>A hundred community members’ lived-experience recounted through anecdotes and other qualitative methods is often dismissed as poor data, whereas a “white paper” is accepted as valid.
That's a little more measured way of making the same point, and in my opinion they hit the nail on the head. Note "white paper" referring this time to a technical brief, not race.
Qualitative research methods are vital, especially for nonprofits serving real communities of people, but often not taken seriously and eschewed in favor of studies by consultants and professional researchers. It's the difference between an organization working with people as subjects, or as partners. And for a community-based nonprofit that difference is everything.
>A hundred community members’ lived-experience recounted through anecdotes and other qualitative methods is often dismissed as poor data, whereas a “white paper” is accepted as valid.
That's a little more measured way of making the same point, and in my opinion they hit the nail on the head. Note "white paper" referring this time to a technical brief, not race.
Qualitative research methods are vital, especially for nonprofits serving real communities of people, but often not taken seriously and eschewed in favor of studies by consultants and professional researchers. It's the difference between an organization working with people as subjects, or as partners. And for a community-based nonprofit that difference is everything.