Call It What It Is: Outreach, Participation and Co-Creation Aren’t the Same -and That’s OK!

Co-creation is having a bit of a moment. Everything’s being called co-created. School workshops. Community consultations. Audience development sessions. That show an artist made after talking to a few young people.

Except… most of it isn’t co-creation. And that’s not a criticism. It’s an invitation to be honest -and to be proud of what’s really happening.

Outreach, participation and co-creation all have value. But they’re not the same thing. And when we blur the lines, we do a disservice to all of them.

Why It Matters

Funders love co-creation. It suggests power-sharing, relevance, inclusion. So organisations start renaming long-standing participation work as “co-created,” even when the practice hasn’t changed.

But co-creation isn’t better than participation. Participation isn’t better than outreach. They do different things. They have different intentions, outcomes and risks. They require different types of leadership and resource.

Instead of trying to impress with language, let’s focus on being honest about what we’re actually doing. And let’s celebrate that properly.

Outreach: Opening Doors

Outreach is about connection. It’s the moment someone first encounters the work. It’s a flyer through the door, a pop-up workshop, a warm hello in a space they haven’t been before.

It’s not about co-authorship. It’s about access.

And when done well, outreach builds relationships that can lead to deeper collaboration. It creates trust, visibility and starting points. That’s not small work. That’s foundational.

Participation: Creating Space

Participation takes it further. People don’t just come -they contribute. They respond. They shape the moment. They’re involved in the experience, even if the overall framework still belongs to the artist or organisation.

Good participation is powerful. It builds confidence. It sparks creativity. It creates a sense of belonging and ownership in the moment.

But it’s still often within someone else’s structure. That doesn’t make it less valuable. It just makes it different from co-creation.

Co-Creation: Sharing Power

Co-creation is a different kind of practice. It means shared ownership. Not just “come and try this” or “help us shape this,” but “what shall we build together, and how will we share responsibility?”

It’s messier. Slower. It involves risk. It requires a shift in power -not just process.

When done well, co-creation can challenge how decisions are made, how success is defined, and who gets to lead. It asks for trust. It offers transformation. But it’s not always the right fit. And that’s OK too.

Language Is Power. Let’s Use It Properly.

When everything gets labelled co-creation, the term becomes meaningless. It erases the depth of the practice. It also puts pressure on people doing brilliant participation or outreach work to reframe it, just to sound fundable.

Let’s stop pretending that only co-creation is valuable. Let’s be specific, proud and clear.

Here’s what that could look like:

• A one-off workshop with a youth group? Brilliant outreach.

• A 12-week project where participants help shape the artistic content? High-quality participation.

• A long-term process where a community group makes decisions about what to make, how to make it and who leads it? That’s co-creation.

All of them make impact. All of them deserve space. And none of them need dressing up.

Final Thought

If everything is co-creation, then nothing is.

Let’s name what we’re doing clearly and with pride. Not for the funders. For the people. For the practice. For the future of the work.