The relational method: reimagining university research through community organising

In recent years, higher education has been criticised for its detachment from real-world challenges. Its critics have said that too often universities privilege technical expertise or institutional prestige over meaningful engagement with communities.

Today, as crises of confidence deepen, the call for change is louder than ever. 

Here at UCL, working with colleagues in other universities, researchers, communities and partner organisations have been responding to this call by developing new ways in which universities can effectively work with people and places. 

In their new paper for the prestigious journal, Perspectives on Politics, Marc Stears from UCL and Amanda Tattersall from the University of Sydney outline one such idea.

They argue that community organising, a tradition rooted in the work of thinkers such as Saul Alinsky and practised globally for over 80 years, offers a powerful model for this transformation.

These are themes already picked up across the UCL Policy Lab’s work. It is a focus on politics and policy that puts relationships, shared power, and openness to uncertainty at its core.

Why Universities Need a Relational Turn

As Stears and Tattersall set out, community-led research - through methods like co-design, co-production, and participatory action research - has gained traction in recent years. These approaches, adopted by universities including UCL and practised within the UCL Policy Lab, aim to involve affected communities as partners in shaping research questions, collecting data, and delivering impact.

Stears and Tattersall argue that what they call the “relational method” is replacing the status quo. It draws on the principles of community organising to offer a practical guide for scholars who want to work in genuine partnership with communities. At its heart are three interlocking ideas:

• Relationality: Building deep, dialogical relationships that precede data collection or other work. Community organizers argue that “relationship precedes action”; in research, this means “relationship precedes data.” Through practices like one-to-one relational meetings, university researchers and community members explore their aligned interests, values, and motivations before defining research questions.
   
• Recognising that research is never neutral. Traditional academic practice has ignored power dynamics. Not anymore. The relational method recognises that they are always central. Stears and Tattersall argue for “power with” rather than “power over”. They say we should create decision-making spaces where communities and researchers hold each other accountable and co-own the process.
   
• Uncertainty: Embracing the unpredictability of collaborative work. Unlike traditional scholarship, which too often seeks certainty and control, the relational method acknowledges that research in the real world is often contingent, iterative, and shaped by negotiation. This openness is not a weakness—it is a strength that keeps research relevant and responsive.

The paper also sets out how the relational method is not just a research technique; it is a strategy for institutional change. Community organising has a proven track record of transforming powerful institutions - from securing living wages to reshaping housing policy. Applied to universities, it is already challenging entrenched norms and creating a culture that values collaboration over hierarchy.

All of this is something which can be seen as part of a broader civic mission. Stears and Tattersall show how universities can not only produce knowledge and teach the next generation, but also act as democratic institutions, working alongside communities to tackle shared challenges. They show how this is being put into place, right now, with changes to everything from ethics processes and research agreements to staff training and leadership development. It also means recognising that the purpose of research is not only to generate findings for scholarly purposes but to strengthen the capacity of communities themselves.

Most of all, Stears and Tattersall argue that the relational method invites us to imagine a university that is porous, participatory, and politically engaged - a university that sees knowledge as something created with communities, not just for them. In a time of cultural division and social upheaval, this approach offers a practical way to rebuild trust and reassert the public purpose of higher education.

To find out more about this paper and the work of the Lab, sign up for our newsletter or email the team.

More on this subject includes Shared Institutions, published in October 2025 by the UCL Policy Lab and More in Common, which found that universities remain a source of national pride. You can read Dr Michael Spence's (President & Provost of UCL) article about this in The Conversation, and James Baggaley's article in the New Statesman.