Problem Statement: Jack is an American student who lived at a youth center in Kenya while working on a social venture. In this role, he lived and interacted with the children at the center and worked closely with the staff. One Saturday evening, kids under the age of 14 years were to receive presents that were sent by an international donor organization. A staff member at the youth center had picked up all the gifts the previous weekend and they were finally going to be distributed this Saturday. When it came time to give the gifts out after dinner, the staff members called Jack up to the front – as he was a guest – to assist in the gift-giving ceremony. The staff members had allocated the gifts for the children and labelled them – Jack’s job was to hand out the gifts to the kids. The only problem was that four children did not receive gifts and the staff members did not appear to be concerned about the four forgotten children. As kids began leaving the hall, they thanked Jack for the gifts. The kids were convinced that Jack had gotten the gifts for them. Jack felt a little awkward but at the same time reflected that a good relationship with the kids would help him in several ways during his five-month stay at the center. 

At the bottom of the boxes containing the gifts, there were a few black hats. The kids that did not get a present were brought over to the box and given a hat. However, they were upset about the fact that they were not given the hat as ceremoniously as the other kids. The staff gave them their hat and shooed them on their way as if they had some fault in this situation. As one of the little boys who did not receive a gift left the hall, he walked past Jack holding his black hat, and gave him a stare that clearly indicated that he blamed Jack for not receiving a gift. Jack met with the staff and discussed how the four kids were very upset and felt ‘left out’ after the incident. The staff did not acknowledge the problem and were a little piqued that they were being blamed for such a trivial matter. They were convinced that Jack was making a big deal out of the situation and were concerned that Jack would become a ‘children’s rights activist’ and create unnecessary problems for them. The only response they gave Jack was – “If you think there is a problem, then you go ahead and solve it”. If you were Jack, how would you proceed? 

Step 1: Determine the facts in the situation – obtain all of the unbiased facts possible. Clearly state the ethical issue.

• Jack, an American student, is a guest at a youth center in Kenya that is helping in giving out gifts during the ceremony
• Kids in the youth center are expecting gifts, the left out kids believe they are equally deserving of gifts
• Four children did not receive gifts, and with their level of maturity at this age, it is assumed that they will not be able to realize that it was a mistake.
• After the staff distributed the black hats, they did not further respond to the children who we assume are still upset from not receiving gifts.
• The kids blamed Jack for not getting gifts, even though the staff allocated the donated gifts.
• Jack discussed with the staff the kids felt upset and left out, but they didn’t acknowledge the problem at all and believed it was Jack’s problem
• Jack wants to accommodate the kids who did not receive gifts, but this may be a part of Kenyan, or the youth center’s culture, where some kids do not receive gifts.
• It is assumed that the black hat is not as good, or as special of a present as the other gifts

When Jack told the staff the children were disappointed, they did not seem to care. Jack implicitly took some credit for getting the gifts, even though he did not contribute to the gifts, which is why he took the blame. Now, Jack has to figure out how to solve the problem.

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

• Jack:
  • Personal: Jack believes the kids who did not get gifts need to be compensated better, unlike the staff; wants to maintain amiable relationships with the kids and staff, wants to do something for the kids
  • Professional: wants to continue his social work at the youth center, does not want to upset the staff nor the children, wants to save face
• The four children who did not receive presents:
  • Personal: Unhappy with their gifts, they believe Jack is to blame for this. They may be made fun of for not getting a gift, although it was an accident. They want to be included.
  • Professional: Children do not have professional motivations
• The children who received presents:
  • Personal: Happy to get a good gift, they believe Jack is a great person for “getting them” their gift
  • Professional: Children do not have professional motivations
• The Staff
  • Personal: Trying to save face by keeping blame on Jack. Many of the staff members grew up in the center themselves so they have personal ties to the center/families.
  • Professional: wanting their next paycheck, getting their job done every day. They do not want Jack to get out of control with his savior complex and they want to work within their limits.

Step 4: Formulate (at least three) alternative solutions – based on information available, using basic ethical core values as guide 

• Potential solution 1: Have a private (calm) discussion with the staff members involved being honest in a respectful manner. Kindly remind them what the big goal is, (the kids), and the best way to go about things
  • Ethical Principle or code
    • Fidelity and Responsibility, Justice, Respect for Persons and Dignity
  • Pros 
    • Private setting and calm environment allow for civilized, honest discussion
    • Hopefully will allow for a diplomatic, calm resolution
    • Stern reminder of nature of venture and that tension will only impede that goal
  • Cons 
    • Invitation to a private conversation could be seen as threatening
    • The kids still may not understand the problem and may still be upset
    • This does not directly help the fact that four kids did not get gifts and will feel neglected.

Implications on relationships/venture:

• • • • Short Term: Hopefully this will result in less tension between the staff and Jack and the children and Jack. This would be a good move for the youth center overall, but may be frowned upon in the short term.
      • Long Term: This conversation will hopefully lead to a long term solution that will satisfy all parties involved. Everyone’s voice can be heard in this discussion. 

2. Reach out to a donor organization like WHO and see if they can get gifts for the students

• • Pros: 
    • Jack would not have to pay for the gifts 
    • The kids would receive gifts 
    • The integrity of the youth center can be as Jack can save face, and the kids would no longer blame Jack
  • Cons: 
    • The gifts may not be personalized for the kids
    • It would take time for the kids to receive the gifts
    • The four gifts are not that costly. The organization may not uphold this request because of the lack of relevance and cost.
  • Implications on relationships/venture:
    • Short Term: Jack’s relationship with the staff may be tarnished due to his extreme efforts to get the children gifts. This would also be extra work for the donor organization which they may be unhappy about. However, everyone saves face overall
    • Long Term: In the long term, Jack solved a small problem for the youth center, and the staff will end up being grateful.

• Potential solution 3: Jack can purchase four presents on his own for the four children who were left out
  • Pros:
    • The children will get their presents
    • The children will continue their positive relationship with Jack
  • Cons: 
    • The children will not receive the same public receiving of the gifts like the other kids.
    • Jack has to pay out of his own pocket for the toys, which is a con for Jack
    • The other kids might see this as special treatment
    • The staff might feel uncomfortable if Jack does not tell them, feel as if he is taking matters into his own hands.
  • Implications on relationships/ venture:
    • Short Term: Kids will be happy they got gifts. Jack helps the youth center save face by fixing the problem. He will also not receive the blame anymore.
    • Long Term: Youth staff might appreciate Jack more for helping solve the problem, but this is not guaranteed, Jack saves his own face and the kids end up liking him more. The kids who did not receive presents will no longer feel excluded.

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

• Ethics Principles (autonomy, non-maleficence, beneficence, justice, and fidelity)
  • The kids without presents are being unjustly treated in comparison 
  • The Engineering Code of Ethics does not apply here
• Inner Reflection: If I put myself in a kid’s shoes, I know that I would feel excluded if I did not receive a gift. I would feel as if I did something wrong. 
• Golden Rule: Treat others the way you want to be treated. As an extension of Inner Reflection, you would feel neglected if you were one of few who did not receive a gift

Step 6: Select the best course of action – that which satisfies the highest core ethical values. 

Best Solution: Combination of 1 and 2 or 3. The staff and children should be explained of the problem, and should have an open conversation about the solution. Jack can purchase the four gifts himself, or a donor organization could pay for the gifts. This is the long term goal. In the short term, Jack can wear the black hat in order to make the four kids feel included in a group.

This is the best solution (ethically and tangibly) because:

1. Kids that were neglected are given both an explanation and a comparable gift (Justice, Respect for Persons and Dignity). This means that they obtain a valuable learning experience and will eventually receive a gift.
2. The stakeholder relationship with the staff  is re-established and tension is diplomatically resolved (Fidelity and Responsibility)
3. A long term solution, not just a band aid fix
4. All stakeholders are satisfied, able to apologize and explain while allowing stakeholders to save face

Some Consequences may entail;

1. It may be incredibly difficult to get in contact with an organization who would donate toys to Kenya or even for Jack to get toys himself of the center is remote and far away from anywhere that would sell toys (However, in this case, he could make toys out of wood) 
2. Depending on the cost of the gifts, Jack may have to pay a significant amount out of pocket.
3. The ROI may not be worth it if using the donor funding route
4. The social impact of getting toys for the kids would be positive. The economic and environmental impact variable is negligible.

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

1. Find another donation center or pay out of pocket for 4 comparable gifts
2. Give to 4 children and explain that no one was meant to get hurt, it was an honest mistake and all parties are sorry while giving them some sort of public recognition without it seeming forced or special.
3. Mention the resolved situation and outcome to the staff members and have a diplomatic conversation to settle tensions and create a better understanding for the future
4. With these steps, all stakeholders have a clear understanding of the situation and next steps to solve the problem if it were to happen again.