ejt221's Blog

1. I am a first generation Asian American that seeks to improve the lives of others and inspire more to do the same through my diverse skills and interests, including psychology, medicine, as well as music. I am a scientist, a musician, and a humanitarian.

I believe I was put on this earth to:

I don’t really believe I was put on this Earth for any specific reason.

My purpose is to:

Live morally and love others.

I believe (my core values):

The purpose of life is not to perpetually serve yourself.

We are all responsible for uplifting those in need.

Healthcare is a human right.

The one thing I must do before I die is:

See my parents proud of the person I’ve become.

My advocates and supporters all believe I:

Will make a real difference in others’ lives someday.

The evil I want to eradicate in this world is:

Laissez-faire capitalism.

I want to work in order to:

Achieve financial independence by means of public service.

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:

I don’t always do anything. I am a human being with imperfections. But, I strive to always empathize with those that I meet, see things from their perspective before passing any judgment or being quick to demonize. I also try to always consider the impact of my behavior. If not before I act, which is obviously preferred, then I will do so after the fact, to understand all implications on others as well as myself.

Again, I am not always successful, but recognizing when I am not and truly committing to preventing that mistake is the best that I can do.

I never:

See anyone as inherently good or bad, or inherently anything for that matter. This line of thinking plays a huge role in dividing social groups, providing an excuse to exploit those deemed inherently different or to bestow upon oneself a higher inherent value. The interpretation of what is good and what is bad is far too subjective and the labeling of such is most often used to divide.

My work style is:

Goal-oriented but not time-constrained. I find that if I set goals for myself which are meaningful and not trivial, that alone is enough to motivate me to achieve them. I mostly only do things that will further my big life goals, so even the most trivial, seemingly unrelated tasks contribute to my growth in some way and thus, always frame goals to remind myself of that. However, when put under a time-constraint, my work suffers, as my anxiety skyrockets before the countdown even beings, and my thoughts will be scattered and poorly expressed–most of the time, not even retrievable. In my anxious state, I often cannot even remember why I am doing what I am doing and am highly susceptible to self-doubt.

I try to treat people:

As I myself would like to be treated.

I approach problems by:

Considering all pathways and/or perspectives and all implications of each.

Victories are time to:

Celebrate for a few moments, and then see how you can move forward from there.

If another attacks my point of view I:

Ask them to have as open a dialogue as our temperaments allow, and if all goes awry before a mutual understanding can even be reached, cut the conversation short and move along.

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

It really depends on what it is that I am fundamentally disagreeing with. If it’s a matter that doesn’t impart negative consequences onto anyone but the actor, I will do nothing. Live and let live. However, if it does involve the exploitation of others, I will voice that opinion loudly and proudly (respectfully). I will not support that organization or that person and I sure as hell will not associate with them.

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.

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.

By: Diagnosing Autism Team

GSIF System

• Our system depicts the complex relationship of the GSIF and Lehigh partnership. It is complex as many stakeholders and partners are included in the system for every piece to be successful. 

• Lehigh began by hiring Khanjan who leverages his connections with organizations (e.g., World Hope International) across the Lehigh Valley and the globe (e.g., Sierra Leone, Philippines) to develop the opportunities to travel and help others. 
• These opportunities then provide phenomenal, hands-on learning experiences for students where they would never have the chance to do so before. This amplifies the already high respect and caliber of Lehigh University. This only increases as the GSIF ventures show success and prove their worth at the university. 
• Through these organizations (e.g., World Hope), the Office of Creative Inquiry, and Lehigh, all stakeholder benefit and strengthen their sector of the world in a positive way. 
• The learning process is cyclical in that we must constantly learn from our mistakes and achievements. 
• Because we are essentially responsible for the design, implementation, and upholding partnerships, we must hold accountability for our wins and losses within the process as we are dealing with real people in real situations. Thus, we are forced to learn to see things in as many perspectives as possible to ensure we are going about things the right way. There is far more at stake than completing an assignment for a grade.

Traditional Classroom System

• As a simple and direct model, this system is linear and does not provide the depth of knowledge or experience gained in hands-on experience. Further, it does not lead students to become better global citizens nor does it allow for creativity as syllabus and courses are structured to meet specific learning objectives that cannot be diverted from. No partnerships are made, the applications of the material learned in class are theoretical (versus real world) and hold no accountability.

Link to visual: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1E35ATVep8yRHpWE6Jr9Idk_49tu9Xrpc/view?usp=sharing

The recording behind the figures is linked here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1P5nEi6k9h0AOwLOxUp3RdgkMGKpGmHal/view?usp=sharing

let me know if it doesnt work!

Link to visual:

currentsytem (1)

Emily Tasik & Tommy Persaud

1. 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.

Our proposed solution would start by erasing the existing payroll database and start anew. To create the new database, we would require a check in at least three times a day. Employees will  check in with a designated staff member at each police base/region for verification. They will report their activities and location throughout the day. Based on these check-ins, a person would be added to the database. This in turn should establish a database composed only of the active policemen. The money that was previously being paid to these ghost people can thus be redirected to paying the aforementioned designated staff member, who will continue overseeing the check-ins (reduce corruption) and who will serve as a role which others can seek to work up to (boost morale). It can also be allocated toward yearly bonuses that are directly measured by progress and achievements. It might also be possible to have more community outreach to build the relationship between the policemen and the community they are protecting. This results in less fear and more trust, and thus, more cooperativity during times of duress or high stakes crime.  

This approach embodies the tenet of regulation: a process of ensuring intrinsic feedback to bring about desired operation of the system so as to meet the desired goals. Having someone be a supervisor that all must respond to allows for a system with checkpoints and feedback at every level of supervision. With that being said, the tenet of leverage points is also utilized in that these small changes (check-ins) would result in a much more stable and productive police system as people are now individually held accountable for the work they do and must actively strive for progress. In a sense, equifinality is also in play when considering the trust built between policemen and community members. Through more community outreach, such relationships should grow and that newfound trust would allow for a more cooperative, larger communal system of protector and protectee. Thus, working at a greater goal of harmony and cooperation through different means. In the essence of this, multifinality also comes hand in hand as the community should ideally feel safer when they know their policemen are striving for better, are trustworthy, and are not corroborating a corrupt system. Policemen are then putting in more effort and more care in the work that they do so that they may both protect those whom they swore they would protect as well as climb the ladder for higher bonuses or ranking. 

2. 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.

The first thing the entrepreneur should do is hold a series of community meetings, or, town halls, to gage the concerns and desires of the community members since they are (or should be) major stakeholders in the business of composting their hyacinth. She should propose a number of possible solutions. She can begin with hiring more of the community members as employees to harvest and process the hyacinth. With more hands on deck, more compost and briquettes could be produced, and thus more money can be made. Since briquettes can be used as low cost heat source for cooking or home heating, and thus mass production is already a bonus in and of itself. If not enough of an incentive, community members could get a small discount for allowing access to their hyacinth. Since compost has many uses, ie. farming, she could also team up with farmers in the area to do a similar thing (use as incentive, introduce discount). In all of this, the fishermen benefit by having the lake cleaned and thus, multiple goals are met (multifinality) for the progress of one greater goal (equifinality): profit for all stakeholders and harmony while doing so. Because all would be working together (community provides employees, employees provide hyacinth profit, profit provides for the entrepreneur as well as the farmers, and families using briquettes, in addition to cleaning the lake for fishermen), the tenet of interdependence surrounding the production and distribution of hyacinth now exists as well. The community is also free from health consequences of hyacinth pollution in the lake, further satisfying the tenet of holism.

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.

Partnerships at the Individual level

• Dr. Kristi Morin
• Alyssa
• Kathleen
• Emily
• Grace
• Ted
• Lindsey
• Kelsey

Partnerships at the Team level

• Diagnosing Autism in SL research group
• Qualitative Expert: Suzanne Kucharczyk
• Khanjan Mehta
• Lehigh University

Partnerships at the GSIF level

• University of Makeni
• World Hope International
• Sierra Leone Autistic Society
• INSAR research group

List ten specific ways in which your teaming approach has changed/evolved since you started, teamwork skills you have developed, and lessons you have learned.

1.  A) Teaming Approach: All of us had individual roles and areas of expertise 
   1. B) How it has changed: We still have areas of expertise, but we have since expanded outside of our roles and have been working on various projects together outside of our expertise
   2. C) Skills Developed: Allowed us to learn multiple skills outside of our comfort zone 
   3. D) Lessons Learned: Flexibility, adaptability
2.  A) Teaming Approach: We met once a week with our faculty advisor 
   1. B) How it has changed: We still meet with our faculty advisor but now we also often meet just as a team throughout the week  and frequently text each other about the work instead of waiting for the next meeting to bring something up
   2. C) Skills Developed: Learned independence in regards to managing our work on our own as well as are more comfortable asking each other questions on the fly
   3. D) Lessons Learned: How to be responsible and take more initiative, teamwork
3.  A) Teaming Approach: We all met in person
   1. B) How it has changed: We are now meeting remotely only 
   2. C) Skills Developed:  Zoom efficiency
   3. D) Lessons Learned: Adapting to new circumstances
4.  A) Teaming Approach: We were not communicating as frequently as we should have 
   1. B) How it has changed: We have a group chat and often CC each other on emails 
   2. C) Skills Developed: We developed our communication skills
   3. D) Lessons Learned: Communication is key
5.  A) Teaming Approach: Our faculty advisor led our team meetings 
   1. B) How it has changed: Students now mainly lead the meetings 
   2. C) Skills Developed: Flexibility and independence 
   3. D) Lessons Learned: We work a lot better if we are primarily involved
6.  A) Teaming Approach: Member with expertise would teach concepts in a lecture type way
   1. B) How it has changed: We try to have a kind of group discussion about things and everyone tries to learn and solve certain things themselves first, then ask expert for help and we discuss it as a group
   2. C) Skills Developed: Troubleshooting, teamwork
   3. D) Lessons Learned: Try to solve problems independently and then discussing it is a much better way to learn than just regurgitating information
7.  A) Teaming Approach: Hesitation to ask for help, especially from advisor
   1. B) How it has changed: I am a lot more comfortable with my group and especially my advisor. I was scared to ask questions in case I missed the answer before or it was a “stupid question”
   2. C) Skills Developed: Self-confidence
   3. D) Lessons Learned: There is no such thing as stupid questions
8.  A) Teaming Approach: Since I was the qualitative expert, I focused very heavily on doing a literature search but I was blindly googling and it was very disorganized
   1. B) How it has changed: Everyone is training to be a qualitative expert now since we are working on a meta-synthesis! It is much more organized when multiple hands are on deck
   2. C) Skills Developed: Teamwork
   3. D) Lessons Learned: Working as a team reaps better results than working alone!
9.  A) Teaming Approach: We had contact with our partners on the ground in Sierra Leone 
   1. B) How it has changed: COVID and remote working has made it hard to keep in touch 
   2. C) Skills Developed: Adaptability and consideration 
   3. D) Lessons Learned: we must be adaptable to new situations and should not heavily rely on partners on the ground
10.  A) Teaming Approach: We were mostly focused on our screener 
    1. B) How it has changed: We realized that our venture needs work in other areas such as building connections, funding, just adding to the general body of work on disabilities in LMIC
    2. C) Skills Developed: Critical thinking, research design 
    3. D) Lessons Learned: Our venture does not end after we develop our screener!

Updated Collaboration Plan

What are my personal goals (small g) on this team? Pull those goals from the dreams on your individual profiles. Capture them by person in your collaborative plan. e.g., get an A, learn laser cutting, start something I can continue after the semester

My personal goals on this team are to keep learning from my teammates. I learn so much from each and every one of them and I would love to continue this! I want to grow in my research skills as my career heavily relies on it and doing so from people I am comfortable and enjoy interacting with is really the biggest personal goal I have.

What is the Project GOAL (big G) we’re all committed to achieve together?

The project GOAL for our team is to develop a culturally appropriate, highly effective Autism diagnostic screener. Throughout this process we must also be committed to finding a way to disseminate the screener, bring awareness and education on the nature of Autism, as well as providing training for community health workers throughout Sierra Leone. We also want to add the scant body of work surrounding disabilities in LMIC and are already doing this by having multiple different papers in the works.

Establish Roles – How will you leverage the assets each member brings to the team? How will you leverage the experiences each member brings to the team? How will you ensure that the team’s work gets done on time and with high quality?

• Qualitative Expert (Emily):  Responsible for the study design & approach. For example, which approach (e.g., case study, ethnography, etc), what types of data should we collect, develop protocol, how to synthesize and write up the data, develop focus group and interview questions/format. Experience in working on psychological/sociological research–both quantitative and qualitative. Collaborating on the meta-synthesis.

• IRB Expert (Alyssa): Responsible for anything & everything related to the IRB. She is the  point of contact with the University, she will write, submit, revise, and resubmit IRB,  develop consents (verbal only), and work with the qualitative expert to create data collection forms, etc. Experience in working on psychological/sociological research–both quantitative and qualitative. Alyssa also leads the meta-synthesis that our team is collaboratively working on.

• Assessment Expert (Kathleen): Responsible for main analyses on current Western assessments and screeners and will work with SPED & cultural experts to decide what questions/tasks our assessment should have, learn how to validate the assessment.Knowledge of available western screeners and experience using, scoring, and reporting these tools. Previous experience developing and validating a new measure. Psychometric expertise. Kathleen is also responsible for the psychometrics paper that our team has been working on. Collaborating on the meta-synthesis.

• SPED/ASD/Education/Healthcare Expert (Lindsey): Responsible for understandinding these facets in order to inform the team on how best to approach our goal. Will seek to answer questions like: how did we get from where we started in the US in terms of level of knowledge, awareness, and services, to where we are now? What can we do in SL to make progress in this area? What is the education structure of SL? What trainings do teachers need to be qualified to teach? What is the healthcare system like? Collaborating on the meta-synthesis.

• Cultural Expert (Grace): Responsible for thoroughly understanding the culture of Sierra Leone: its history, language, values, beliefs, geography, different districts, etc., the strengths and challenges of the people and country, and will report on current events weekly which are impacting and shaping the country. Collaborating on the meta-synthesis.

• Ted: Collaborating on the meta-synthesis.Providing collaborative help with Kathleen on the psychometric paper.

By assigning roles in this format, we can ensure that every facet of our broad and ambitious project goal is covered in depth so that we can gather data as comprehensively as possible–to form a firm foundation for our screener and education dissemination.

Establish Team Procedures Decision Making – What process shall we use: consensus, majority rules, deference to expert, default to the loudest, or? Effective Meetings – Focus on key, timely decisions together vs. status/update (offline); meeting roles: scribe, facilitator, time keeper Communication – FTF: frequency, time, location; type of technology: (Google docs, Hangout, etc.); expectations for responsiveness; ‘best time to work’ (AM, PM, weekends?)

• So far, we have not had an issue with disagreements and finding a consensus on important decisions. Thus, we will continue with our usual approach where someone proposes a question or suggestion on a problem and all are given a chance to input their own thoughts, stance, and comments so that we may discuss the most viable decision based on all the cards put forth on the table. If there is still a strong disagreement, we may consult our various experts (both team members and professional contacts) depending on the area of which the disagreement stands. We are currently meeting weekly with our teams on ZOOM to discuss the outcomes of screening abstracts for a publication. This is another example of how we work well together to resolve conflicts. If two team members disagree on an abstract or article, a professional discussion where we explain our reasoning is held. We have collaborative conversations and come to a final consensus.
• Each week we set a goal as a team. We have individual responsibilities of managing our time wisely to ensure these goals are attained by our next team meeting. We follow a pretty explicit format set forth by team leaders on how to mark items as done, your status on screening through a color coded system and open communication throughout the process. We always have a due date to have work completed by 5PM the day before our weekly team meetings so that team leaders have time to review the work to give meaningful feedback at the meeting.

1. Why can’t you use other diagnostic tools already created?
   1. They have low sensitivity and specificity rates across cultures. They are not always feasible in low income countries like Sierra Leone. Most are very expensive. For example, the GARS-3 is the cheapest price per form at $1.24. It is projected that there will be 691,034 children aged 3-5 in 2022. It would cost more than $850,000 ($856,882.16) to screen all of the children in this age range. Which is a substantial amount of money for a country where the average yearly income is $500. Lastly, most require a high level of education to be able to read and respond to the questions (6+ grade US education level), and an even higher level of education to administer, score, and interpret (master’s).
2. What are the cross cultural differences that were mentioned in your presentation that hinder current Western assessments?
   1. Current assessments are tailored to test Western populations. For example, the ADOS 2 uses the song “Happy Birthday” as an assessment tool, this may not be relevant in Sierra Leonean context. 
3. Is your screener going to be free?
   1. Our screener will be available through open access and can be used at no cost. The cost incurred will be through printing cost of the screener. 
4. What partners do you work with in Sierra Leone in order to complete your project?
   1. Thus far, our team has developed partnerships with World Hope International, Sierra Leone Autistic Society, and the University of Makeni.
5. What is your screener dissemination plan?
   1. Our team has a malleable five-year dissemination plan starting with three districts in year one of the roll out and building to 16 districts by year five. 
6. What happens after a person gets screened?
   1. As our team is still working on developing a full roll out plan, we are working with partners to determine the best plan to reduce a bottleneck of children while screening 90% of children by 2026.
7. What does validation of the screener entail? Can you describe it more in detail as well as a timeline.
   1. We’ll administer our larger pool of questions to a number of individuals when we are in the field. The specific number of children that we will be aiming for will depend on the exact number of items we have in our initial pool. Within psychometric literature the standards for the number of people you need to conduct initial validity and reliability statistics varies, but typically recommend a minimum of 300 or 10-25 per item. 
   2. After we get that initial data we’ll perform exploratory factor analysis to determine how well the items are aligning with each other, how reliable they are, and which, if any items, should be removed because they’ll improve the reliability statistics. After we narrow down the items and have our final assessment, we’ll gather additional data and perform confirmatory factor analysis tests to ensure that our initial results hold up with other individuals.
   3. If we are able to gather a large enough number of participants during our initial field work visit than we’ll be able to separate that participant pool in half and perform both the EFA and CFA with that initial data. If not, then complete validation of the tool would be completed after two fieldwork visits, or after we’ve been able to have the community health workers gather additional data. 
8. Who will give the screener in the community? 
   1. Community health workers and teachers will be trained to give the screener. Ideally, our venture aims to have 3 nurses at each healthcare facility and 3 teachers at each school trained.
9. What is your team’s plan to involve schools with your venture?
   1. Our venture plans to train at least three teachers at each school on how to give the screener. Our team also plans to work to provide training on disabilities and autism in schools interested.
10. What are a few cultural barriers that you have encountered in this venture? 
    1. The biggest obstacle for our team is the rooted cultural beliefs about disabilities. Many community members believe disabilities are from “Satan” and are contagious. Many people believe miracle clinics at churches are their only hope to be “cured”. 
11. Do you plan to involve the government of Sierra Leone in the dissemination of your screener? 
    1. We absolutely plan to involve the government of Sierra Leone in the dissemination of our screener. That is a relationship we are still attempting to build; however, once created we know their partnership will help greatly in the acceptance of the screener from the community. 
12. How do you plan on validating that the community health workers (or anyone else that will actually give the screener) are doing it correctly after you and your supervision leave?
    1. We will ensure that the CHWs are administering the screeners to the children because they will be sending data to our team. We hope that by providing specific trainings on the screener and educating the CHWs about autism, they will be administering the screener with validity. We will also have a measurement and evaluation consultant that will analyze the data and conduct observations of the CHWs administering the screener. This information will be compiled and sent to the team for review.  
13. How are children currently being screened in SL, especially with regards to attending institutions like the Sierra Leone Autistic Society? 

1. Currently Sierra Leone, as a country,  is not screening children for Autism. Our team is still looking to further communicate with our partners, the Sierra Leone Autistic Society, in order to determine what criteria is used to accept children with disabilities into their institution.

1. How do you plan on changing deeply ingrained social attitudes toward disability, especially in a scarcely populated land mass such as SL?
   1. Education on the true nature of disability will be a top priority in our screener dissemination plan. We plan on training CHWs (and educators) on not only how to administer the screener but on the basis of disability as well, so that misinformation (ie. “possession”) can be unlearned. 
   2. To ensure the spread of information through remote populations, we will be training CHWs from various regions in the country rather than only from one area. 
2. What qualifies your team to conduct this type of research?
   1. As this is our venture’s first year, we are aiming to build credibility through academic publications in peer reviewed journals as well as conference presentations to increase our qualifications and show our contribution to this field.
3. How is autism understood in Sierra Leone?
   1. Mental disabilities are not generally understood in sub-saharan Africa and the limited research previously conducted shows a negative stigma for children with disabilities, some unethical cultural practices of giving the child back to God, and the belief that these disabilities are from witchcraft and demonic possession.
4. How can you determine if this is a successful venture?
   1. We will meet our screening goals for each district (20% Y1, 40%Y2, 60% Y3, 80% Y4, and 100% Y5). The children, by the age of school age, will be screened for autism and will be referred to centers and contacts for support services for their children. 
5.  How can your project be sustainable if you are not charging the country for your materials?
   1. Our venture relies heavily on grants and donations to fund our venture. This research is a game changer for society which will excite donors and grant organizations.
6. How do you know that these are the present attitudes on disability in SL?
   1. We are in the process of publishing a manuscript where data was gathered through interviews and focus groups in 200 participants. From the analysis, we found that their perceptions on disability largely rest on spiritual, or karmic bases. 
7. Do you have any plans to use your screener outside of Sierra Leone?
   1. After the implementation of our screener in Sierra Leone, we aim to further expand its use in the surrounding nations in West Africa, and eventually throughout Sub-Saharan Africa (whom, with the exception of South Africa) are all facing a similar dilemma of a lack of understanding and attention to mental health.

Grassroot diplomacy: A set of delicate and deliberate techniques for working harmoniously and effectively with diverse entities to catalyze social change

Prompt: Grassroots Diplomacy Case 9/8/2020

Part 1: Ethical Decision-Making

Step 1: Determine the facts

•  ~35% of the children is stunted due to poor nutrition
• Traditionally, maize and bananas are the items most commonly made into gruel and fed to infants at 2 months of age
• Gruel is used to complement breastfeeding until approx. 24 months
• Mothers in East Africa believe gruel is beneficial to children, but studies show it has little nutrition
• HIV/AIDS are prevalent in the region
• World Health Organization recommends exclusive breastfeeding until infant is 6 months of age
• The longer a HIV+ mother is breastfeeding, the higher the risk of transmission
• Received grant to establish a women’s cooperative in region to improve children’s nutrition and livelihood of households
• Funds from women’s cooperative can produce a nutritiousness, shelf-stable porridge made from local produce that is intended to wean children off of breastmilk around 6 months 
• 500 women from three sublocations have indicated interest in joining cooperative, but they are skeptical about the porridge 
• Cash crops in region will be used to make the porridge, but they are grown with pesticides which can cause adverse growth for infants

1. B) Clearly state the ethical issue/issues (seesaw problem)

• Prolonged breastfeeding in the area could potentially lead to the child being transmitted of HIV virus
• Pesticides are used on many crops, and there is a possibility of pesticides being in the foods produced for infants/young children
• Not a lot of women are being tested, diagnosed or treated for viruses such as HIV/AIDS
• Early introduction of supplemental foods for infants’ diets introduces the chance of endangering the child’s health
• (Compare the harm) Traces of Pesticide VS HIV

1. C) Steps 2 & 3: Define the stakeholders and assess their motivations

• Mothers in the area
  • Personal: they want healthy babies, they do not want to spread HIV/AIDS to their babies 
  • Professional: n/a
• Members of the womens’ cooperative
  • Personal: want to provide nutritious, locally grown baby supplement to wean children off of breastfeeding at 6 months, want better livelihoods for themselves and other women, may just want to feel good about themselves, want to keep their jobs
  • Professional: may want to enter a career in this field, want this venture to be successful so that it can continue to get its funding and they can stayed employed 
• The donor (secondary bc they are not directly involved to solve this case)
  • Personal: may just want better health/livelihoods for these women, improve nutritional status of children, status of donating 
  • Professional: may be doing this to get in the public’s good graces for their career
• You (leader of cooperative) 
  • Personal: may just want better health/livelihoods for these women, improve nutritional status of children, status of building it 
  • Professional: increase skills/resume build for career, wants to push for a career in nutrition/public health
• Children (secondary)
  • Basic needs of being fed (personal motivation)

Step 4: Formulate alternative solutions

*Who’s going to pay? Would it be organizations such as WHO, health administry or etc that we can partner with? 

Community health workers or volunteers are highly needed, so it is hard to work with them in this issue, unless there is a way to incentivize them.

1. Solution: hold information sessions to show the benefits of this new supplement and the cons of the traditional method alongside trusted community members (teach them first and maybe have them be the main hosts/info givers)

• • Pros:
    • People will no longer be relying on hearsay but rather, will make an informed decision based on facts 
    • Trusted community members hosting the information session will minimize reluctance to trust new supplement
    • Babies get the nutrition needed and do not have to increase risk of hiv from prolonged breastfeeding
  • Cons: 
    • People may still be skeptical due to pesticides 
      • Show them that the risk of possible presence of pesticides does not compare to the risk of possible exposure to HIV/AIDS 
    • Pesticides still pose a real risk to the health of the baby
      • Remove crops on there that are known to commonly sprayed with pesticides and replace with other sources that specific nutrient
      • Or go to farmer that does not use pesticides and get verification to show mothers
    • How does it save face of those involved?
      • Everyone is trusted and informed
  • Implications on relationships: bond between womens cooperative and the general community will strengthen both long and short term because there is an atmosphere of communication, trust, and education
  • Implications on the venture:
    • Short Term: venture might struggle to lift off to due either misunderstand, miscommunication, or the extra time it takes to teach the community hosts as well as the mothers
    • Long Term: stronger bond centered around communication, trust, and education will allow the venture to proceed smoothly and more effectively. Community will be better informed on the science behind nutrition rather than maintaining that misinformation and us simply working around it

2. Solution: Partner up with a food distributor that does not involve or provide weaning food that has been recently sprayed with pesticides

• • How does it solve the problem?: 
    • They must have a record of when the crops were last sprayed
  • Pros: You are able to track the right timing of when the crops can be harvested, where the pesticide will not affect who consumes the product. If there is a waiting period for the pesticide to dissipate, this can help lessen the risks for children.
  • Cons: If crops now took longer to wait and harvest, this takes up time for the farmers, who just want to earn money from their crops in the market. Not all crops are completely free of pesticides, so even after a waiting period, there still may be some left
  • How does it save face of those involved?: 
    • Farmers can experience increased profits. Those consuming the crops can have a smaller intake of the pesticides. 
  • Implications on relationships:
    • Short Term: The 500 women will likely cooperate more often if they knew about the pesticide cycles.
    • Long Term: More women will begin to participate in the cooperative, once they see
  • Implications on the venture:
    • Short Term: 
    • Long Term:  

3. Solution: Sanitary efforts on the food being used to produce the porridge

• • Pros: 
    • This can help get rid of any extra traces of pesticides on the surface of the food that remains. (Ex: washing food carefully and peeling the skin of some fruit)
    • women in the coop can do it for a small incentive or we could put simple instructions on the packaging
  • Cons: 
    • more physical labor
    • more wages to pay
    • more time to spend
  • How does it save face of those involved?: 
    • Women are reassured their food is clean and the distributors do not have to be associated with pesticide
  • Implications on relationships: physical labor and cooperation can strengthen professional atmosphere of coop
  • Implications on the venture:
    • Short Term: Mothers will learn how to wash their produce carefully when they learn how to produce their own shelf-stable porridge
    • Long Term: Partnerships with local supermarkets to have commercial vegetable and fruit washes

Step 5: From the past cases, I have learned that many times honesty is the best policy to ensure a long term stable relationship. Give the consumer the benefit of the doubt (just as in the syringes) and trust that they will be responsible with the information so long as you took every precaution to ensure as such.

Step 6/7: Best solution–education. Focus on the primary stakeholder: the mothers. This can be done by providing clear instructions on either washing the vegetables to get rid of any residual pesticides and hold “information sessions” which could also function as marketing campaigns (if the donor plans to profit off of this gruel) so it would not be as cost-raking as you would think, as more people would hear about the gruel through hearsay and thus attending these sessions. These sessions would demonstrate the minimal risk of pesticides versus the long time risk of a child born with HIV/AIDS.

1. Design packaging with simple instructions to wash thoroughly (pictures when able).
2. Plan information sessions with community members, health workers, etc. Pay them a small wage.
3. Spread the word! Drive to different towns handing out flyers for the sessions, tell health clinics to divert breastfeeding mothers to an info session, etc.
4. Hold the sessions!

Part 2: Grassroots Diplomacy

Step 1: Determine the facts

• Women work for about nine hours every day and earn KES 300
• They have the opportunity to sell the produce grown on their small farms to the cooperative 
• Transaction is conducted at a prevailing market rate which helps the woman make some money on the side
• The arrangement of being able to earn money from selling their produce to cooperatives saves them (time+ money) to the village market in order to sell them

1. B) Clearly state the ethical issue/issues

• The woman does not get a say in keeping their own money, as the men in her family have power over that
• The twin social outcomes of improving the nutritional status of children and the livelihoods of rural households is not being achieved

1. C) Steps 2 & 3: Define the stakeholders and assess their motivations

• The Entrepreneur
  • Enjoy the publicity and connections with the community, but wants to help solve this issue, however this issue has been ingrained in the community for a while
• The women in the communities
  • Just want to feed their children and save some of the money to support their families
  • Grow and sell the best produce to the cooperatives
• Children 
  • Just want to be fed
• The men in the women’s families
  • Personal motivation to enjoy life, drink alcohol and do frivolous things

Step 4: Formulate alternative solutions

1. Solution: give women a portion of their earnings ($1.50) in cash so that they their husbands could have something while the rest can be given out in gift cards OR credit at the cooperative, which would reduce their incentive to cash it out themselves (swipe in and the amount of money increases per day in the gift card)

• • Pros:
    • Most of the money is stored for the family to use later for their children
  • Cons: 
    • They’re going to ask where the rest of the money is, might still get mad
  • How does it save face of those involved?: 
    • Saves face for both wife and husband
  • Implications on relationships:
    • Short Term: husband and wife will fight less about the money since the husband’s needs are curbed by the small cash incentive
    • Long Term: Babies are healthy! father is drunk! Mother is hopefully satisfied with where her hard earned money is going. 
  • Implications on the venture: Money will flow back into the co-op via gift card for gruel, partnered supermarkets, etc. Co-op will grow, livelihoods of mothers and babies are improved. 

2. Solution: Credits in cooperative, instead of money they can get credit hours, she can use it in the store of the cooperative worth $6 per credit, but if they want the cash they would be getting $3

• • Pros:
    • incentivizes health of baby over cash for other things
  • Cons: 
    • no one is stopping the husband from making the wife take out the cash regardless
  • How does it save face of those involved?: 
    • Husband can still indulge in his hedonism without being shamed for it
  • Implications on relationships:
    • Short Term: husband and wife have a stabler relationship
    • Long Term: atmosphere of putting alcoholism over health of family is prolonged and even ingrained
  • Implications on the venture:
    • Short Term: would succeed.
    • Long Term:  because of constant prioritization of  material things over health of baby, the venture’s long term goal of improving health and livelihood cannot be achieved to its greatest potential
• Solution: The women would get a side incentive along with the money they are earning from the cooperative, which would be alcohol, or gruel. 
  • Pros:
    • Both parties have something
    • money can be set aside for the children
  • Cons: 
    • husband might still buy other things with the money other than alcohol
    • Husband will sell on black market
    • expensive to purchase alcohol just to incentivize men not to steal their wives money and degrade baby’s health
  • How does it save face of those involved?: 
    • Husband can still indulge in his hedonism without being shamed for it
  • Implications on relationships:
    • Short Term: husband and wife have a stabler relationship
    • Long Term: atmosphere of putting alcoholism over health of family is prolonged and even ingrained
  • Implications on the venture:
    • Short Term: would succeed.
    • Long Term:  because of constant prioritization of  material things over health of baby, the venture’s long term goal of improving health and livelihood cannot be achieved to its greatest potential

Step 5:  

My chosen solution is biased against the husbands and for the mothers + babies. In my opinion, it does nothing for our venture goal to simply add a band-aid fix to a deeply ingrained cultural issue that will continually be a roadblock in achieving the goal of better livelihoods.

Step 6/7: Best solution–give 1/3 of daily or weekly earnings in cash (to curb alcoholic husband) and 2/3 in a gift card for gruel or for a partnered supermarket.

1. Grassroots diplomacy. Speak to community members about issue and best way to go about it. In this diplomacy, also search for supermarkets who are willing to partner up with the venture to provide these gift cards.
2. Implement.

Step 1: 

• limited resources (not enough gifts)
• gifts were donated
• This takes place in Kenya and Jack is American = cultural differences
• Staff allocated and labelled the gifts
• Because Jack handed out the gifts the kids thought that Jack bought the gifts
• only 1 kid that did not receive a gift blamed Jack
• Jack and the staff did not agree about existence of issue. 
• staff don’t acknowledge the problem to be immediate or important.

Step 2 and 3: 

• • Staff: Saving face, Fear of Jack’s savior complex, working within their limits, the children ,things to smooth and keep running 
  • Jack: Saving face with the children, making all children feel included
  • The Children who received gifts: Appease the kids who didn’t get gifts
  • The Children who didn’t received gifts: feeling included/getting the same experience as the other children, not getting teased by the kids that got wrapped gifts

Step 4: 

• 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
    • Come to a resolution in a very diplomatic way
    • Stern reminder of nature of venture and that unresolved tension will only impede that goal
  • Cons 
    • Invitation to a private conversation could be seen as threatening
      • tense stakeholder relationship = negative impact on venture fluidity (short term only because chances are, they will see the faults in their actions after they exit this heated mental state)
    • could escalate the situation more than it would have been escalated
    • Staff cannot save face in that they can’t just forget about it and not mentally process their negligence. But–they CAN save face in that they can come up with an excuse or really just apologize to make up for their actions. Saving face the right way.
• Potential solution 2: Just wear the hat for a few days to make the kids feel special
  • Ethical Principle or code
    • Justice, Respect for Persons and Dignity
  • Pros 
    • the kids who didn’t get gifts may feel special and that their gifts meant something
    • allows staff to save face as they don’t need to publicly and personally confront their own negligence
  • Cons 
    • Other kids that did not receive the hat might feel bad about their own gifts, restarting the cycle of ‘you can’t please everyone’
    • Doesn’t foster a long term solution, more of a short term band-aid fix. Tension between researcher and staff might remain impaired. Tension between children and staff remain impaired. Venture cannot succeed at its full potential without full cooperation and amicability of stakeholders
• Potential solution 3: Explain the situation to the kids and be honest about the mistake. Apologize sincerely. 
  • Ethical Principle or code
    • Justice, Respect for Persons and Dignity
  • Pros 
    • This could serve as a learning experience about life and unfairness in life to the children, and allow for children to understand the implications of certain aspects of life.  
  • Cons 
    • Again, does not address the possibly impaired, tense relationship between the two stakeholders
    • Negligence from staff could repeat without your presence
      • really impair venture long term
    • Children might not understand due to their age and may lead to a worse situation with the children, worsening the tension with the staff as a result

Step 5: 

These 3 options are essentially only 2 options: confront the staff or take care of the situation yourself. I don’t think it needs to be either or. I do think there would be some tension which needs to be resolved based on the “If there’s a problem, fix it yourself” conversation. This a stakeholder relationship that affects the venture at hand. The staff may very well continue to be neglectful and depending on the nature of your venture, this could be the exact opposite of what you want.

Step 6: 

Best Solution: Combination of 1, 2, and 3. 

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 have the solution ultimately resolved. 
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 and happy as a result

Possible Consequences

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. Jack may have to pay out of pocket. But I assume since he is able to fly out all the way to Africa for this venture which deals directly with these kids, he can afford it. Especially, if he personally sees a huge issue in the situation.
3. The ROI may not be worth it 
4. There won’t be much environmental impact due to the toys already existing, the toys getting would actually create a small positive impact on the environment
5. The staff may continue to see your reaction as confrontational and unnecessary

Step 7

1. Find another donation center or pay out of pocket for 4 comparable gifts or just wear the hat
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
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