Let's brainstorm solutions together. What would actually work?"

3. Design and Prototyping Not: "We'll create the program and show you." Co-design: "Let's develop this together, test it, refine it based on what you experience."

4. Implementation Not: "We'll deliver the program." Co-design: "Some of you will deliver it, some will help guide it, all will shape how it runs."

5. Evaluation Not: "We'll measure if it met our goals." Co-design: "Did this work for you? What should change? What should continue?"

If people with lived experience aren't involved at ALL stages, it's not co-design.

Genuine Decision-Making Power

Tokenistic: Advisory group gives feedback. Management decides.

Co-design: Advisory group makes decisions with management, or advisory group decides within agreed parameters.

Example:

❌ Tokenistic: "Thanks for your input. We've taken some of your suggestions on board."

✅ Co-design: "You've identified three priorities. Which should we pursue first? You decide, and we'll resource it."

The test: Can they say no to your ideas? Can their vision prevail over yours? If not, it's not shared power.

Paid Participation

Free labour isn't a partnership.

People with lived experience should be paid for:

• Attending meetings ($50-100/hour minimum)

• Reviewing documents

• Co-facilitating

• Research participation

• Lived experience expertise

Why this matters:

• Recognises expertise has value

• Makes participation accessible to people who can't afford to volunteer

• Signals genuine partnership

Not paying people = extracting free knowledge from often marginalised people = exploitation.

Accessible and Inclusive

Co-design processes must be accessible to:

• People with disability (physical access, communication supports, flexible participation)

• People from CALD backgrounds (interpreters, culturally appropriate methods)

• People with low literacy (visual methods, verbal participation)

• People with caring responsibilities (childcare, flexible times)

• People with lived experience of trauma (trauma-informed processes)

If your process excludes people, you're not co-designing with them.

Long-Term Commitment

One workshop ≠ co-design.

Real co-design takes months or years:

• Building relationships and trust

• Multiple touchpoints

• Iterative design and testing

• Ongoing adjustment

• Sustained involvement

Quick co-design is usually fake co-design.

Common Co-Design Mistakes

1. "Co-Design" Without Power

What it looks like: "We co-designed this program with lived experience!"

Reality:

• One consultation session

• No decision-making power

• Professional staff still controlled all decisions

• Lived experience input was "considered" but easily dismissed

Why it's harmful:

• Misrepresents what happened

• Wastes participants' time

• Creates cynicism about future engagement

• Tokenises lived experience

2. Cherry-Picking Participants

What it looks like: Only involving people who:

• Are articulate and confident

• Agree with professionals

• Are "easy to work with"

• Represent the "deserving"

Why it's harmful:

• Excludes people most affected

• Creates unrepresentative co-design

• Reinforces existing power structures

• Services still don't work for everyone

Real co-design includes:

• People who challenge you

• People with complex needs

• People experiencing current struggles (not just "success stories")

• Diverse voices

3. Late Involvement

What it looks like: "We've already decided we need a support group program. Help us design what it looks like."

Problem: Major decision (that we need a support group) already made without them.

Real co-design: "What kind of support would help?" They might identify support groups, or something completely different.

Start earlier. Much earlier.

4. No Follow-Through

What it looks like: Lots of consultation. Then silence. Then a program appears that bears little resemblance to what was discussed.

Why it's harmful:

• Broken trust

• Participants feel used

• Reinforces belief that "they never listen"

Real co-design: What was designed together is actually implemented. Adjustments explained. Ongoing involvement.

5. Burden Without Support

What it looks like: Expecting people to:

• Navigate complex processes without support

• Understand professional jargon

• Manage emotional labour of reliving experiences

• Operate in formal structures unfamiliar to them

Real co-design provides:

• Plain language

• Support people to participate

• Debriefing and emotional support

• Capacity-building

• Peer support

Making Co-Design Real

1. Start with Relationship-Building

Before jumping into design:

• Spend time building trust

• Understand people's experiences and priorities

• Demonstrate you're trustworthy

• Show you can receive criticism without defensiveness

Rushed relationship-building = shallow co-design.

2. Be Clear About What's Negotiable

Honesty about constraints builds trust.

"We have $50k and 6 months. We must serve people in this region. Everything else is negotiable."

Better this honesty than pretending everything is open when it's not.

3. Build Capacity

Some participants will be new to co-design.

Provide:

• Orientation to process

• Mentoring from experienced co-designers

• Skills development (meeting participation, advocacy, project management)

• Peer support

Don't expect people to arrive with all skills.

4. Share Information Equally

Power imbalance often comes from information asymmetry.

Ensure co-designers have:

• Access to all relevant information

• Time to review complex documents

• Information in accessible formats

• Support to understand context

If staff know things co-designers don't, power isn't equal.

5. Create Safe Spaces for Disagreement

Disagreement is healthy in co-design.

Create safety for:

• Challenging professional assumptions

• Saying "that won't work"

• Proposing radical alternatives

• Naming power dynamics

If everyone always agrees, something's wrong.

6. Document and Report Back

Transparent documentation shows:

• What was discussed

• Who decided what

• Why decisions were made

• What happened to suggestions that weren't pursued

This accountability matters.

7. Embed Lived Experience Leadership

Beyond one-off co-design:

Employ people with lived experience in:

• Service delivery

• Management

• Governance

• Peer support roles

Co-design shouldn't be separate from organisational structure—it should be embedded.

Examples of Real Co-Design

Example 1: Housing Service

❌Fake co-design: "We designed a housing program. What do you think?"

✅Real co-design:

• Steering committee: 50% people with lived experience of homelessness

• Paid participation

• Problem definition done together ("What makes housing sustainable?")

• Service model designed by committee

• People with lived experience employed as peer navigators

• Ongoing feedback loops built in

• Evaluation measures decided by steering committee

Result: Program shaped by those who've experienced homelessness, more likely to work.

Example 2: Disability Service

❌Fake co-design: Workshop where people with disability gave feedback on pre-written program

✅Real co-design:

• Reference group of people with disability with decision-making power

• All documents in accessible formats

• Design decisions made by reference group

• Service co-delivered by people with disability and non-disabled staff

• "Nothing about us without us" as operating principle

Result: Service that actually works for disabled people because they designed it.

Example 3: Mental Health Peer Support

❌Fake co-design: Clinical staff designed peer program, asked peers for input

✅Real co-design:

• Peers designed the model

• Peers determined training, supervision approach

• Peers on hiring panel

• Peer governance structure

• Clinical staff in support role, not design role

Result: Peer-led program that reflects peer values, not clinical assumptions.

When Co-Design Is Hard

Organisational Resistance

Common pushback:

• "It takes too long"

• "They don't have the expertise"

• "We'll lose control"

• "What if they want something we can't deliver?"

Responses:

• Co-design saves time in long run (less redesign)

• Lived experience IS expertise

• Sharing control is the point

• Be honest about constraints upfront

Power Struggles

When professionals and co-designers disagree:

Don't: Dismiss co-designers' views as "unrealistic" or "not understanding how things work"

Do:

• Explore the disagreement

• Understand their reasoning

• Check if constraints you're citing are real or assumed

• Consider: maybe they're right and the "way things work" needs to change

Sometimes disagreement means co-design is actually working—power dynamics are being challenged.

Burnout

Co-design is intensive work for everyone.

Support needed:

• Adequate time and resources

• Emotional support

• Regular breaks

• Celebrating progress

• Acknowledging difficulty

If people are burning out, something in the process needs to change.

The Bigger Picture

Co-design is ultimately about democracy.

Who gets to decide what services exist and how they operate?

Traditional model: Professionals, managers, funders decide. Service users receive.

Co-design model: Service users have equal voice in design. Partnership.

Community-led model: Service users design and lead. Professionals support.

Each shift redistributes power.

And that's the point.

Services should be accountable to the people they serve.

Co-design is how we make that real.

Key Takeaways

• Co-design means shared decision-making power at ALL stages, not just gathering input

• Real co-design requires paid participation, accessible processes, and long-term commitment

• Tokenistic co-design (one workshop, no power) does more harm than good

• People with lived experience must be involved from problem definition through evaluation

• Disagreement and challenge are signs co-design is working

• Co-design takes longer but creates better services and redistributes power

• Beyond co-design projects, embed lived experience leadership in organisations

Reflection Questions

• When you've called something "co-design," was it really? What level of power-sharing existed?

• What makes you uncomfortable about genuinely sharing power with service users?

• Who's missing from your co-design processes? Why?

• What would need to change in your organisation for real co-design to happen?

Further Learning

Develop co-design capacity with The Community Workers Hub:

• Co-Design Methods for Inclusive Service Development - Practical tools and processes for genuine co-design

• Community Engagement That Actually Engages - Building foundations for meaningful participation

• Leading with Lived Experience: When Peers Join the Team - Embedding lived experience leadership

Join The Hub for training in power-sharing and authentic partnership.

Sarah Smallman is the founder of The Community Workers Hub and believes those closest to the issues are closest to the solutions.