Safeguarding user researchers and their participants
This summer, my colleague Josefeen Foxter and I explored how we might strengthen safeguarding protocols at NHS Digital. Safeguarding is a vital ethical responsibility of user researchers, particularly when researching sensitive topics or with vulnerable people. It’s also important to consider when protecting the wellbeing of user researchers and their teams, especially when working on products and services that address challenging, emotive and potentially triggering social issues.
We knew lots of other organisations would have great ideas for how to safeguard user researchers and their participants, so we have been gathering insight on what works and what’s missing. Josefeen surveyed our own user research community at NHS Digital, while I put a call out on Twitter and LinkedIn to speak to members of the user research community across charity, public and private sectors about their experiences. I’m so grateful to everyone who spoke to me, with particular thanks to Nel Mathams and Cat Fox for co-facilitating a workshop on the topic — something Nel wrote about here. The power of the internet and our impromptu ability to come together as a community and help each other continues to astound me, so thank you to all who got involved with this!
So, what did we learn, and what are we going to do about it?
Centralised training and protocols
While organisations with frontline service delivery, such as charities or NHS Trusts, enforce mandatory safeguarding training for all staff, several other organisations do not. Perhaps they don’t consider this to be something user researchers need to undertake, but I think it’s telling that many of the user research teams I spoke to have taken it upon themselves to find training around how to have conversations with vulnerable people or how to consider ethical evidence generation in their work. Practically, safeguarding concerns do come up in user research, particularly when working on complex social issues, and team leads reflected that they want their staff to know how to respond to such concerns appropriately. Ethically, we also have a duty of care to ensure our participants aren’t harmed by their involvement in user research. And emotionally, user researchers told us that they feel anxious and under pressure when they aren’t supported with proper training — it can be a lot for someone to be presented with a distressed participant and not know what to do to best support them. So, mandatory safeguarding training for all user researchers is important, and something NHS Digital are now exploring as a result of this work.
Another thing NHS Digital is strengthening, and which is closely linked to training, is having formalised protocols in place — so everyone knows what they must do in the instance of a safeguarding concern. We learned that this should ideally be set up by the designated Safeguarding Lead. There are different approaches to the Safeguarding Lead role — some organisations have a centralised role, whereas others may have a senior user researcher performing the role after additional training. However, in both instances, having this role in place builds confidence for user researchers to know what to do in an emergency, and how to escalate issues if needed. Other key responsibilities of Safeguarding Leads include logging safeguarding concerns, identifying trends and working to mitigate risks — for instance, by adjusting team training, or by recommending how to adjust research plans and methods.
Preparation
It’s important for user researchers to prepare for possible safeguarding concerns before conducting a user research session. This means assessing the risk of conducting the research for both the participant and the researcher. Does this research need to be done, in this way, and at this time? If so, anticipating what might come up for an individual and having appropriate signposts to hand helps to increase feelings of preparedness. This is something everyone we spoke to says they already do, but again in many cases this is down to the individual and not something mandated as part of research planning — something Josefeen and I have recommended we change at NHS Digital.
An additional thing some user researchers, myself included, do is to get a subject matter expert, or the Safeguarding Lead when available, to check that research plans are appropriate before conducting sensitive user research. It may be that experts know of more tailored signposts for the user group being interviewed, or that a particular question in a discussion guide may be troubling for a participant to answer. Another thing I’ve recently started doing, off the back of reading Design Justice, is to consider the space where user research is conducted. Some spaces, such as an office building, may not feel particularly warm and comforting to some participants — but on the other hand, a face-to-face meeting is much easier for a user researcher to ensure a participant is feeling ok when ending a session. Remote user research, the standard in pandemic times, may mean that some participants feel at ease in their own homes, but for others this space may not feel safe at all — so we need to think about this when planning our work.
And it isn’t just about planning before a session. Many user researchers told us they prepare participants by giving clear instructions about what a session will entail, the rights of the participant in ending the session, and what safeguarding protocols are in place, i.e., what can be kept confidential, and what has to happen if certain information is disclosed that puts that participant or others around them at risk. It’s important to say this upfront so as to build trust between the user researcher and participant, and to ensure participants understand exactly what they are agreeing to. Agencies like Paper are even creating templated discussion guides for conversations like this, so it’s easier for user researchers to know what needs to be said about this topic.
Aftercare
All the user researchers we spoke to agreed that offering participants signposts for additional support after a session should be standard, and again this is something we seek to formalise at NHS Digital. Bright Harbour, for instance, offer all sorts of wonderful aftercare to user research participants, including free one-off psychological support to any participant who needs it — no matter where that research is conducted. They also have open-source aftercare packs for user researchers to adapt for their own organisations. You can read more about their incredible work here.
In addition to the support offered to participants after a session, we learned that it’s important for user researchers and their teams to reflect on how they feel, and know they can reach out for support if it’s needed. We already have a great community at NHS Digital where we can turn to each other for support, but we want to strengthen this when it comes to safeguarding by creating dedicated times for user researchers to come together and share their experiences around safeguarding, learning from each other while getting peer support. We will also continue to promote the engagement of Mental Health First Aiders in supporting colleagues with their own wellbeing.
I hope this has been a useful insight into how user researchers and their participants can be better safeguarded, so that everyone involved in user research can enjoy a safe and assured experience.
If anyone has any other suggestions of what else might be done to safeguard user researchers and their participants, please reach out, as I’m keen to keep this important conversation going as we learn and grow as a community. And thanks again to all who’ve taken part so far!
