Donna Frost

Chapter 4 96 2010 ; Titchen, McCormack, Wilson, & Solman, 2011 ). Within the CCCI we discussed why and how we were investigating together, our motivations and concerns, and the ways in which we would support and challenge each other to participate, as recommended by Ahlström, Nilsson, and Nils-Göran ( 2007 ) and Chiu ( 2008 ). I had, initially, a leading role in ensuring we discussed these matters and in facilitating an equitable process. I learnt to articulate my decisions and aspects of our group process to bring them into the collective attention and to make the tacit aspects of our process visible. Being clear and talking about what we were doing was intended to help us, collectively, to manage the messiness of the inquiry process, to uncover sources of frustration and to move forward when we ran into obstacles or noticed stagnation. Practically, this meant that each of the meetings followed a certain structure, to a greater or lesser extent, and the purpose of each element of the meeting had been previously agreed upon or was familiar to the CCCI group members. Time for key activities was planned as part of the agenda. Similarly, reaching agreement about goals and modes of inquiry was also necessary for the periods between meetings. During these periods the inquiry group members were professionally active in their work as registered nurses or nurse practitioners. As well, they were taking note of particular professional experiences and generating research data about them as agreed upon in the inquiry group. Creating protected space The CCCI group meetings were scheduled every six to eight weeks for 2 – 3 hours and took place away from theward or unit where the group members worked and in some cases off-site completely. Meeting off-site resulted in meeting less frequently but enabled a longer meeting ( 3 – 4 hours). Bleepers and work telephones were handed over to colleagues if at all possible. As Titchen and McCormack ( 2010 ), Titchen et al. ( 2011 ) and others (eg. Predeger, 1995 , 1996 ; Heron & Lahood, 2008 ) suggest, effort was made to make the space in which we met inviting and to indicate in some way that we were entering an ‘othered’ kind of space. For example, attention was paid, initially by me but later by other group members as well, to arranging chairs, tables and creative materials neatly and attractively, with room to move about. Following Titchen and Horsfall ( 2007 ) I used flowers, leaves, a beautiful scarf or piece of fabric, a little pile of stones or shells, incense, a candle or a bowl of water as a kind of focus, to alert the senses and to indicate, ‘Here we are, in our space’. Later in the NP inquiry some group members would bring home baking or fruit to share, but there were always in any case drinking water, tea, coffee and biscuits available.