Case Study: Grassroots Diplomacy 

Emma Clopton 

1.List the facts: 

1. Jack is an American student who lived at a youth center in Kenya for 5 months 
2. Kids under the age of 14 were to receive presents from an international donor organization 
3. Staff members allocated Jack to hand out gifts 
4. Four children did not receive gifts and staff members did not care about them
5. Kids blame Jack for lack of presents 
6. Kids who did not get gifts were given hats
7. Jack cares for the relationship with the children
8. Jack talked to staff and they told Jack to deal with the issue and to not be a children’s rights activist 

 

2. Define the problem

Not all of the children received gifts and the staff members seemed to not care about it, meanwhile Jack is extremely uncomfortable not giving gifts to all of the children because it made them feel unequal. Now the blame is placed on Jack and staff members could care less. 

 

3. Define the stakeholders and their professional and personal motivations

1. The children 
   1. Want to all receive the ceremonious gifts, seek fairness
   2. No professional motivations 
2. International Donor Organization 
   1. Personal motivation: Provide gifts for all of the children and improve their quality of life 
   2. Professional motivation: maintain good rapport with the youth center 
3. Jack 
   1. Personal motivation: Have a good relationship with the children and the staff
   2. Professional motivation: maintain good relationship with the staff and children and complete his work with few hurdles. 

1. Staff Members 
   1. Personal motivation: get paid 
   2. Professional motivation: maintain a good reputation for the youth center and also let Jack do the work to avoid blame/conflict. 

4. Formulate alternative solutions 

 

1. Jack should tell the children what happened and heal the misunderstood relationship
   1. Jack can mend his relationship with the children by telling them up front what happened. This can help Jack not receive the blame for trying to be a part of a ceremonious event innocently. This also will help the children understand the situation and why there was a lack of presents and that there was no intention of them being slighted. 
      1. Pros: The blame is off of Jack; children will understand the situation and receive an apology; Jack saves face for himself because he rebuilds trust with the children. 
      2. Cons: Blame will be turned onto the staff/youth center and donor for not having the adequate amount of gifts; this won’t solve the problem of having no tangible gift for the children who were left out; staff/youth center will be upset with Jack for making them look bad. 
   2. Implications on relationships 
      1. Short-term: Jack will mend his relationship with the children by telling them the truth
      2. Long-term: Could damage the relationship with the staff members because the blame is turned on to them and the youth center at large
   3. Implications on the venture: 
      1. Short-term: preserve his credibility of his work amongst the children
      2. Long-term: lose credibility of his work amongst staff members and youth center; reputation of the youth center and donor organization could be shattered. 

1. Jack should contact the donor organization to provide more gifts
   1. By Jack contacting the donor organization, he is being proactive in ensuring that all the children get the same gift and that the organization also is aware of the mistake. This leaves the careless staff unbothered, save face for Jack, and give everyone the same gift. 
      1. Pros: in the long-run everyone will be happy; Jack saves face for himself; staff are not offended; reputation of youth center is not impacted; donor organization is aware of their mistake 
      2. Cons: The four children may still feel like they were left out; students may still blame Jack for the mistake; delayed process; donor organization may not want to provide more presents due to a particular budget; costs the organization more money. 
   2. Implications on relationships: 
      1. Short-term: children may still feel left out and upset with Jack since they were still forgotten. The gift may take a bit longer to arrive, so it won’t be as meaningful to them. The children may also be upset with the donor organization that forgot the additional gifts. 
      2. Long-term: the children will eventually be happy that they receive the gift and lift the blame off of Jack since he went to resolve the problem. 
   3. Implications on venture: 
      1. Short-term: children will be upset at not only Jack, but the youth center and donor organization about the mishap. This may infringe on their trust with the center. 
      2. Long-term: staff members can continue to be careless for the students beyond Jack’s time there; Jack’s relationship with the youth center is not damaged; the reputation of the youth center is not going to be damaged after resolving the issue. 
2. Jack can show off the black hat as if it was equivalently valuable to the other present 
   1. By Jack showing off the black hat and making it seem super special, the four kids will feel valued and not left out. Also, this helps mend any relationship/trust issues between the kids and Jack. 
      1. Pros: does not slight the organization or youth center; no issues with the staff; makes children feel special and their gift is meaningful because Jack made it look cool and have value; children will feel like the presents are fair; saves face for Jack because he fixes the problem for the children without adding any additional expenses for the donor organization and does not create any issues/points any fingers at people responsible. 
      2. Cons: Other children who received the original gift may feel like theirs is not as special as the hats since Jack is making them seem so valuable; donor organization won’t know of their mistake; staff members do not take any responsibility for caring about the four children 
   2. Implications on relationships: 
      1. Short term: children who were given the original gift may now feel not as special as those who receive the hats, especially because Jack made them feel so particularly valuable. 
      2. Long-term: the children will most likely forget about this and Jack will have managed to keep everyone happy and not create any issues with the staff/youth center as well as call out the donor organization for the mistake 
   3. Implications on venture: 
      1. Short term: all stakeholders are happy and/or unbothered with this decision. 
      2. Long term: staff members can continue to fail to care or help the children like their job entails, causing potential problems like this to happen again. Jack will not be there to cover up the problems. 

 

5. Seek additional assistance

From personal experience, dealing with my baby cousins during play time can get a bit difficult. They often get really upset when they do not have a turn playing with a certain toy and yell at each other. Having to step in, I come up with ways to keep both of them happy and sharing toys fairly. I would try to grab another toy and make it seem super cool and ask to have a playtime buddy. This immediately gets whoever is upset at the time distracted and excited to have and play with something else. This keeps both happy and not jealous of each other. 

6. Select the best course of action 

The best course of action would be for Jack to makeshift a solution and turn the black hats from being a last minute gift to something special to the children. This will save face for Jack across all parties, keeping children happy as well as the staff and donor organization. 

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

1. Converse with the staff that giving the hats to the children won’t bring up any issues
2. Compliment the children who have the hats and make them feel valued
3. Share stories about similar ones in stores in the US and also ask to try on the hat to make the children feel confident.