Last Blog Post

Living an Impact-Focused Life

What’s your Why?

I believe I was put on this earth to:

  • Help people that are less fortunate
  • Use my voice to fight for others
  • Solve problems
  • Learn, fail, and grow

My purpose is to:

  • Develop solutions that better people’s lives, share knowledge, make people happy

I believe (my core values):

  • Honesty, fairness, equality, balance, determination, curiosity

The one thing I must do before I die is:

  • Travel: meeting people and learning cultures

 

My advocates and supporters all believe I:

  • Am smart, inquisitive and a hard worker

 

 

The evil I want to eradicate in this world is:

  • Diseases that harm people or jeopardize any person’s health
  • Unfair treatment of people in any context
  • Ignorance

 

 

I want to work in order to:

  • Use my degree to make a difference by working for a company that makes high-quality products that impact people’s health and well-being positively across the globe by helping people do more, feel better, and live longer
  • Influence or change how people see the world

 

 

 

Walk the Talk – Your How

If you are truly committed to your Why, you show it in your everyday behavior. It is all air until you do it. Working from your Why, How do you prove that you are true to your Why in all you do?

 

I always:

  • Am nice to others
  • Ask others how they feel
  • Tell people thank you or that I appreciate them

 

I never:

  • Boast, brag, or degrade others for their opinions

 

 

My work style is:

  • I like to work collaboratively, while also having time to reflect afterward on everything

 

 

I try to treat people:

  • Respectfully, fair, and kindly

 

 

I approach problems by:

  • Doing research on current problem
  • Brainstorming multiple solutions, and then finally selecting the best one

 

 

Victories are time to:

  • Pause momentarily and congratulate yourself for your hard work

 

 

 

If another attacks my point of view I:

  • Defend myself but also hear them out

 

 

If I fundamentally do not agree with what an organization or person is doing, I will:

  • Speak up and say my opinion

 

 

 

 

Your Credibility – Your Whats

You have just spent some considerable time at Lehigh, and specifically in the Global Social Impact Fellowship, on many whats. Your whats include lab research, formal presentations, writing research papers, engaging with people in other cultural contexts, building prototypes, designing and building systems, raising funds, hiring employees, etc. The whats you have collected along the way are critical to your credibility when you are entering the workforce or applying to the best graduate and professional schools. They signify a credible currency to which organizations can assign value. Create a list of your Whats that are truly reflective of your Why & How.  You did these things because you believe (Why) and you acquired them in the following (How) manner. These are examples you can use in interviews.

What Have I Done List of Experiences, Accomplishments, and Lessons Learned
Degrees, Minors, Certificates, Fellowships Major: Supply Chain Management

Minor: Business Information Systems

Fellowships: Global Social Impact Fellowship

Research Experiences

 

 

 

 

Global Social Impact Fellowship: Research Fellow

Mountaintop Summer Research

 

 

 

Inventions and Innovations

 

 

 

PlasTech Recycling Solutions
(Social) Entrepreneurial Ventures

 

 

 

PlasTech Ventures

 

 

 

 

 

Publications

(Formal and Informal)

 

Comparing PET bricks to conventional concrete masonry units

 

 

 

 

 

Formal Presentations

(at Lehigh and Beyond)

 

 

 

GSIF presentations

Management presentations

Supply chain presentations

Entrepreneurship classes presentations

Internship presentations on process improvements

Awards and

External Recognition

 

 

 

 

Dean’s List

 

 

 

 

 

Articulating and learning from GSIF-related Experiences. For each of these prompts, we want you to identify one and only one specific and compelling event/incident/experience/moment and identify exactly how you grew personally and professionally through that moment.

Teamwork Experience

(and Lessons Learned)

 

 

During GSIF, I learned a lot through our interdisciplinary team. Being that I was not an engineer, I really enjoyed hearing their ideas and their perspective on different decisions. One example is how Laura always mentioned the materials science perspective before we made a solid decision.

 

 

Lessons Learned: I would not have known about various machineries and their outputs if it weren’t for this team. I also learned to be comfortable asking questions since I was not familiar with different things at first.

 

 

 

Conflict Resolution Experience

(and Lessons Learned)

This summer during Mountaintop, being that it was virtual, some members of the team had different schedules. Sometimes, someone would be busy while others weren’t, or vice versa. We instead picked a time that worked for everyone weekly rather than trying to always meet at different times.

 

Lessons Learned: It’s important to be flexible and respect other’s time (especially during a pandemic when everyone has a lot going on).

 

Leadership Experience

(and Lessons Learned)

 

 

 

 

I took the lead on the website this summer and fall semester. It was taking a while for LTS to transfer possession into my account, and I did not want the team to think I was slacking. I told them I requested access and I kept calling to make sure I would get access and eventually I did.

 

Lessons Learned: Be persistent, and also be upfront with others about your progress.

Dealing with Chaos, Ambiguity, and Uncertainty (and Lessons Learned) I feel like there is a lot of chaos and uncertainty during Venturewell E-Team Meetings. I always feel like the other teams have more developed ideas and have conducted more stakeholder interviews; I feel intimidated at times. However, I have learned that they are really understanding. The other teams are there to learn too, and they want to help people that are in similar positions as them.

 

Lessons Learned: Keep believing in your idea and solution. Not everything can be done overnight. Keep asking questions when necessary.

Personally Challenging Experience (and Lessons Learned)

 

A personally challenging experience I had was this past summer during Mountaintop. I had to babysit my two nieces while also doing research since my sister and her husband were essential workers. I tried to balance the workload and work on mountaintop-related things at night when my nieces went to sleep.  I also think my niece screamed during a Zoom meeting once too. I told my members of the team this and they would try to have meetings at night too so I was not overworking myself.

 

 

Lessons Learned: Be upfront with team members about what you can handle. Be honest if you need their help.

 

Cross-cultural Experience (and Lessons Learned)

 

We have been reaching out a lot to stakeholders in the Philippines, but not receiving much feedback. We were wondering why this was the case, but it was because they do not check their emails much. People in the Philippines prefer Facebook Messenger or WeChat for communicating with others, which we soon realized. We now try to use these methods when reaching out to them.

 

Lessons Learned: You may have to adapt your original way of doing things.

 

 

An experience that helped you connect your GSIF work to your discipline / major.

 

Finding percentages of plastics in the waste stream and understanding the junk shop’s role in recycling in the Philippines.

 

 

Lessons Learned: It was necessary to learn if PET (our target material) was abundant in the waste stream so we could continue making brick prototypes.

 

A moment that boosted your sense of agency and self-efficacy – you felt like you can speak for yourself, get stuff done, take on the world and make it better.

 

We have been having trouble getting in contact with stakeholders, but after finally securing a stakeholder interview I felt really accomplished. It was also really cool talking to someone that had never heard of our project before. They offered a new perspective that could potentially lead us to a new customer segment of construction companies.
A moment where you felt like you truly have a strong sense of purpose and belonging in this dynamic, globalized interdependent world.

 

During Venturewell, we met with someone who really liked our idea. He even said, “What’s stopping you from moving to the Philippines and doing it right now?” He was really passionate about our project and was the most enthusiastic about it out of everyone I had talked too, and it made me feel like the progress we have made so far was really worth it and had a strong purpose.

Semester 2: Blog Post 10

GSIF Conceptual Framework

Impact: Aim to solve complex, real-world issues.

 

Educate: Exchange the knowledge and develop the skills to combat complex, real-world issues.

 

Implement: Execute the knowledge gained through programs within Lehigh such as GSIF and capstone in order to solve the complex, real-world issues.

 

Influence: Through our implementation at the global scale, we solve complex, real-world issues with the help of partnerships that end up influencing governments and corporations.

 

Semester 2: Blog Post 8

Team members: Susan Cheng, Laura Marsiglio

Case 1:

Background: Afghanistan Police

  • Population: 35,000,000 (250,000 Police)
  • Literacy Rate: 27% (2019: 32%)
    • High numerous rate: understand numbers
  • 13 Years later Issue: Billions of dollars have been spent on the police force but there is still poor personnel and payroll data (no verification)
    • Extremely High (Hierarchical) Corruption:
      • 10% “Ghost” Police
      • Commanders get a cut from salaries: each person employed, they get a portion of the salary
    • Poor Morale (from poor salary) → Defection to the Taliban
    • Law and Order Crises; deface public trust

 

If you are the Chief of Police for Afghanistan, what solution would you develop to pay the cops that are actually working, reduce corruption, and boost their morale?

 

Actions I would take as the Chief of Police for Afghanistan:

  1. Raise the salary of all policemen. 
    1. Differentiation (identifying the problem): Upon examining the problems within the current system of operation in the Afghanistan Police force, I pinpointed the individual issue of poor salary to members of the police force.
    2. Explanation of solution: One of the reasons why there is an extremely high (hierarchical) corruption is due to the fact that the people in the police force are simply not getting paid enough. Commanders who have some power are using it for corruption rather than the good because they need money to sustain themselves and their families. This statement is especially true to policemen who do not have the power to perform such corruption for the surplus income and end up defecting to the Taliban. It is inappropriate to raise the salary of corrupt government officials, however, it is a different story if they are not getting paid well for their service and need to resort to corruption in order to meet their financial needs. As the Chief of the Police for Afghanistan, I need to first take care of my men who are working for the public by providing them the appropriate financial means for survival.
      1. Multifinality & Interdependence: An increase in pay of all the employees within the police force develops a mutually beneficial relationship between the police force organization and its members. The financial needs of the members are being met and corruption within the organization decreases corruption. The morale of the policemen will increase and lead to a fall in the number of cases of deflection to the Taliban, which benefits both the organization and its members as well. The police force meets their goal of obtaining an income that will meet their financial need. The police force system meets its need of decreasing corruption, raising the morale of the officers, and decreasing the number of deflection to the Taliban.
  2. Scan the entire police force and remove all ghost police. 
    1. Differentiation (identifying the problem): A problem within the Afghanistan Police force is that 10% of individuals (ghost police) listed in the police force (system) receive pay.
    2. Explanation of solution: Annually the police force eats 10% of its overhead cost paying for ghost police. A scan of the entire police force to terminate the ghost members is appropriate to eliminate the financial leakage within the organization. The inappropriately lotted money can be re-invested in the first action of raising the pay of policemen (check details above, listed in the first action).
      1. Multifinality: Police organization retains 10% of its overhead costs and eliminates ghost members in initiating the scan/verification amongst its own members. Members of the police force execute the scan and enable the organization to retain 10% of its overhead costs, which will now be applied back to them to raise their salary. 
  3. Have police officers do community service and set up a donation box. 
    1. Differentiation (identifying the problem): Another problem within the current system of operation in the Afghanistan Police force, is the individual issues of (1) law and order crisis and (2) deface trust of the public.
    2. Explanation of solution: Community service allows officers to develop a rapport between them and the community they serve. The personal/communal trust that is established between the individual police members and the public would influence the reduction in corruption. The individual police member that is caught in corruption would lose face and the public may become more active in pressuring the police force to remove the corrupt officer since they would know him. Community service would re-establish both the people’s image of the police force in a positive light and their trust in the police force. The donation box serves as an indication of support/trust towards the police force and provides a source of income to raise the salary of the officers (action 1).
      1. Equifinality: Corruption is decreased through the channel of personally meeting the public. The officers provide community service and develop a personal relationship with the community which will make them less inclined to perform corruption.
      2. Regulation: The donation box serves as a feedback system from the public that reflects their perception of (1) law and order and (2) their trust in the police. The public will only donate money if they trust the police and see that they are maintaining law and order.
  4. Change existing policies to make corruption acts more difficult within the police force: (1) commanders no longer get a salary cut from each person employed and (2) all police are required to present the proof in the completion of their initial training program (perhaps their ID/certificate) in order to receive their pay.
    1. Differentiation: An individual problem within the current system of operation in the Afghanistan Police force is the corruption amongst commanders.
    2. Explanation of Solution: Another solution to eliminate corruption is making the act of corruption more difficult for the commanders who are committing the act. Implementing a policy of eliminating the idea of receiving a salary cut from each person they employ disincentivizes them to employ people for money and would shift their focus on employing people who are fit for the job to make the commanders themselves look good. Enhancing their image and achievements through their subordinates will serve as an alternative means to obtain more money through a raise rather than corruption. The difficulty or extra work in obtaining proof of training also disincentives commanders to perform corruption for a measly small lump of cash.
      1. Equifinality: A decrease in corruption is achieved in an alternative channel from action 1. In this action, the desired output is achieved in eliminating the salary cut bonus, which is made up through the raise in salary from action 1. Commanders will no longer have incentives to simply have a large number of subordinates. In addition, a decrease in corruption is also achieved by making the act more difficult for commanders from requiring proof of initial training.

 

Case 2:

Facts:

  • Water hyacinth infestation is a problem affecting the shores of Lake Victoria
  • The amount of moss coverage doubles every month
  • Blocks fishermen’s access to lake and results in spread of disease
  • Entrepreneur is profiting from compost and briquettes that she produces from crushed hyacinth
  • Employs four people to cut, crush, and bring hyacinth to her workshop
  • Need for hyacinth increases substantially after two weeks
  • Communities on shore are unhappy that she is making money
  • The members of the community stop her from accessing the hyacinth, so now she needs to get it from somewhere else 

 

Problem: If you are the entrepreneur, what multi-final solution will you develop so that you succeed, your venture succeeds (takes water hyacinth off the lake), and the people living along the lakeshore also walk away happy. Please be specific on how your solution might function and precisely whom you would work with. For example, refrain from including vague stakeholders like entire communities.

 

Systems approach:

  • Consider whole structure of related systems
    • Interaction of ecosystem, entrepreneur’s business model, and community members (fishermen, potential venture employees)
  • Looks for interrelationships across systems
    • Hyacinth interferes with fishermen’s ability to conduct business
    • Entrepreneur dependent on sustainable yield of hyacinth to operate business
    • Community dependent on entrepreneur for jobs
  • Understand the long standing causal factors which generate problems
    • Hyacinth causes problems for fishermen
    • Members of the community will always need jobs
    • Removing too much hyacinth is not sustainable for the entrepreneur
  • Identify leverage points which wield influence across the whole system
    • If entrepreneur runs out of hyacinth, her business model is no longer operative
      • Using too much hyacinth is unsustainable, so they should only take half of what is currently growing each month, so when it grows back the original quantity will be maintained
  • Short term and long term impact on all systems
  • Consciously avoids ‘shifting problems’ to other parts of the system
  • Identify resistance sources; reduce resistance rather than increase force
    • Community members are resistant because the entrepreneur is profiting from their problem

Solutions:

  1. Getting feedback from the community (stakeholders like fishermen, leaders of government agencies, common citizens that are concerned about the hyacinth issue) through open discussions
    1. Regulation: the feedback will bring about expectations of the moss removal and what the community feels are the issues with the entrepreneur taking the moss and selling it as her own. The entrepreneur should also openly discuss the pollution/resource depletion and other effects of removing the moss that may increase around the lake, and discuss with them ways to combat any issues so that it results in a win-win situation for all. 
    2. Explanation of solution: Open discussions will facilitate a cooperative discussion and will allow people to express their opinions on moss removal and come up with a solution that all stakeholders are happy with.
  2. Establish a type of permitting system 
    1. Equifinality: the same output of removing the hyacinth (but not too much by the entrepreneur alone) is achieved, with multiple channels of stakeholders being utilized so many different outlets of people can reap the benefits.
    2. Explanation of solution: The permitting system will allow fishermen to collect hyacinth, then they will either be paid a small amount by the entrepreneur or offered a discount on her products; the permits will also ensure that too much hyacinth is not removed to the point of resource exploitation.
  3. Sourcing the hyacinth from other lakes other than Lake Victoria
    1. Differentiation: identifying individual components of a large system. Identifying other lakes that have hyacinth will lead to less outrage when the entrepreneur profits off of large sums of moss from one single lake. The rest of the moss can be used by other members of the community and even fishermen that collect the hyacinth and sell it to people like the entrepreneur that uses the moss to make products
    2. Explanation of solution: Taking a small portion of the moss from certain locations will lead to less resource exploitation and will allow fishermen and other members of the community to have access to the hyacinth, making it more fair and giving more people a chance to benefit from the hyacinth. Having multiple sources will also allow the entrepreneur to keep up with the demand for the hyacinth
  4. Hiring more community members to help her in the crushing and composting process as the demand for the hyacinth increases 
    1. Holism: the components of the system need to work together to achieve their goal. This benefits multiple components of the system because the entrepreneur has created more jobs and people will be more economically sound and have more opportunities to provide for themselves. The fishermen also benefit from this option because the moss will continue to be removed from their lake, permitting their access to the lake and mitigating the risk of spreading disease 
    2. Explanation of solution: Since community members are outraged that they are not more involved with getting profits from the entrepreneur’s product, a way for them to accept her business is if they are involved and employed in the business, getting a salary.

Semester 2: Blog Post 7

Describe at least 5 partnerships with individuals and/or organizations that have been formed to support your project and that impact the success or failure of your venture. Please identify partnerships at the individual, team, and Lehigh/GSIF level.

  1. What constituted the partnership
  2. How did the partner help? How did you help them?
  3. Was this a symbiotic relationship? Why or why not?
  4. What would help strengthen this partnership and make it more equitable?

 

Team:

  1. University of the Philippines Diliman (UPD) HEED program
    1. UPD has a similar program (HEED) as GSIF for their students. When the GSIF decided to take on the PlasTech Ventures project, the project idea was also presented to UPD. Since the project also aligns with the HEED program, they decided to take it on as well.
    2. The partnership enables the PlasTech Ventures team to obtain direct information about the Philippines. In addition, UPD provides a facility for the PlasTech Ventures team to work at during fieldwork. We provide constant updates on our project to UPD and provide assistance within our capabilities upon request.
    3. No, this is not a symbiotic relationship. Our team oftentimes reach out to the UPD team to request for information that would advance the project. However, responses tend to be slow on their end and communication has slowed down significantly at this point in time. During fieldwork, the relationship is symbiotic and they are constantly present when needed to advance the project forward.
    4. An equal level of commitment between UPD and the PlasTech Ventures team would strengthen this partnership and make it more equitable. Since the UPD team is only committed to the project on a semester basis, the constant change in participants on the project resets the communication between them and the US. In addition, the motivation and feeling of ownership over the project never fully develop for the UPD students involved in the project. 
  2. Venturewell
    1. This entrepreneurial program provides routine coaching, training and grant funding to move our technology and our venture forward
    2. The coaching we received from VentureWell helped us to network and develop important skills. We in turn help them by giving them positive publicity.
    3. This is not a very symbiotic relationship because we are receiving more from VentureWell than we are giving back. Although we feed into their business model and build their reputation, VentureWell provides the majority of the resources in this partnership.
    4. This partnership could be strengthened by maintaining constant communication between us and them. The communication would advance PlasTech Ventures forwards while satisfying Venturewell’s requirements. Meeting these requirements enables Venturewell to meet its goals of transforming higher education and social entrepreneurship. 
  3. Victor Paterno (7-Eleven Philippines) 
    1. Being that he is a Filipino businessman, the partnership was constituted to help advise us on venture creation and business development aspects.
    2. He helped us with his expertise and guidance on his particular industry and of the geographic area. At the time, PlasTech Ventures was very new so we helped him by sharing our knowledge and ideas to offer a solution to combat the plastic waste crisis.
    3. This was not a symbiotic relationship because at the time we had little to offer to him. We benefited more from his expertise and knowledge that he offered. 
    4. This partnership was initiated in the beginning stages of development and has not been communicating on a continuous basis so we really need to strengthen our relationship by reaching out to Victor Paterno. A more equitable relationship between Victor and us could be him becoming an entrepreneur and establishing a PlasTech Venture in the Philippines through us while also activating as a business advisor for our PlasTech Ventures initiative.
  4. Philippine Plastic Industry Association (PPIA)
    1. This partnership will help the team understand more of the machinery standards for the Philippines and help us implement the necessary operating procedures.
    2. We both have common goals of reducing the environmental damage created by plastic pollution. By having a common goal we can help each other advance the dream forward. Being that they are in the Philippines they can help us specifically because we are not able to be there full-time. 
    3. This is a symbiotic relationship because while we both have the same goal to reduce environmental damage, we also have other specific goals that each side works to fulfill for the other.  When we help them, we will be helping improve the well-being and financial state of their economy and citizens. When they help us, we are gaining more insight and understandings that will help us develop the project further and make it more feasible
    4. Frequent constant communication between the PPIA and us would strengthen this partnership. Exchanges on how PPIA can expand our reputation in the Philippines and how we can contribute to meeting their company goals such as creating employment opportunities would make our partnership more equitable. 
  5. Jill Manapat
    1. Jill Manapat and Khanjan had a previously established connection with one another. Khanjan played a role in inspiring Jill to start up the HEED program for students to work on impactful projects at UPD. As the director in charge of the HEED program (which is similar to GSIF working on impact-based projects), Jill is almost always willing to provide feedback and guidance to the PlasTech Ventures team.
    2. Ma’am Jill helps our team by offering her expertise about in-country operations. Our team is doing a large majority of the hands-on work, which advances the project forward. We offer our resources and information on our research to Jill.
    3. Yes, this is a symbiotic relationship because her advice is very important. She also has a valuable network in the Philippines that we are able to capitalize on with her help. Our team is responsible for much of the forward progress on this project, which will give her insights on how the HEED program can advance their PlasTech Ventures. 
    4. Sometimes communication is slow, which inhibits our ability to make progress. Constant communication between Jill and Plastech Ventures would strengthen our relationship and make it more equitable.

Semester 2: Blog Post 6

  1. Ten specific ways your team approach has changed/teamwork skills/lessons learned
  • 1) We delegate more specific roles for each person at the end of each meeting (examples currently: Susan and Laura are the lab leads, Kelly is the lead on the paper, Ellie is the lead on UPD outreach and Andy is the lead on reverse engineering), and we also name to-do items that we have to accomplish as a team (this week’s example: grant funding). This helps us to remember which team member is responsible for what each week and helps us get more things accomplished.
  • 2) We have become comfortable asking each other for help and being transparent if we have other tasks that are due that week and we cannot mentally handle it (example: during exam week, someone asked us for help with their side of the work).
  • 3) We make a timeline at the beginning of each semester with concrete deliverables we need, and I think this is really effective to help us ensure that we are on track.
  • 4) Even though I am technically not a member of Capstone, I think keeping briefs are really important. If I ever have a question or need to look for something someone did in the past, it is a really easy way to stay organized and make sure no information is lost. I think it’s important to note for myself that for research, it’s very important to keep a brief like this to make sure the content is neat and readable.
  • 5) I would say PlasTech Ventures definitely developed the skills of problem-solving/adaptability throughout the past year. Since our project is very technical, we were confused which way to pivot after COVID-19 hit. However, I think our focus on more of the economics side over the summer was still a productive use of our time and we still got a lot accomplished as a team.
  • 6) An important teamwork skill everyone has on this team is being welcoming. Even though I’m not an engineering major, they have been really helpful in answering questions I have had along the way, whether it be about moldings, manufacturing processes, etc.
  • 7) A lesson I learned from being on this team is the importance of cross-functional teams. One time Laura was doing research on PET and its ability to emit VOCs and she found it had the lowest emissions of VOCs among different kinds of plastics, and in that same week I found that PET was abundant in the waste stream in the Philippines. With both of those facts for validation we strongly considered PET as our target material for the bricks. Without each other’s knowledge, we couldn’t have presented as strong of an argument for picking PET as the target material.
  • 8) Another lesson I learned is: not everything goes as planned. With this team, we have had numerous pivots (example: our business model going from entrepreneurs to solely us to start out, and now, our possible new customer segment of refugee camps). With this being said, it’s also really important to remain open-minded and flexible because when constructing a venture there are a lot of moving parts.
  • 9) Before COVID, after a few weeks of being on the team, we started to get lunch together at Williams after our meetings with the advisors. I think this was really important to bond with one another outside of the project and just get to know each other more personally. This helped the team dynamic because we came to become good friends which I really think is important because we spend a lot of time working on tasks together.
  • 10) A teamwork skill we have all gotten better at is being more comfortable reaching out to stakeholders. Since we are involved in Venturewell, it is required for us to conduct stakeholder interviews, and in the beginning we struggled with finding connections. However, I think people took the initiative to call new people and get creative with finding stakeholders, even if it involved actually calling them on the phone.
  1. During Spring 2020/Week 7, your team developed a Collaboration Plan for your team clearly articulating your goals (Small g and Big G), Roles, Procedures, and Relationships. Provide an updated collaboration plan.

 

Goals:

  • What are the personal goals (small g) of each member on this team?
    • Laura: Use the technical skills I’ve developed through my coursework at Lehigh to  make positive change on global scale
    • Susan: To change the way people currently live to be more sustainable and environmentally friendly through my mechanical engineering and product design background.
    • Kelly: Using my experience to manage the distribution channels of plastics to ensure there is consistency in the types of plastics used, so that the bricks ultimately can be of high quality to the population of the Philippines. 

 

  • What is the project GOAL (big G) we’re all committed to achieve together?
    • To provide a clean environment for Filipinos to live in by diverting solid plastic waste from landfills and decreasing plastic pollution in the oceans.

 

Roles:

    • Team leaders

 

  • Prototyping – Andy
  • Material Testing- Laura
  • Paper Development- Kelly

 

      • UPD Outreach- Ellie
    • Team scribes: Andy and Susan 
    • Company sponsor interface: Susan
    • Financial manager: Kelly
    • Final brief editors: Susan → Laura → Andy
    • Liaison to shops, labs and other support persons:
      • Woodshop: Susan

 

  • Packard Shop: Andy

 

    • Whitaker labs: Laura

 

Procedures: 

  1. Decision Making – What process shall we use: consensus, majority rules, deference to expert, default to the loudest, or?
  • Decision making will result from mainly a team consensus. So far, no situations have arisen where there has been enough disagreement among the team to warrant alternative strategies. In areas where a majority of the team lacks knowledge, we tend to defer to the ‘expert’ on the team.
  1. Effective Meetings – Focus on key, timely decisions together vs. status/update (offline);
  • Meetings occur every Friday where each team member presents their work for the past week. The team analyzes the result of all the team members’ work and determines the next steps as a group. The team then divides and conquers the tasks needed to achieve the next steps by next week’s deadline. If any changes occur throughout the week that relates to the deliverable set for the upcoming week, the team member will notify the student team via Slack and develop any necessary backup plan.
  1. Meeting roles: scribe, facilitator, timekeeper
  • Andy and Susan will collaborate as the main scribes during the meeting. Any other members are free to chime into the effort. The team will go through the list of deliverables that was agreed upon the previous week and ask the designated team member to present their efforts on the specified deliverable. Brian acts as the facilitator based on the information presented during the meeting. Both he and other faculty advisors will ask key questions throughout the meeting to push the team forward. Deliverables will be determined and assigned to each member at the end of each meeting as a group consensus. 
  1. Communication – FTF: frequency, time, location; type of technology: (Googledocs, Zoom, Hangout, etc.); expectations for responsiveness; ‘best time to work’ (AM, PM, weekends?)
  • The general meeting between the team, advisors, PI, and sponsors occur on Fridays from 12pm-1pm on Zoom. The student team will be in constant communication with each other through Slack throughout the week and expects a response within an hour to one day. A weekly brief will be sent out to all the faculty advisors prior to the weekly general meeting to provide a quick update on the team’s efforts and progress during the week.

Relationships:

  • Team Diversity – What is the diversity on our team? Disciplines to tap for solutions;  individual learning styles for the stages of invention; overall team learning style strengths and places to supplement;  cultural backgrounds , work experience, dreams to leverage for scope & impact of goals, new roles, better procedures; languages for more diverse customer set, bigger market;
    • Currently, our team is composed of people from all kinds of backgrounds that have contributed to advancing PlasTech Ventures forward. First, the majority of the team is pursuing a different major. Andy and Susan are Mechanical Engineering majors (Susan also has a product design minor) and have been really involved in making various designs of wall systems and the machinery to produce the wall systems. Ellie is an IDEAS major (Mechanical Engineering and Environmental Science) who has been investigating UV degradation on plastics to understand how the wall systems will be impacted by the sun over a long period of time. Laura is an IDEAS major (Material Science & Engineering, Economics, Environmental Studies) who is leading the efforts in conducting research on the compressive strength of recycled plastics at different contamination levels. Lastly, Kelly is a supply chain who plays a major role in determining the movement of plastics in the Philippines and is currently leading efforts in the development of our most recent paper.
  1. Listening – Notice my binary thinking, auto-rankism, and go beyond it.
  • As the team is faced with numerous tasks ranging from prototyping machinery to material testing, the team decided to divide and conquer! During the start of the Fall 2020 semester, PlasTech Ventures was divided into the prototyping group and the material testing group. At the very start of the semester, the research team was fumbling their way through obtaining accessibility to testing facilities, sourcing the PET flakes, determining the experimental procedure and equipment, etc. Understanding that the prototyping team was busy with their tasks, such as machinery investigation, the research team had every intention to shoulder the heavy duties that were laid upon its members. The prototyping team listened to the researcher’s team progress and knew they needed help. They immediately proceeded in aiding the research team and spent at least a week in investigating the appropriate specimen mold for the experiment. 
  1. Team Name–What’s a team name that captures who we are and what we’re going to do?
  • PlasTech Ventures! The team is utilizing technology to create products out of recycled plastics in order to diverge plastics from the landfill and ocean. The business model that the team is currently developing will provide entrepreneurial opportunities to Filipinos.

 

Semester 2: Blog Post 5

Team Members: Kelly Mulvaney, Susan Cheng, Laura Marsiglio

Develop Top 20 FAQs for your project

  1. Questions
    1. Identify the most important questions, building on the referee Qs
    2. Why? What? How? How well? How exactly? At steady-state…
  2. Provide concise and precise responses to each question

 

Questions:

  1. How do PET bricks compare to concrete bricks as a building material?
    1. Our team relied on ASTM Standards used in the construction industry to validate the properties of PET. Using a finite element analysis, PET was predicted to have a compressive strength greater than 12.4 MPa, which is the minimum specified for concrete masonry units.
  2. Flammability is a concern if using plastic as a building material. What research have you done to ensure it is a safe material?
    1. Our team is not able to conduct flammability testing in Lehigh’s labs. However, our research indicates that PET is less flammable than other common polymers, evidenced by the use of polyester fibers in children’s pajamas. We have also looked into the possibility of flame retardant additives to increase the safety of the material.
  3. Are VOCs a concern when using plastic as a building material?
    1. The chemical structure of PET makes it less likely to release VOCs than other common plastics. In one study, PET was found to have the lowest quantity of VOCs released when exposed to a month of artificial weathering, compared to other plastics commonly found in the recycling stream.
  4. How do you plan to recruit entrepreneurs?
    1. We intend to recruit entrepreneurs by utilizing our in-country resources. Our hope is to partner with NGOs that may have insight into the potential workforce. By opening and operating a pilot facility for some amount of time before relinquishing control to entrepreneurs and opening franchise facilities, we will be able to gauge the dedication of potential entrepreneurs. This will also ensure that we recruit individuals who will build a good name for the venture.
  5. How much overhead will be required in operating the recycling facility?
    1. An overhead of 2.5 people will be required to operate the facility. We will need a sales person and the facility manager as the full-timers. An additional part-timer will be necessary to assist the facility manager from time to time to manufacture the bricks.
  6. How do you make sure that an entrepreneur doesn’t take your idea, run with it, and undermine your venture?
    1. In offering the business in a box product to entrepreneurs, they will have to rely on us to provide: the instruction and training to operate the machines in a safe manner, the machinery itself, and the extensive support network which include suppliers of PET and distributors of the PET bricks.
  7. How will individuals in the Philippines, which is known to be a low/middle-income country, secure funds for the initial investment? 
    1. We plan to connect potential entrepreneurs with established microfinance institutions in the Philippines and develop a system where we would help guarantee loans and make them less risky for the MFI. MFIs would take a share of revenues the entrepreneurs earn from selling bricks as loan repayments.
  8. What do the distribution channels for current brick manufacturers look like?
    1. Prescon, Holcim, and Republic Cement and Building Materials are currently the top three suppliers of cement bricks in the Philippines in terms of sales revenue. One or many of these types of bricks can be found at most construction supply stores in the Philippines. More research needs to be done on how exactly these distribution channels are set in place and if there are any intermediaries that the bricks go through before reaching the end consumer.
  9. What market validation have you done to confirm consumer’s interest in PET brick?
    1. We have conducted research on similar existing products in the Philippine market. We found a company known as Green Antz who is producing ecobricks from sachets. Their success story indicates to us that there is a demand for PET bricks.
  10. How do you plan to enter the market and establish credibility for your brick?
    1. We plan on launching our first recycling facility in the Summer of 2022 and building a house out of our own PET bricks in order to market our brand, our products, and our credibility in the Filippino market. We will utilize our existing connections and partnerships, such as UPD, to expand our platform.
  11. How do you plan to source the recycled PET? Is there enough plastic PET to support your production rate?
    1. We plan to obtain raw materials by having a kiosk in the recycling facility where scavengers/locals come to exchange plastics for money. After reading through a barangay’s waste management plan from one of our connections at UPD, it was found that about 20% of most waste streams are comprised of plastics. which means there is plenty of PET in the waste stream to support our production rate. PET bottles specifically are one of the most valuable forms of plastic in the Philippines and are the most retrieved due to its high predicted value after consumption.
  12. How much waste can a single facility divert in a year? Are you even going to make an impact on the plastic waste problem?
    1. A single facility will be diverting 3200 lbs of plastic from the landfill per week. Three years after launching our first recycling facility, we expect to support 20 recycling facilities that will be diverting 64,000lbs of plastic from the landfill per week. Our goal is not to solve the plastic crisis, but to be a part of the solution.
  13. What is the ROI of your venture? Is the return on investment in a fair time frame that would make it financially accessible to entrepreneurs in the Philippines?
    1. In our most recent analysis, we concluded that the ROI would be approximately a little over 8 months. Our ROI meets our goal of a max ROI of 12-18 months for entrepreneurs in the Philippines.
  14. Where will the profit that is generated from your venture go?
    1. Profit generated from our venture will go towards maintaining the operation of our venture in providing the training, machinery, and support network to entrepreneurs. Profits will also be used to further market the venture to increase the number of recycling facilities in the Philippines.
  15. What is the processing capacity of your ideal facility?
    1. The ideal processing capacity of the facility will allow the entrepreneur to achieve an ROI in 12-18 months. With our current estimated processing capacity of the melter, this is a production rate of 13 bricks per hour.
  16. What are the health implications on the workers who will be operating the machinery and melting the plastic?
    1. OSHA does not classify PET as hazardous, and it has not been found to be carcinogenic. However, when it is melted, it has the potential to emit small amounts of volatile organic compounds that could potentially irritate people’s eyes, nose, and lungs. To mitigate the risk of worker injury, strict safety precautions will be put in place and proper safety gear will be distributed to workers.
  17. Why did you take a community-scale approach? (What are the drawbacks of current industrial-scale facilities in the Philippines?)
    1. The limiting factors of the current industrial recycling systems include their high operating costs, as well as the high costs associated with transporting recyclable materials to the facility. Their size and capacity also require significant initial investments that may take 2-5 years for investors to see a return. We expect community-scale recycling facilities with the most optimal combination of technologies (specifically, the melter) to see a return on their investment in 8-9 months, and the localized facilities would require significantly less transportation and operating costs.
  18. What is the production rate for your bricks? What does that look like in the impact you are trying to make?
    1. Our current estimated production rate is 13 bricks/hour with the melter. We have not done in-lab testing yet, so this is subject to change. This production rate will allow one facility to divert 107 tons of plastic per year.
  19. Which molding will produce the highest throughput? Is this one also the one that is the most expensive? How much energy will your machine use?
    1. The melter allows for the highest production rate. This method is actually less expensive than larger scale compression or injection machines. The melter uses 1.12 kW of electricity, which is lower than the compression molder our team looked into.
  20. Besides using the PET bricks to construct homes, what other ways can they be utilized?
    1. During the Venturewell Phase II workshop, we spoke with experts that recommended positioning our products to other markets rather than keeping it limited to just housing materials. We see the potential for these bricks to be used for gardening/landscaping and/or artisan purposes as well.
  21. How do you plan to scale/expand into other geographic areas to combat their plastic pollution issue?
    1. In July of 2019, members of our team did fieldwork and found that the entire community was energized by the venture and fully supportive of it. With 897 barangays across Manila, there are tons of opportunities for us to gain traction as a venture, especially since the team was approached by many of these neighboring barangays during fieldwork. Not only this, but other countries with the same issue of excessive plastic pollution could benefit from our approach as well, as community-scale recycling generates extra income opportunities for people in middle-low income countries.

Semester 2: Blog Post 4

Teammates: Bishoy Youhana, Megan Lindle, Asgar Ali

 

Part 1: Ethical Decision Making 

 

Step 1: Determine the facts in the situation:

Implicit facts:

  • Due to their inability to conduct research on the matter, the women believe feeding their children gruel is highly beneficial. This is probably a cultural norm that everyone has just gone along with for decades without concrete proof it is sufficient.
  • No readily available testing – if they have HIV they might not even know
  • The women do not necessarily know how the pesticides might affect the children

 

Explicit facts:

  • HIV/AIDS is very prevalent in the region.
  • 35% of children in the region is stunted due to poor nutrition
  • The child’s main source of nutrition is from the gruel that is made out of maize and bananas
  • We have 500 women willing to join the co-operative.
  • The crops that will be used for making the porridge are often exposed to pesticides which can have adverse effects on the children.
  • Few women are tested for HIV/AIDS
  • There is a higher chance of transmitting HIV through breastfeeding

Assumptions: 

  • We are assuming that the cooperative will make products that are affordable for the women.

 

Primary issue: 

  • Breastfeeding can be potentially harmful in regions where HIV cases are prevalent since it can increase the chances of transmitting the disease to the children.
  • Alternative nutritional supplements such as porridge can be offered as a possible alternative to breastfeeding and reduce the growth stunting numbers in the region. However, the ingredients that go into making these are known to be exposed to pesticides which can potentially harm the babies.

 

Step 2 & 3: Define the Stakeholders and Motivations (personal vs professional)

 

  • The children: 
    1. Personal:
      1. Want the porridge to taste good
      2. Need food that will help them grow
    2. Professional: None 

 

  • The mothers: 
    1. Personal:
      1. Want their children to be properly fed (no pesticides) and HIV/AIDS free 
    2. Professional:
      1. Make money
  • Myself/the cooperative: 
    1. Personal:
      1. Improve nutritional status of the children and improve the livelihoods of rural communities
    2. Professional:
      1. Build credibility to get more funding for future projects
  • The women who joined the cooperative:
    1. Personal:
      1. Income opportunity
      2. passion for the cause
    2. Professional:
      1. To produce nutrient packed porridge using locally grown produce.
  • Government/other groups (secondary):
    1. Personal:
      1. Want to reduce growth stunting cases to go down
      2. Improve livelihoods.
    2. Professional:
      1. Develop the country overall
  • Donors (secondary):
    1. Personal: 
      1. Improve livelihoods of the families and reduce the growth stunting
    2. Professional: None

 

Step 4: Formulate (at least three) alternative solutions:

 

  1. Exclusively breastfeed children- The mothers could simply breastfeed the children until they no longer need it because breastfeeding can provide essential nutrients that can’t be replicated at an affordable price point.
    1. Ethical principle: consequence based thinking
    2. Pros: 
      1. No risk kids receiving pesticides 
      2. The mothers will not be worried about feeding their children products that they are unfamiliar with
    3. Cons: 
      1. Kids will have poor nutrition
      2. Risk receiving HIV/AIDS from prolonged breastfeeding

 

  1. Guidebook/pamphlet detailing which fruits/vegetables contain which nutrients and when is the best time to serve this to their children (0-6 months, 6-12 months, etc.)
    1. Ethical principle: consequence based thinking and ethics of care
    2. Pros: 
      1. No dire need for prolonged breastfeeding (less risk for receiving HIV)
      2. Allows them to understand the benefits and proper nutrition that each food brings; each child will have a more well-balanced diet
    3. Cons: 
      1. Mothers may not be educated enough to utilize the guidebook
      2. Mothers may resort to archaic or traditional solutions rather than the guidebook
      3. May not be as cost-effective as the porridge.
      4. There still could be nutrients from breastmilk that these food lack
  2. Use the funds to develop a nutritious and shelf stable porridge. Maybe use more of the funding to better process/wash off the pesticides before they can go into making the porridge.
    1. Ethical principle: consequence based thinking 
    2. Pros:
      1. This way the mothers could be assured that their children would not get HIV from prolonged breastfeeding 
      2. Children will have the essential plus supplementary nutrition from the porridge which can help reduce growth stunting. 
      3. Still will receive nutrients from breast milk; this would be used after the baby is 6 months 
    3. Cons:
      1. Risk receiving pesticides
      2. Will not have enough funding left to market the product 
      3. The baby might still have HIV from birth

 

Step 5: Seek additional assistance, as appropriate – previous cases, peers, reliance on personal experience, inner reflection 

  • Pesticides are more common in fruits, vegetables, meats, poultry, and fish
  • Pesticides can bio-accumulate in the body. Most people don’t consume enough for it to be fatal, however, the neurotoxins can harm small children.
  • In children, pesticides pose a threat to the developing brain and the nervous system.
  • Most East African countries import their pesticides from Europe 
  • AIDS is one of the leading causes of death in East Africa
  • 25% of babies born to women with HIV will also be infected

 

Step 6: Select the best course of action – that solves the problem, saves face and has the best short term and long-term implications for your relationship and venture. Explain reasoning and discuss your solution vis-a-vis other approaches discussed in class. 

 

Solution: Use the funds to develop a nutritious and shelf stable porridge and use more of the funding to better process/wash off the pesticides before they can go into making the porridge. This way-

 

  • Children will receive good nutrition.
  • Children will not be dependent on prolonged breastfeeding for nutrients (decreasing the risk of HIV)
  • It would reduce the risk of receiving pesticides but would cost a bit more money.

 

This solution allows the children to not depend on breastfeeding as the only source of nutrients, thus making sure they don’t practice prolonged breastfeeding, reducing the risk of HIV. This also allows the children to receive a good amount of nutrients from the porridge, reducing malnutrition. However, it is more expensive to implement than the other two solutions proposed, and does risk the children receiving pesticides, but if resources are allocated correctly, fruits should be washed carefully, so the pesticide level in the porridge will be minimal. 

 

Having the porridge would be an excellent solution supplement to breastfeeding since it would provide some nutrients that breastfeeding cannot provide. Additionally, processing the local produce before making the porridge with them would let the local women working at the cooperative know that pesticides are harmful and they might share this knowledge with other locals of the region. If done right this might even be able to spark some change in agricultural practices. An advantage of this would be that there could be an important shift from using store bought pesticides to natural pesticides and herbicides like manure.

 

Step 7:  Implications of your solution on the venture

 

  • Technology-  the technological implications of the solution would be that it would require more physical capitals such as extra machines to better clean the produce to reduce the potential risk of pesticide residue from the porridge. However, this might also spark a change in the agricultural field since if farmers are aware that the pesticides they use on the produce is harmful, then they would likely use natural pesticides which would help make the solution more cost efficient.
  • Economic- the economic implications of the solution is that a lot more money would go in the making of the product. There would be a lot less money allocated for the marketing of the product since many of the target market is unfamiliar with the product. Although this is not necessarily a bad thing, it might not be sustainable for the venture to use local produce to manufacture the porridge in the long run especially if they cannot sell enough of them.
  • Social-  the solution has a major social implication in that it is sort of based on the assumption that the consumers of this region would even buy the porridge in the first place. Since mothers in this region are culturally accustomed to exclusively breastfeeding their children, it would be difficult to market the product since it would essentially mean changing their way of doing things. However, if done correctly, the porridge could be supplemented with breastfeeding and would be incredibly helpful with bringing down the growth stunting rate of the region.
  • Environmental- the environmental implication of this solution would be that the processing of the produce might leave behind harmful chemicals that might hurt the surrounding environment if they are not taken care of properly.

 

 

Part 2: Grassroots Diplomacy

 

Step 1: Determine the facts in the situation:

Facts: 

  • The women have a chance to sell their locally grown produce to the cooperative
  • They like this arrangement because it saves them time and money
  • When they bring the money back home, they are forced to give it to the males
  • Men spend the money on alcohol and other things
  • The twin outcomes of the cooperative are not achieved
  • I only have 6 months left at this cooperative
  • The other members of the board wants things to change as well
  • The women are not unhappy about giving their money to the males, but do not like the fact that the males don’t look after their families.

 

Issue: 

  • The women cannot use the money directly to improve the nutrition of their children because of aggressive male members of the family who take their money away and use it on alcohol and other frivolous things.

 

Step 2 & 3: Define the Stakeholders and Motivations (personal vs professional)

 

  • The children: 
    1. Personal:
      1. Want the porridge to taste good
      2. Need food that will help them grow
    2. Professional: None 

 

  • The mothers: 
    1. Personal:
      1. Want their children to be properly fed (no pesticides) and HIV/AIDS free 
    2. Professional:
      1. Make money
  • Myself/the cooperative: 
    1. Personal:
      1. Improve nutritional status of the children and improve the livelihoods of rural communities
    2. Professional:
      1. Build credibility to get more funding for future projects
  • The women who joined the cooperative:
    1. Personal:
      1. Income opportunity
      2. passion for the cause
    2. Professional:
      1. To produce nutrient packed porridge using locally grown produce.
  • Government/other groups (secondary):
    1. Personal:
      1. Want to reduce growth stunting cases to go down
      2. Improve livelihoods.
    2. Professional:
      1. Develop the country overall
  • Donors (secondary):
    1. Personal: 
      1. Improve livelihoods of the families and reduce the growth stunting
    2. Professional: None
  • Men:
    1. Personal:
      1. They just want the women’s money and want to spend it on desirable things for themselves.
    2. Professional: 
      1. Instead of spending money on alcohol, they could work with the women and make their own money.  
  • The six members of the leadership group: 
    1. Personal:
      1. They want what it best for the cooperation
      2. They want the women of the cooperation to use their own money instead of surrendering before their husbands because these members are local women who likely struggle with similar issues.
    2. Professional: 
      1. They want to achieve the twin outcomes of the cooperation.

 

Step 4,5,6: Formulate an alternative solution:

 

  • Optimal Solution: Bring together leaders in the community and discuss the issue immediately and talk about the ⅓ rule of payment. Essentially how it would work is, the cooperative would function as an equity firm. The workers can work for the cooperation and have one third of their income be given to them immediately, one-third be saved by the company as bonds and the rest of the money could be used to provide the women with high value products such as goats or chickens which can generate income for their families in the long term. The cooperation could establish a separate store at the cooperative where the workers could use the money right away to purchase these products. This would stop the males from taking the money away because they would already use the money to buy products. This solution also allows the women to generate income for their families for the long term without any major risks because they would be guaranteed their money in the future when the cooperation bond matures. The males would also likely be in favor of this decision because it would mean that they would receive more money in the future instead of a small sum immediately. This solution meets the twin goals because it incentivizes the women to keep working at the cooperation by providing essentials, securing their future through bonds and avoiding having to deal with the males of the households while also making sure that they get the necessary items the women need to properly take care of their families.

 

 

  • Pros: 

 

      • Gives immediate and long term benefits to the the women
      • Gives the men a reason to not take the money from the women immediately since they would get more in the future.
      • Allows the women to buy essential products like the porridge to feed their children which would help minimize the growth stunting in the region

 

  • Cons:

 

      • The men might be resistant to the idea of the women not having enough money to give to them and this might lead to abuse 
      • There could be a trust issue since the idea of bonds might be new to them
      • Getting only one third of the income at a time might not be sufficient for them to sustain their families

 

  • Short term implication of the venture:

 

      • In the short term the venture might run into problems of retaining the workers because having only one third of their income given to them at a time might not work out that well considering the fact that it would be a very low amount.
      • There would be alot of trust issues between the employees and the cooperation since this system of payment would be new to them.

 

  • Long term implications of the venture:

 

      • The cooperation could be able to sustain itself and thrive at some point if they are able to build trust with the women they employ.
      • The women would be happy since they would have a steady source of income as well a plan for their future.
      • This solution could potentially get the males to start doing something productive to earn their own money instead of relying on the women.

 

  • Saving face:

 

      • The women get a chance to save face since they do not need to confront the men regularly about their income since they would spend it on essential items.
      • The cooperation saves face by discussing their ideas with local leaders and getting them on board with their plan and allowing the women to get a steady source of income.
      • The men saves face by not relying on the women for money but getting a job to pay for their own things
      • The committee saves face by coming up with a great plan to achieve the twin outcome goals of the cooperation.

 

  • Assistance sought to come up with the solution:

 

    • The class discussion and the group discussion mainly helped in brainstorming ideas from which the group narrowed it down to this solution.

Implementation steps:

  • Apply grassroots diplomacy steps to bring about change in the large scale in the long run by talking to local leaders
  • Ask the women if the solution works for them 
    • Getting their feedback is very important
  • Validate the process and discuss with male leaders (25 to 30 males) and get them on board
  • Get recommendations from all of the stakeholders before making any major decisions
  • Hire people to handle the bonds/finance related activities 
  • Hire people to maintain the store
  • Take a survey from the women to see which items they spend the most money on
  • From this survey, buy products in bulk for the store
  • Get in touch with government officials/organizations to see if they can donate products to the store
  • Take surveys from the women in the future to see how the cooperation impacted their lives

Semester 2: Blog Post 3

Prompt: Grassroots Diplomacy Case 9/8/2020

Step 1: A) Determine the facts

  • Jack is an American student who lived at a youth center in Kenya, he is a guest that was helping in giving out gifts during the ceremony
  • Kids in the youth center are expecting gifts – once they saw that every other child got a present, they felt deserving of one as well
  • Four children were forgotten – as children they are not mature enough to realize that this might have been a mistake
  • The hats are not as special as some of the other gifts the other children got – this is unfair to them and why they do not approve of just the black hats
  • The staff shooed the kids away after giving them the hats, acting as if the kids were the ones at fault
  • The kids blamed Jack for not getting gifts, even though it was the staff’s fault
  • Jack discussed with the staff the kids felt upset and left out, but they didn’t acknowledge the problem at all and just got annoyed at Jack 
  • Jack may not understand the culture – it may be commonplace in youth centers for children to not get gifts. Jack’s instinct is to accommodate the kids that are left out, but in Kenya they might not think much of this
  • Jack wants to save face as well as the youth center (Jack more so though)
  • They all live at the youth center
  • Only one student gave Jack a glare – the other three may not think it was Jack’s fault?
  • Assumption: the black hat is not a good present
  • Assumption: all four of the children are indeed upset by not getting presents

 

  1. B) Clearly state the ethical issue/issues
  • Jack took some credit for getting the gifts, even though they were from the donors, so the four kids that did not receive a present blamed him for that. When Jack brought up the children’s disappointment to the staff, they did not seem to care at all. Now, Jack is faced with the ethical dilemma of figuring out how to solve the problem of not every child getting a gift. To him this is not only unjust, but he also does not want to disappoint the primary people he has been working hard to keep happy all summer: the kids. This matters to Jack because he bonded and got close to the kids throughout his time in Kenya and does not want to disappoint them or for them to think badly of him. He needs to decide what to do about the kids that did not receive gifts. 

 

Steps 2 & 3: Define the stakeholders and assess their motivations

    • Jack
      • Personal: sees the issue at hand as a real concern compared to his coworkers, wants to have good relationships with the kids and workers and for everyone to be happy, wants to be well-liked, wants to remember his experience in Kenya as positive, wants to save face
      • Professional: wants to continue his job at the youth center, does not want to upset the workers, wants to have a good relationship with the workers and be respected by them, wants to handle the situation calmly
    • The children who received presents
      • Personal: happy to receive their presents, see Jack in good standing, might tease the kids that just got black hats
      • Professional: not as applicable since they are kids; but, they feel deserving of a present because the majority of the kids did get a present
    • The children who did not receive presents
      • Personal: very unhappy with their hats (not a sufficient present in their eyes), associate their anger with Jack, feel left out or maybe like they did something wrong
      • Professional:  not as applicable since they are kids; but, they feel deserving of a present because the majority of the kids did get a present
    • The youth center workers
      • Personal: pride – trying to save face by not acknowledging the problem, many of them might have grown up in the center themselves so they have personal reasons for working there but understand that sometimes mistakes like this happen, want things to be smooth without disturbances or unnecessary turn of events
      • Professional: wanting their next paycheck, getting their job done every day, moving on to the next task with the kids

Step 4: Formulate alternative solutions

  1. Solution: Jack can purchase four presents on his own for the four children who were left out
    • How does it solve the problem?:
      • No child will be upset because they did not receive a present. Also, this is what is fair because it is not fair for some kids to get presents while others do not. 
    • Pros:
      • The children will receive real presents
      • The children will be more positive with Jack
      • The children will be happy
    • Cons: 
      • The children will not receive the same public treatment as the other kids which was part of why they became upset – they still are probably wondering why there was a delay for them to receive toys
      • Jack has to pay out of his own pocket for the toys
      • The other kids might see this as special treatment
      • Have to be careful of precedents you set because the kids/staff may start expecting this from you regularly
      • The staff might feel uncomfortable if Jack does not tell them, almost going behind their backs
    • How does it save face of those involved?: 
      • Jack helps the youth center staff save face by fixing the problem they made, and also saves his own face since the kids won’t blame him anymore for not getting gifts, since he initially took credit for getting them
      • Jack also saves face for the kids who didn’t get presents as they will not be seen as different from the other kids anymore
    • Implications on relationships:
      • Short Term: Kids will be happy they got gifts and will approve of Jack
      • Long Term: Youth staff might appreciate Jack more for helping solve the problem, Jack saves his own face and the kids end up liking him more
    • Implications on the venture:
      • Short Term: Jack will restore his standing in the eyes of the kids and have an easier time as a worker and maintain his job in the venture
      • Long Term: This is a very minuscule problem as it is overlooked by the workers and only affects a small portion of the kids. It will most likely be forgotten and have no effect in the long term of Jack’s stay.
  1. 2. Jack can designate children to partner up and/or share their toys since they live there; promote it as a community donation of gifts everyone can use
    • How does it solve the problem?:
      • It ensures that no child is forgotten and they can access all and any of the toys they want to play with.
    • Pros:
      • Promotes sharing and socialization among the kids
      • They live there so it will be easy for them to share
      • The kids can play with multiple toys; maybe they weren’t particularly interested in the individual gift they were given at first and wanted to play with someone else’s
    • Cons: 
      • The initial four kids left out will probably still be upset they didn’t have a gift given directly to them
      • It could seem that the children are having their toys taken away from them after they were gifted
      • Could lead to more fighting over toys than was anticipated with the original issue
    • How does it save face of those involved?: 
      • All of the kids will be able to play with all of the various toys; no kid gets left out 
      • No one has to pay extra money for more gifts
      • The kids won’t think Jack forgot to buy gifts (they’ll  forget), and the donors won’t have to worry about not getting enough in the first place
    • Implications on relationships:
      • Short Term: The students will be happy with Jack since they can all play with every gift
      • Long Term: The workers may feel like Jack is too controlling in the moment unless he asks for help / or, they will think he is very adaptable 
    • Implications on the venture
      • Short Term: Jack will have a good experience with the kids since he was able to find a solution that made them happy fast 
      • Long Term: The workers might be wary of Jack because he made a big decision without consulting them, but there is also the possibility they would forget about it. They could also see him as a problem solver and quick adapter. This is a very circumstantial implication, since we don’t really know how the workers will react.

 

  1. 2. 3. Reach out to donor organization and see if they can accommodate these four students
    • How does it solve the problem?
      • This approach will allow every student to get a gift, without Jack or anyone else having to pay money out of their own pockets. 
    • Pros: 
      • Jack would not have to pay for the gifts 
      • The kids will hopefully receive gifts 
      • The integrity of the youth center can be upheld because Jack saves face as well as the youth organization
    • Cons: 
      • The kids will not receive the recognition
      • It might take time before the kids can receive the gifts
      • The organization might feel attacked and will not want this information about a possible mistake getting out to the public
    • How does it save face of those involved?: 
      • All the kids will get toys
      • The kids that do not have toys will feel happier
      • Jack/the youth center will be seen in a positive light by the kids
    • Implications on relationships:
      • Short Term: Puts stress on Jack’s relationships with his coworkers as they might feel he is taking things to extremes and they might discourage his efforts. Also, this creates a lot of unanticipated work for the donor organization who would think their job is done already.
      • Long Term: If all goes smoothly the workers and organization will most likely forget about Jack’s action as it is a small problem that was hopefully handled well.
    • Implications on the venture
      • Short Term: Jack’s co-workers might be upset with his extreme efforts and be less kind to him as a result. The organization might give Jack a hard time, adding to the work and stress on his stay.
      • Long Term: Jack’s coworkers will forget the incident with time and go back to their original impressions. The organization will be more wary about their donation if they choose to work with Jack and his youth center again.

 

Step 5: Seek additional assistance, as appropriate – engineering codes of ethics, previous cases, peers, reliance on personal experience, inner reflection, etc. 

  • Ethics
    • Injustice – it is unfair that not everyone got a regular gift. Who is to say one child is more deserving than another?
  • Peers
    • Working with a student group of 4, we discussed these three approaches and realized that there is no simple answer. The best methods we decided were between approaches 1 and 2, but we still did not think it would be good for Jack to have to deal with the awkward conversation of discussing the payment of the new gifts with the youth center
  • Previous cases
    • In the times of coronavirus, health care professionals faced the ethical dilemma of who to save due to the limited supply of ventilators. Doctors and nurses needed to accurately assess and prioritize those with the best chance of survival and use their resources accordingly. While this case is more of a life or death situation, it emphasizes that predicaments such as these can occur on any scale.

 

 

Step 6: Select the best course of action – that which satisfies the highest core ethical values. Explain reasoning and justify. Discuss your stance vis-a-vis other approaches discussed in the class. Mention also its possible negative implications.

  • The best course of action in my opinion is to distract the children momentarily with another activity and then come back to the gifts and teach them a lesson on sharing. Instead of each person exclusively having ownership of one gift, the kids will have the ability to play with any and all gifts that were donated (act like the gift is a lump sum rather than specific to each individual kid). This saves face of the youth center and Jack because now children will have access to a plethora of toys and will be encouraged to socialize and bond over playing with the toys together. 
  • This solution has the best implications for relationships and the venture because in my opinion it will illustrate to the youth center employees that Jack is flexible and can adapt well to handle situations professionally and confidently instead of giving in and going out to buy gifts himself. If he was to give in and actually buy gifts or ask the donors to send more, it may set a precedent for the children always getting what they want from him and it could create a bad pattern. 
  • This solution will take the least amount of time compared to the other approaches because both of the other approaches will involve getting money and going to a store – being that it is faster the kids will be happier quicker which is always a good thing so no one starts crying or having a tantrum that might affect the other kids. It also is more financially sound than the other approaches because it does not require any more money to be put into gifting. 
  • This solution also gets rid of any awkwardness that might ensue if Jack had to tell the youth center he was buying more gifts with his own money or if he had to reach out to the organization to ask them to send more gifts. If he did this, this could create short and/or long term implications on his relationship with the youth center because they might think Jack thinks they are being bad workers and that Jack has to fix their mess for them.
  • This solution leads to a win-win for all stakeholders because it quickly deflects the problem and allows kids to have even more options for toys than they had before. They also all live in the youth center, so all the toys will be readily available for them to play with. 
  • A shortcoming of this approach is that some kids may fight over the toys. However, sharing is a necessary skill taught to children of all ages so it is good that they are getting exposed to a more friendly and welcoming environment that shares with one another. This approach is also less personalized than each child receiving individual gifts, but it’s better than fully neglecting the four kids that did not get presents. 
  • This is also what people do at daycare centers in the US- when centers such as these receive gift donations, no one’s name is given exclusively to the gift for kids to have ownership of one gift- rather, all the kids play together with the toys and have the ability to rotate which toys they want to play with. This also stimulates their brains more since some toys such as musical instruments can enhance hand-eye coordination and toys such as soccer balls can improve kids’ motor skills. Their developmental progression may be enhanced with exposure to more toys. 

Step 7: Step by step implementation: List the sequence of actions you will take to implement your solution. 

  • Talk to staff about the idea. This is absolutely crucial because Jack does not want to overstep any boundaries with this set of stakeholders.
  • Upon approval, have the kids stop what they are doing and go in another room to do a math/science/some educational exercise. Depending on their age, this deflection of time could make the kids forget they even had presents in the first place.
  • Upon returning back to the toys after a short while, explain that the toys are actually for everyone. Start playing with other employees of the youth center to demonstrate the fun of playing with toys together. Promote activities that get the kids to share, such as playing dollhouse if some of them have dolls, dress-up, etc.  This step involves all the stakeholders together coming in harmony to simply enjoy and be grateful for gifts that everyone can have access to. 
  • Everyone’s face is saved because there is no need to go out and buy more gifts and the kids are happy and more social with one another. The situation is not worsened; rather it illustrates to the youth center that Jack is really flexible and can adapt professionally to unforeseen situations. 

Semester 2: Blog Post 2

Prompt:

Lesotho is a small developing country contained within South Africa. You and your team of academic researchers (10 in all) are spending the next two weeks travelling to different communities throughout Lesotho to test water sources for disease-causing pathogens. The testing you need to do is simple but requires significant assistance from the community – showing your team all the different locations where individuals get their water from, and places/methods for storing the water. You do not see the need to pay the community members, considering if someone asked you about your water source, you would not mind driving them up to the lake! The ultimate goal of the project is to understand the lifecycle and characteristics of a specific pathogen, which is found only in this region of Lesotho. Several publications are expected from this research study. A comprehensive profile of this pathogen can help in many ways including development of chemical additives to make the water safe to drink. Is it ethical to conduct this research study? What will you do next?

Step 1: A) Determine the facts

  • I am an academic researcher expecting several publications out of the research study in Lesotho, a small developing country contained within South Africa.
  • There are clear signs that Lesotho water has disease causing pathogens, which is a major risk to the people of Lesotho’s well-being.
  • Their methods for storing water are different, uncommon, and less safe compared to conventional methods the research team practices in their home country. 
  • Driving the community members up the lake in exchange for information is considered good enough payment – they do not expect actual pay. In some form this could be taking advantage since the people of Lesotho may not realize that they deserve to pay for their efforts and contributions to the research.
  • We need to rely heavily on indigenous knowledge to move towards a clear problem statement or solution – without this knowledge, the research will not be worth publishing.
  • The research team and I are experts in pathogen/disease research, and our research is likely funded by an outside source such as a university/lab/government that expects a publication with a clear outcome.
  • We are hoping that the chemical additives will make the water safer to drink, but there will be costs involved that we are unsure the people of Lesotho can afford. 
  • We are assuming all IRB certifications have been obtained. 
  • We are assuming we would get assistance from the local community but who is to say they will be willing to participate?
  • There may be implications of not being able to complete the study (funding, brand, relationships may be affected) – to avoid this, ahead of time, we should do more research on stakeholders and attempt to connect with them. 

Step 1: B) Clearly state the ethical issues

  • The first ethical issue encountered is: the pathogen only affects a small region out of the entire world; should we concentrate our efforts on diseases that only affect a few people, or on diseases that are widespread and affect a large-scale of people?
  • The second ethical issue encountered is: the research team is relying heavily on indigenous knowledge of the people of Lesotho. They are the true contributors to the content of the publication, yet they are receiving no incentives for sharing the valuable knowledge they possess. 
  • The third ethical issue encountered is: (In my opinion) we are not being transparent about what we are doing in Lesotho. The people might be so eager to help us because they are expecting us to have a clear solution for them to use right away by the end of our time here. We need to give them more of an education and background on what we are doing and what we hope to accomplish.

Steps 2 & 3: Define the stakeholders and assess their motivations

  • Local water company
    • Get out product/earn revenue
    • Help those patients involved
  • Funding agency – University/lab/government 
    • Treat spread of disease
    • Reputation of gaining academic knowledge on pathogen
    • Funding agency will have their name attached to the possible solution
    • More advertising – want to be a world leader in the field – want to build up their brand
    • More partners
  • Research team
    • Help patients involved
    • Further their career and potentially make money 
    • Earn more money to continue doing research and get continuous funding
    • Credibility, brand, and reputation boost
  • Local people
    • Create healthier living environment 
    • Have safer water to drink
    • Lessen the risk of contracting a disease-causing pathogen
    • Excitement to learn and socialize – but their vulnerability may result in wanting you to hear what you want to hear – they do not want to come off as ignorant – they may reinforce your ideas because they think you’re smart and want to agree. On the other hand, some may be weary to trust an outsider so make sure you talk to the right people 
    • Negotiating entry
  • Tertiary Stakeholder Hospital/ health care workers (third party to the solution in its direct implications)
    • Treat people with the illness
    • Make sure hospital isn’t always at capacity – prevent future cases
    • Can devote their resources to other fatal and urgent cases 
  • Academic Journal
    • Getting new and credible information that will better their reputation and add to their plethora of knowledge
    • Enhancement of their brand – they want to conduct this research first and say they were the first to find information about an area people didn’t know much about
  • Yourself (Researcher)
    • Help local communities involved
    • (Hopefully) Actual interest/passion for social impact 
    • Understand the lifecycle and characteristics of the pathogen and the chemical
    • Boost credentials with multiple publications
    • Maintain your job and further career

 

Step 4: Formulate alternative solutions

  • Send prepaid sampling supplies and provide incentives to the people to gather water samples/take surveys seeing where people get water from
    • Pros: Save travelling expenses; allows us to test the water in our labs which probably have more resources  
    • Cons: Samples could be taken incorrectly; shipping could take long creating a bottleneck in the research process; we will have the water, but not the background information and statistics on where it was obtained and how many other people also collect water from this area
    • Principle:  It’s better to incentivize the locals to do the work for the research team and help send the samples to us; justice because both parties are receiving benefits; duty-based thinking: not lying/withholding information from the local people – paying them because they deserve it
  • To find water sources on our own without any local assistance 
    • Pros: Removes ethical dilemma regarding incentivizing the community; reduces costs
    • Cons: could be gathering water where they do not drink from;  could take much longer than if you asked the community; compromises validity on whether or not I’m taking water from the right place
    • Principle: virtue-based thinking: keeping my integrity and not taking advantage of the people of Lesotho; honesty, individual responsibility
  • Give the people of Lesotho a blueprint on how to move forward with what we found; how they can progress with our research findings to stay healthy and lessen the risk of getting the pathogen – and then ultimately make publication available to people here  
    • Pros: more time to find other methods; being upfront with what was accomplished
    • Cons: they may not understand the publication if complex calculations and graphs are involved; they also may not have any tangible benefit from the research right away
    • Principle: honesty/transparency; care-based thinking: want to keep a good relationship
  • Have community health workers travel with you during your field work so that there is a trusted person with you to help prevent push back
    • Pros: would lessen the chance of push back; allows for consistent data flow which increases validity; creates a benefit to the people of Lesotho because their water is consistently being tested which will mitigate the risks of them contracting the disease
    • Cons: would have to spend more money on bringing that health care worker along and providing frequent tests
    • Principle: consequence-based thinking: produces the greatest overall good for those affected, most amount of benefits to the most stakeholders 

Step 5: Seek additional assistance, as appropriate – engineering codes of ethics, previous cases, peers, reliance on personal experience, inner reflection, etc. 

  • Previous cases – https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6521341/, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4077002/
    • Although this disease-causing pathogen is specific to the area of Lesotho, reading the materials and methods of other research publications could be beneficial before going there. See if there is any mention of how to get the people in the area involved and if they were compensated for their work; if they were compensated, see if there is any mention of the amount that they were paid.
    • One article mentions: The relationship between E. coli counts in drinking water and type of water sources used by households and views of households on neighbourhood open defecation, hygiene practices, livestock faeces and latrine detections in proximity to water sources were analysed
      • These factors could serve as a basis of your research study. If possible, conduct stakeholder interviews regarding these factors before getting to Lesotho
  • Research on the Belmont Report/other ethical standards within the research sector
    • The section on justice mentions that one person should not receive benefits while the other subject does not – this is seen as injustice. Without paying the people of Lesotho or giving them any sort of tangible benefit from my research, I as a researcher am committing an act of injustice. 
  • Inner reflection
    • Research should not be about getting your name out there and building your credibility as a professional – it should come from a deep passion for helping others. Therefore, it is important to focus on the ethical issues involved in research rather than just the research itself. Even if people are not expecting to be compensated, ethically, they deserve to be because otherwise they are not receiving any benefit. We are simply conducting research – a final product on enhancing water quality will not be established for some time, so in the meantime the least they deserve is compensation.

Step 6: Select the best course of action – that which satisfies the highest core ethical values. Explain reasoning and justify. Discuss your stance vis-a-vis other approaches discussed in the class. 

  • The best course of action is to designate community health workers that will work with my research team during and after fieldwork so that there is a trusted person acting as a representative in Lesotho for us full-time. The compensation will go to them and their team, and the people in the community will benefit from the consistent testing of their water. The funding source will have confidence knowing that the research is always progressing and that the data collected updated and analyzed on a routinely basis. This will ensure consistency and reliability of the study. 
  • This solution offers the most benefits to the most amount of stakeholders – the community will know how clean their water is, the community health workers are receiving compensation, and hospitals will be less bombarded with people that have the disease. Other solutions are not as ethical because the people do not receive any tangible benefits and with other approaches the data might end up being misconstrued.
  • When keeping a solution in mind you want to keep it practical and efficient. The study needs to be done correctly in order for the research to be successful, and other solutions such as giving them prepaid test kits could risk the validity of the entire project.

Step 7: (If applicable) What are the implications of your solution on the venture. Explain the impact of your proposed solution on the venture’s technology, economic, social and environmental aspects. 

Impact on technology aspect: The consistent research by the community health workers will hopefully lead to a technology that can be used to treat people in this area. This technology could potentially treat other areas where water contamination is an issue too. Although this is the long-term goal of the research, the technology could have negative implications if used incorrectly. For example, if a chemical is created to clean the water, the people there have to be sure to measure the correct amount of the chemical, otherwise it may do more harm than good. Additionally, we do not know the costs of the technology and if people of Lesotho are going to be able to afford it. 

Impact on economic aspect: If the technology is implemented, the Lesotho government or an outside business can capitalize on it, which will spark their economy. Cleaner water could also result in more tourism and could contribute to the economy as well. Alternatively, if the government is controlling, they may price it highly and not make it accessible to everyone.

Impact on social aspect: Socially, the research team benefits the most because they are able to build their credibility through these numerous publications. On the other hand, the people of Lesotho are used to their culture and their own conventional way of living. They may not want things to be changed and they may not even be willing to use the new technology; they also may not trust us since we are foreign to them.

Impact on environmental aspect: The solution will likely involve adding chemicals to the water to make it safe to drink. However, the wildlife in the water may not be able to withstand living in the water with chemicals present, especially if too much of the chemicals get added – which could also affect the nearby plants and animals if there is runoff. If used properly or if the research team goes a different route to create some sort of filtration system that does not require chemicals, the people of Lesotho will be healthier as well as the wildlife present in their water.