Table 1.

Theoretical background to the framework

Original dimension descriptor	Workshop descriptor	Theoretical background to dimension
Weak public/strong public	Weak voice/strong voice	Fraser15 suggests that not all public voices have an equal ability to influence decision‐making. She makes a distinction between “strong” and “weak” publics. A strong public is one where not only discussions take place, but can also influence decision‐making. This may occur through having access to an organization's decision‐making bodies or being able to bring pressure to bear on them.12 Weak publics may discuss issues, but have little chance of influencing decision‐making.
Monism/pluralism	One way to be involved/many ways to be involved	Bourdieu's work on different forms of cultural capital alerted us to the potential for knowledge to take on different forms (e.g. abstract and conceptual or concrete and experiential), but also that these forms may not be equally valued. Furthermore, as Fraser15 suggests, channelling diverse cultural forms of expression through a single involvement approach is likely to perpetuate inequality, as any single method is liable to privilege one social or cultural group over another.
Instrumental/Expressive	Organization's concerns/public concerns	This dimension draws on Habermas’ “lifeworld/system” distinction.6 “Lifeworld” refers to the contexts of social action, including public opinion, norms and values, as well as individual experiences and behaviours. The “system”, provides the means for the material reproduction of society, for example bureaucracies and markets. The system is characterized by instrumental action, whereas the lifeworld is characterized by more expressive action. Although this distinction can be drawn too sharply, it helps to understand the interface between, for example, the “system” of organizations and the “lifeworld” concerns of patients and public.
Conservation/Change	Organization changes/organization resists change	The degree to which decision‐makers are willing or able to respond to issues raised by participants in knowledge spaces is important. It depends on a number of contextual factors, such as economic resources and national policies.