https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1rOJCUrRgLZLiBDflIf8IxpAWGcQqSlaDnwOQYTXeNgQ/edit?usp=sharing

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1rOJCUrRgLZLiBDflIf8IxpAWGcQqSlaDnwOQYTXeNgQ/edit?usp=sharing

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1rOJCUrRgLZLiBDflIf8IxpAWGcQqSlaDnwOQYTXeNgQ/edit?usp=sharing

Students: Julie Wright, Cate Adams, Ava DeLauro, Y Lam, Emily Tsao, Zelalem Ayalew

Part 1

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

• Ugochi founded SYE-T (Soccer for Youth Empowerment Tournament)
• This tournament is for vulnerable children from cities around the US
• Over 30,000 youth benefit each year from pre-selection training & program engagement
• Ugochi gained support from over 50 in-kind sponsors that provided the kids with priceless experiences and connections that can help them shape a better future
• Spikey, a shoe manufacturing company, sponsored SYE-T for $2 million which allowed Ugochi to expand the number of participating cities from 5 to 15.
• However, Spikey uses 3 manufacturers in Cambodia that employ children under the age of 12 in their facilities
• The children work up to 60 hours a week with no education benefits
• Ugochi is concerned about the labor practices of Spikey
• The problem is that Ugochi is trying to support the well-being of children in the U.S. while being complicit in perpetuating a similar problem abroad. She doesn’t know if it is ethical to stay in partnership with Spikey because they are investing $2 million in the program and the money has helped her create an effective program 
• Youths participate in SYE-T from more than 20 cities

Step 2: Define the Stakeholders – those with a vested interest in the outcome

• Ugochi 
• Children/participants 
• Other donors
• Spikey
• Cambodian Youth 
• First contractor 
• Other two contractors 
• Local churches, schools, universities, businesses 

Step 3: Assess the motivations of the Stakeholders

• Ugochi – To create a sustainable social venture that empowers youth to address high crime rates and the consequences of crime 
• Children/participants – Build personal, professional, and social skills while playing sports 
• Other donors – Support SYE-T professionally 
• First contractor – Support Spikey and provide education as well as shorter work weeks for students 
• Cambodian Youth – Support their families and obtain an education 
• Other two contractors – Support Spikey 
• Spikey – Build a socially progressive brand and wants to increase the number of stakeholders for better profit
• Local churches, schools, universities, businesses – Contribute to the community while also further establishing their own entity 

Step 4: Formulate (at least three) alternative solutions – based on information available, using

fundamental ethical core values as guide

Approach 1

• Potential solution – Turn a blind eye. Continue working with Spikey and the three contractors. 
• Ethical Principle or code
• Pros – We have good relationships with Spikey and have some ground internationally. 
• This may hurt the credibility of the SYE-T given that they are hurting youth across the globe, raises ethical concerns about working with unethical constructs

Approach 2

• Potential solution – Do not work with Spikey anymore 
• Ethical Principle or code- Virtue-based thinking: Working with Spikey does not align with
  Ugochi’s values
• Pros – May open space to forge new partnerships, stop working with a company that has labor practices that are not ethical
• Cons – The program will initially have to shrink, and halt progress, and students may drop from the program entirely 

Approach 3 

• Reconnect with old partnerships 
• Ethical Principle or code
• Pros – Strengthening old relationships and rekindling trust, can create more sustainable partnerships that align with Ugochi and the children’s goals 
• Cons – May not be guaranteed to work with old partnerships again 

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

• Contact other youth community engagement programs to see how they approached sponsorships and contractors, talk to community engagement officials and business managers within Spikey about community relations and company ethics.  
• Consider public opinion with the community 

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 attempt to reconnect with old partnerships. These partnerships align the best with Ugochi’s vision for the program and may be able to help the organization continue sustainably while continuing its growth. This also gives room for SYE-T to stop working with Spikey and find other supporters by having more credibility, as working with Spikey hurts the venture given that their contractors have contradictory values with SYE-T. 

Step 7: (If applicable) What are the implications of your solution on the venture. Explain the

impact of your solution

The venture doesn’t need Spikey anymore to be successful because it is already well-known and established. Reconnecting with old partnerships may be a more efficient and ethical choice. This way, SYE-T will be associated with partners that better align with its values and can better aid the children in creating a brighter future for themselves. As a result, SYE-T will grow in a more sustainable way and continue fulfilling its mission.

Part 2

Grassroots Diplomacy Strategy Development Methodology

Step 1: Determine the facts in the situation – obtain all of the unbiased facts possible

• Ugochi has a meeting with Mr. Mikey, the head of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) for Spikey
• Mr. Mikey insists that there was nothing to be concerned about in Cambodia
• He wants to shift the focus away from the vulnerable youth
• He wants the competition to only be for men over 18 years old. 
• He wants to exclude women and suggests that they be cheerleaders for the event instead
• Mikey threatens to stop sponsoring the event
• Losing Spikey as a sponsor would cause Ugochi to lose 80% of her funding; leaving her with only 20% of the funding
• Ugochi would have to downsize the program and restrict participants

Step 2: Define the problem and the stakeholders – those with a vested interest in the outcome

The problem is the conflict of interests between SYE-T and Spikey, and how Spikey is threatening to pull out funding. 

Ugochi 

The children 

Mr. Mikey 

Step 3: Determine and distinguish between the personal and professional motivations of the

stakeholders.

Ugochi 

• Personal: Help children build their social and professional skills through an athletic program 
• Professional: Manage organization with ethical partnerships that do not discriminate and empower people equitably 

The children 

• Personal: Build social and professional skills, play soccer–have fun!
• Professional: Participate in a meaningful organization and force partnerships with different cities 

Mr. Mikey 

• Personal: Alter SYT-E so that only certain types of people are able to participate in soccer
• Professional: Maintain the image of Spikey by driving SYT-E towards Spikey’s branding 

Step 4: Formulate (at least three) alternative solutions – based on information available, to have a win-win situation for your relationship and your venture.

Approach 1

• Potential Solution – Surrender to Mr. Mikey 
• How does it solve the problem?
  • Pros – We continue relationships with Spikey and have their support from their sponsorships
  • Cons – We lose face as an organization as we process with Mr. Mikey’s sexist takes. We also reduce the population on whom we intend to help with our mission. Our purpose becomes blurred. 
• How does it save face of those involved?
  • It doesn’t … maybe only Spikey because they still maintain their reputation and look charitable by funding SYE-T
• Implications on relationships
  • Short-term – SYE-T and Spikey continue being partners 
  • Long-term – SYE-T’s image becomes harmed 
• Implications on the venture
  • Short-term – Ugochi won’t have to scale down her operations and will continue getting funding from Spikey
  • Long-term – Hurts other people’s willingness to partner with SYT-E, diminishes the overall mission of the program 

Approach 2

• Potential Solution – Negotiate with Spikey and let women and youth participate in the games (Potentially fire/expose Mr. Mikey)
• How does it solve the problem?
  • Pros – Mikey may understand Ugochi’s perspective and agree 
  • Cons- this negotiation may cause SYE-T to lose the funds provided by Spikey
• How does it save the face of those involved?

• Spikey will benefit from the youths and can expand its network and make it publicity to attract more stakeholders
• SYE-T will continue providing support for the youths and can reach many other youths in different parts of the country 

• Implications on relationships
  • Short-term – May strain relationship between Spikey and SYT-E as a whole 
  • Long-term – Changes dynamics between stakeholders and may permanently shift who has decision-making power 
• Implications for the venture
  • Short-term – Halts program progress as new developments have to be figured out 
  • Long-term – Allows women to participate, but gives Spikey decision-making power and may lead to permanent shifts in what the program prioritizes 

Approach 3

• Potential Solution – Cut all ties with Spikey and Mr. Mikey
• How does it solve the problem?
  • Pros – SYE-T won’t be associated with Spikey and their shady manufacturers in Cambodia, and the program won’t be changed from the original mission
  • Cons – Losing 80% of funding and having to significantly downsize the SYE-T operation and the number of kids they can help; it will also be harder to operate and sustain its programs with less funding
• How does it save the face of those involved?
  • Allows SYE-T to continue to work towards their original mission with a clear conscience. Actions speak louder than words and cutting Spikey off shows they are truly committed to bettering the lives of youth around the world
  • It protects SYE-T’s reputation and credibility by distancing itself from the unethical practices of Spikey
• Implications on relationships
  • Short-term – no more business relationship with Spikey
  • Long-term – SYE-T will have to build and maintain new partnerships for support; SYE-T will have to rebuild trust with donors and stakeholders after severing ties with Spikey because it will cause the program to change
• Implications on the venture
  • Short-term – cutting ties with Spikey could cause some financial instability for the venture; it will disrupt SYE-T operations because it will need to find other sources of funding and might have to make sacrifices to stay afloat
  • Long-term – Without funding from Spikey, SYE-T will have to adapt its program and downsize

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

experience, inner reflection

• Consult other head managers in Spikey to talk about Mr. Mikey’s behaviors and comments. See if there could be mediation. Also, discuss the plans again with Spikey to reconsider both stakeholders’ images and intentions.
• Talk to the youth about their feelings and experiences in the program. Use this data to bring in discussions with Spikey.
• Seek additional assistance from other executives within Spikey as to how to proceed with dealing with Mr. Mikey, and reach out to trusted peers in the social entrepreneurship sphere to seek advice on how to negotiate with partners and other funding sources.

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.

The best solution is to cut ties with Spikey because this allows for better development of SYE-T. Cutting ties with Spikey would have the program temporarily shrink, but this does not mean that they cannot bounce back from this. It’s best to stay true to the mission of SYT-E so that the development of the program is put to good use. 

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

1. Explain to Mr. Mikey why SYE-T is splitting from Spikey 
2. Inform all of SYT-E and explain what areas of the programs have to shrink
3. Meet with the SYT-E team to discuss the next steps and how to rebuild the organization 
4. Carry out plan 
   1. Identify alternative funding sources
   2. Revise the budget that will make up for the Spikey funding losses, create a new expansion plan for the future
   3. Reach out to original local organizations and explain to them what happened and suggest plans to reconnect and reestablish their programs for SYE-T
   4. Be transparent with the public about Spikey and why the split is occurring

Go back through your presentation, the Q&A, and feedback received and come up with a list of TEN takeaways / lessons learned / things to do differently next time. 

1. Preparing Material
   1. Compared to the first time we presented in this class, we were pouring a lot of focus into practicing and making sure our slides are nailed down. This time around, the most important part of preparation was to answer the rubric as we do not want to repeat prior presentations. In addition, preparing slides is not difficult as most of the effort should be placed into what we want to say. In accordance with the Cognitive Load Theory, we want to provide information in a digestible manner. This is best paired with eye-catching visuals and a slide theme that flows. The other thing we wished we did differently was to choose our presenters earlier ahead of time. We were unsure of who was presenting that evening and did not confirm until the day of. However, we each had enough experience in presenting to be able to do it on the spot again. There is always the regret of not working on these presentations earlier as well. For the next presentation, we will work to delegate the work differently and give some more space to refine the presentation even further.
2. It’s Not that Deep
   1. Back to the idea of presenting, it is easy to succumb to the idea that we have to be super polished and that this is a be-all and end-all presentation. That is not exactly the case. Yes, our presentation has to fulfill certain criteria and we do have to be professional. Nonetheless, the best type of presentations are the ones that feel easy and discussion-like. We learned to approach our presentations with the idea that we are having a conversation with our audience. This eases back the pressure a bit, but also sets the mood for our presentations. 
3. Appearance
   1. It is easy to be nervous and that can translate to how we speak and look. Unfortunately, body language and our voices are the first impressions the judges will retain. It is important to be calm and to keep our pace right as we are the conduits of information. Also, having a smile on your face can go a long way as it is one way to show enthusiasm. Humility is also important to portray. 
4. Predicting Future Qs
   1. Based on what we leave out in the presentation or some of the hot topics we choose to put into the slides, we cna kind of predict the questions that might be asked. Yes, it is needed to explain how our project works and why we do it. However, a presentation does not have to zero in onto all of the details. Leaving ambiguity does not entirely mean unfleshed or surface level ideas. For instance, we did not feel the need to explain neurodivergence in depth as we expect our audience to have prior knowledge about the subject. If not, we are prepared to explain so.
5. Sit Down, Be Humble
   1. Everytime we present and listen to other presentations, we are reminded of our position in the community. We are students that have the privilege to be able to work on these projects – some that involve advanced technology. To be able to contribute to these projects and aim these solutions for the Lehigh Valley Community is meaningful to us. However, we have to constantly recognize the relationship the campus has with the community. We have to approach our work with much consideration and we need to maintain our connections as this shows the intention to want to work with the community. We don’t want to have a deficit view towards the community and instead, we can act as agents and liaisons. Furthermore, the judges are specialized, but they have more in-depth knowledge about the area than us. 
6. Expanding Project
   1. We received plenty of feedback from the judges on ways we can add supporting components to our project. We have fleshed out some ideas ever since our project such as recording an introduction video with a museum docent and including videos and pictures of what these public spaces look like when people occupy them. We have also considered putting forth our plans of making manipulatives into action. In addition, the idea of expanding our audience to others outside of the neurodivergent crowd such as aiming to have our tours for older people. The idea is awesome as it does increase the goal of making art accessible for all. However, when thinking of the elderly crowd, we were thinking of having them volunteer as docents for our virtual tours. This idea has yet to be explored, but it is now in our notes. 
   2. One of the judges (Adam Ercolani) has a direct connection to one of the organizations we want to work with (Bethlehem Fine Arts Commission). This judge has offered to make the connection happen and to recommend other important community spaces we can scan for our virtual tours. Beyond all the presentation and judge format, this is what is most meaningful to us. We are able to form rapport and have realizable advice that can advance our project. 
7. Considering Audience
   1. Our team has created presentations for many reasons about our project. We are typically good with explaining our project and starting with a narration. However, these judges have already seen our introductions. For the audience this time, we really needed to consider delivering information in a way that feels refreshing and meaningful to them. We need to explain ourselves again, but we have to keep in mind to edit out information that does not address what the judges are looking for this time around. In our past conferences, our presentation formats keep shifting and that keeps up flexible and afloat. 
8. Here to Help
   1. Yes, some of the questions the judges posed can be passive-aggressive, but ultimately they are working with what we give them. If we are delivering confusing information then it is likely that we will receive feedback that challenges what we do. We want to make sure that the message behind out project is understood and that any question posed is a good question. These judges are coming here with different perspectives and much of the feedback had the intention of refining our work. 
9. Other Presentations
   1. After sitting through everybody else’s presentations, we found ourselves taking notes on components that could benefit our project. Many of these groups have similar goals to us or are utilizing similar technology. From one of the groups, we discovered other organizations to work with such as the Lehigh Valley Art & Cultural Alliance as their goal aligns with our project goal. Also, it is interesting to also learn more about VR headsets, GoPros, and Google Earth Studio. We are always curious to see our peer teams carry out their project work. 
10. Revisiting Purpose
    1. As we were working on the slides, we couldn’t help but revisit why we do our project. The question of why we work on these projects often pop up during these judge sessions. We were not asked that question, but a judge did ask why can’t we make our tours for everyone. This brought up the initial reason our faculty mentors stressed when starting this type of project. Our faculty mentors work at Centennial, a school for neurodivergent students, and noticed that there was a lack of art education for their students. Art should be accessible for all and our project is working to answer that challenge from a different standpoint. We want to work with the neurodivergent crowd first and essentially, our tours can serve everyone. Besides revisiting the purpose of the project, our individual passions for continuing to work on the project were also revisited. Everybody is in this project for a different or a similar reason; however, we are proud of the work we have done so far and it is pretty rewarding to present our work to the students we want to work with.

Blog Post DUE 10/22/23 – for discussion / debrief in class on 10/24:

https://www.macfound.org/programs/100change/

What is the larger dream / goal behind your venture?

The larger dream of our venture is to give over 1 million kids access to the arts through immersive virtual content. This looks like many more schools across the country having immersive learning centers and implementing arts education into their curriculum. Our purpose is to educate neurodivergent and neurotypical students in the nation about art. We also hope to incorporate elements such as manipulatives and audio recordings of the actual space in order to further the students’ learning experience. Ultimately, our goal is to expand throughout the country and make sure kids get as much access to arts spaces as possible. 

With the help of a visual, describe a coalition you will build to address the larger problem you are trying to address.

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1BVJxLWc1-Bd2nhfaIjwM1ykev_zZv8hq8lC_wTvyTNs/edit?usp=sharing

What (kinds of) organizations will you bring together? How might the coalition be transformative for the issue? How you might provide leadership and coordination for the coalition.

First, we have a deal with Igloo and Matterport and the Department of Education. Matterport will bring the cameras, Igloo will bring the ILC’s, and the Department of education will supply funding and a plan for implementation. This will result in many more schools having immersive centers or access to them at a lower cost. The Matterport cameras will be used at other universities to replicate what the Open Doors to the Arts Team does. We will work with Khan academy in cooperation with Matterport to optimize their software for additional learning materials. We will then scan all of the Smithsonian in DC because this will give users a broad range of options that are all located in the same area. Using additional funding we will support field trips to DC where students can choose which museum or gallery they would like to attend. We will work with Van Gogh experience to expand our content past virtual tours in order to create immersive virtual art. 

Centennial School
This partnership is what spearheaded the Open Doors for the Arts team. The faculty at the school noticed a need for arts accessibility in their school’s population. The school serves students ages 6-21 with learning and behavioral disabilities. Children with these disabilities oftentimes struggle to connect with the arts and the community at large. The centennial school is also home to its own immersive learning center. With this technology and the need of the students, a partnership with Lehigh University’s Office of Creative Inquiry was ideal. This partner has helped us by providing the technology and the framework for the project. We help the school by creating arts and other area focused content for their students and the community as a whole. This relationship is symbiotic as we both provide value to each other in terms of team to team and on an individual basis. In order to strengthen this relationship it is important to use our content for its intended purpose. With more impact, we will be able to

LUAG
Since our project started this year, LUAG was very helpful with propelling the project forward being that they were the first space that we got to capture content for. Because several of us work at LUAG, we already had a good amount of knowledge about the types of art pieces LUAG has so it was easier for us to learn how to use the camera and the editing software as we were capturing footage and creating descriptions for the art pieces. This is a very helpful partnership as they aided us with providing key educational content for us and we in return have helped strengthen the accessibility aspect of LUAG through strengthening their virtual tours. A way for us to strengthen this relationship is creating a more in depth tour of the lower gallery at LUAG because as of now, our current tour only focuses on a handful of art pieces in the art gallery and only touches the surface of the art gallery’s expansive art collection. Continuously, that would also in turn deepen the knowledge and educational aspect that our tour would give students.

AAM
In contrast to our other galleries, the Allentown Art Museum is an actual museum that has big name artists. We have captured all three floors of the space in our tour, and we plan to add scripts to them as well. We have been working with a representative of the AAM to make manipulatives that the students can tactilely handle. Our hope is to practice making these ourselves with help from AAM so that we can be directly involved in this process. The Allentown Art Museum also wants to schedule workshops and tours with us, so we will hopefully have an ongoing partnership with them. The artists shown at the AAM are artists one would see in art history, so the Centennial School students can learn about more of the big name artists. Through the Allentown Art Museum’s implication of tactile elements such as manipulatives, we aim to enhance art education with the Centennial School students.

Bannana Factory
This partnership was started through a connection Y had with the Banana Factory. The Banana Factory provides art opportunities and exhibitions for members of the Bethlehem community. Over the summer we were able to scan one of their exhibits that features specialty dresses made by an independent artist. In addition, the team just recently revisited the Banana Factory to scan a new exhibit. This partnership benefits the project by providing a constant supply of art content for the team to use. This partnership benefits banana factory because the tours we create are also available for their use and strengthens their relationship with the university. This in turn, makes this partnership a symbiotic relationship. In order to strengthen this project it is important to continue to interact with the Banana factory. This could include the team working with some of the children from Banana Factory, Banana Factory staff teaching some lessons in the ILC at centennial school, or Banana Factory partnering with LUAG.

Bethlehem Fine Arts Commission
Similar to our project goal, the Bethlehem Fine Arts Commission exists to promote art culture in the local community. Although this entity is focused on fine arts and our project differs by involving 360 technology and virtual means, our project also platforms fine arts in gallery and museum spaces. With this partnership formed in the near future, the Open Doors to the Arts project name can be grounded in the community and can be exposed to other community leaders interested in art and education. This partnership will allow for further networking and may even aid in distributing our tours and accompanying art guides. In addition, networking will allow for further collaborations in making tours and further feedback on how to best shape our content into professional educational resources. As we progress and continue scanning community spaces, it is best to work with other entities that have the same goal alignment. This can also help build a better relationship with the campus and the community outside campus.

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

• We received a $5000 grant to make t-shirts from an alumnus
• We are the executive director of Sustainable Lehigh 2030, overseeing student groups working on sustainability initiatives
• The student groups will distribute T-shirts to promote their programs 
• This program is aimed to transform LU into a low carbon circular economy
• Follows the triple bottom line sustainability as a core value
• There are 10 student teams to divide funds amongst evenly 
• 3 t shirt options: Cambodia for $2, Los Angeles for $10, organic from the Lehigh Valley for $25
• The alumnus would like us to buy t-shirts from an ethical source and made in the USA, but it’s the most expensive option.

Ethical Issue: Balancing sustainability, ethical labor practices, and cost consideration while keeping in mind the donor’s preferences and the amount of shirts that will be available to each student club. 

Step 2: Define the Stakeholders – those with a vested interest in the outcome

1. Garment factories 
2. Employees
3. Clubs 
4. Alumnus of Lehigh University 
5. Executive Director of Sustainable Lehigh 2030 
6. Lehigh students
7. Lehigh alumni network 
8. Lehigh campus as a whole

Step 3: Assess the motivations of the Stakeholders

1. Garment Factories are able to increase commercial activity and provide jobs for their workers.
2. Employees have a task to do and are getting paid but also deserve good working conditions and fair pay 
3. Clubs are able to spread awareness of their initiatives and be apart of Lehigh Sustainable 20230
4. Alumnus of Lehigh University wants to support Sustainable Lehigh 2030 and emphasize the aspect of U.S. made products.
5. Executive Director of Sustainable 2030 will be able to promote the Lehigh Sustainable 2030
6. Lehigh students always want more shirts and they will be able to support sustainable causes of their choice.
7. The Lehigh Alumni network will be interested in how this initial donation makes an impact. Could lead to more alumni donors in the future
8. The campus as a whole values sustainability and ethical practices 

Step 4: Formulate (at least three) alternative solutions – based on information available, using

basic ethical core values as guide

Approach 1:

Buy organically from the Lehigh Valley for $25 per shirt

Ethical Principle or code: 

Consequence based thinking, sustainable, US made, fair wages

Pros: 

• made from a company that pair employees fair wage
• locally made
• satisfies both of the alumnus want
• Sustainable
• no shipping cost/pollution
• Will likely lead to 100,000 future grant 

Cons: 

• Can only buy 200 t shirts to distribute or 10 per team
• shirts are expensive

Approach 2:

Buy from Cambodia for $2

Ethical Principle or code: 

Duty-based thinking, cost effectiveness, labor standards 

Pros:

• Pay above the living wage
• lowest cost
• contributing to the global economy
• about 2,500 t-shirts can be made and distributed to students

Cons:

• Not made in the USA
• contributes to fast fashion and fabric waste
• shipping costs and waste/pollution produced as byproduct
• might not be fully ethical: unethical work hours
• May not lead to $100,000 grant 

Approach 3:

Buy from LA for $10

Ethical Principle or code:

Virtue based thinking, Support US manufacturing

Pros: 

• It’s made in the USA
• cheaper than the Lehigh Valley t-shirts
• employing undocumented immigrants that may not be able to secure employment otherwise 

Cons: 

• Workers at the factory are treated badly and are paid an unlivable wage
• Could lead to negative publicity for Lehigh
• Could result in not receiving future grant 
• Costly, but not the most expensive option
• Shipping contributes to pollution

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

We could look into further sustainable options to produce t-shirts near the Lehigh Campus.

Based on personal experience we feel that the Lehigh Valley option is clearly the best one. This will satisfy all parties at hand and decrease negative impact on employees and the environment. Consult with labor rights organizations, sustainability experts, and ethical procurement specialists. Consider local and international labor laws as well as sustainability certifications. Could explore a hybrid approach by combining different t-shirt sources. 

REVISED

• Defends the best course of action vis-a-vis other approaches.
• Analyzes impact of the decision on the venture

Comparing all of these solutions and keeping high core ethical values in mind, I think it is best to choose the Lehigh Valley Option. Although Cambodia and LA approaches create wage opportunities for some of the stakeholders involved, these living wages are not entirely ethical as they are below minimum wage compared to US standards. However, these are still jobs and opportunities for people to create income. Furthermore, one of the stakeholders involved asked for US based practices. It would also be best to align with that interest as one of the options is sourcing T-shirts from the Lehigh Valley. In addition, we can secure that 100k grant. The Cambodia approach would not fit this premise, despite it having the best net-product amount at the end. The LA option would fit this premise, but again, it does not exactly seem the most sustainable or ethical. Although less shirts will be produced, I think the sourcing is important for the public to know, especially if we are addressing sustainable objectives. Each club can have ten shirts and that will suffice. The other approaches will have more tshirts per club, but the reasoning behind the amount of shirts is more meaningful than having plenty of shirts to go around. If anything, more shirts create more waste and add to the problem of fast fashion.The grant can be used to produce more tshirts done mindfully the next time the club event is happening. It is best to stay true to our original values in sustainability as it will have less risk in tainting our sustainable code. The other options will incur negative public opinion and have more of a risk of opposing out sustainable code.

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.

Technology: If choosing the Lehigh Valley option, the method of producing the shirts organically will be promoted. Again, sustainable practices will be platformed.

Economic: If looking for gains and best results number-wise, this solution will actually produce the least amount of tshirts and will be seen as the most expensive. However, the value of organic materials make up for the costs of the tshirts.

Social: Good public opinion can arise from this decision as many stakeholders will be pleased. There will be a strong connection between the Lehigh Valley and the campus community as well. Again, green and sustainable measures are promoted and are actually carried out. We can become a honest and transparent entity.

Environmental: With the Lehigh Valley option, we are choosing the best sustainable outcome. Of course, producing tshirts will impact the environment. However, compared to the other solutions, this option will produce the smallest carbon footprint. The other options seem associated with fast fashion practices. An organic tshirt can outlast products of fast fashion, thus proving its value in price.

PROMPT #1:

• Identify the three specific stakeholder groups most impacted by your project. For each one, go through the five elements of framework #2 and identify different answers for each group. In other words, if you’re telling your story to stakeholder group #1 (let’s say, middle school students), what is the context that would be most meaningful to that group? What is the catalyst most meaningful to that group? And so on.

• The centennial school
  • Context: focus on students with neurodivergence or EBD
  • Catalyst: we aim to change the exposure that these students have to the arts
  • Complication: actually entering an arts space can be difficult for these students
  • Change: we create virtual tours using Centennial’s ILC to try to change this issue
  • Consequence: students have had positive feedback with the tours, but we still need to create more and revise them so that they are the most helpful for the students
• Neurodivergent students and students with EBD
  • Context: students with EBD or neurodivergence have limited access to the arts
  • Catalyst: the development of virtual reality technology makes these spaces more accessible
  • Complication: having a space like the ILC is not always accessible
  • Change: we publish virtual tours online on our website so that students can also access those
  • Consequence: the students have access to these tours from their own home and are able to enter these spaces without having to subject to the fear of overstimulation
• LUAG
  • Context: focus on the actual arts space that we are capturing a tour of and how we can alter that tour to best meet the needs of students with neurodivergence or EBD
  • Catalyst: the exhibitions switch every semester, so we are able to continually capture different spaces that LUAG provides
  • Complication: as a team, we have to figure out how to best change and alter our tours based on the new exhibitions
  • Change: we create touch points for the students to click on where they can get more information about the pieces in visual or audio form
  • Consequence: the students have enjoyed learning more about the pieces through the touch points and we will continually work with LUAG to publish more tours

PROMPT #2:

• From the two story frameworks, CHOOSE ONE of them. Doesn’t matter which – choose the one that speaks you to more, or choose randomly. Once you’ve chosen one framework, ignore the other one for this prompt.
• As a team, write the story of your project (as it exists today), using the five story elements in the order in which they are given, #1 through #5. Each element’s section should consist of at least 2-3 carefully constructed sentences. 
• The result should be a coherent, beginning-middle-end story about your project which someone of reasonable intelligence who is unfamiliar with your project can follow and understand, and more importantly, be inspired by. The blog entry should be written as a text-based story, not a bulleted list. You should write it as a first-person plural story – in other words, the character is “we,” the project team.
• Talk it through as a team. Does it make sense? Does it say everything you want and need it to say? If this were the essential structure of your Fall presentations (stretched out to 7 minutes), would it be successful and would the referees know what you were talking about and why? 

Think about the first time you ever entered an art gallery. There are bright lights all around you, people telling you to be quiet, and the expectation to be respectful and stay a safe distance away from the art. There are rules, regulations, and expectations—things that can feel overwhelming for anyone stepping into an art gallery without prior knowledge. These feelings of confusion are representative of the struggles that neurodivergent students experience every day. Children with emotional and behavior disorders (EBD) struggle to connect with arts in the community, sometimes due to lack of exposure but also because of the threat of overstimulation. This problem is widespread throughout the United States, with only seven percent of adults with disabilities ever experiencing an art gallery. We aim to encourage students to experience these unfamiliar places through virtual tours of arts spaces. By creating immersive content for neurodivergent students, they are able to have a connection with the arts within their own school or home environment. These virtual tours are accessible to all through our website, but we directly work with the Centennial School, a K-12 school for students with disabilities, to broadcast these tours to the students. We utilize their Immersive Learning Center (ILC), which is a room with 270° of images and videos projected into their walls. The students are able to experience these arts spaces as if they are actually there, in hopes that more exposure will encourage them to visit these places in person. This has been a slow but inspiring journey; because our project is new, we were only able to accomplish so much. We spent a lot of time working out the logistics of virtual reality technology, using the ILC, and figuring out how best to execute our ideas. Our team has made and published several tours, and the responses from the students we have shown so far have been positive. Ultimately, we have a lot of work to do, but we hope to spread these tours throughout the United States and work more with the Centennial School and its students to figure out how best to help children with neurodivergence or EBD. 

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

1. Developing a low-cost syringe for developing nations is critical to ensure access to safe medical equipment.
2. Adding an auto-disable feature to the syringe significantly increases the cost, but removes the risk of spreading disease through open needles not being disposed of properly. 
3. Without the auto-disable feature there is a risk of syringe reuse which can lead to the spread of disease.

Ethical Issue: As the designer, we must balance the need for affordability with the need for a safe design of the syringe. With that, we must decide what the best course of action is for releasing the syringe and what design will maximize benefit to the developing world health community while minimizing the spread of disease. 

Step 2: Define the Stakeholders – those with a vested interest in the outcome

1. Regulatory bodies such as FDA
2. Patients in the developing world
3. Healthcare workers who perform injections
4. Hospitals in low resource environments
5. The designer and their team
6. Insurance companies
7. Manufacturers of the syringes
8. NGOs focused on healthcare in the developing world
9. Government’s of nations that will be impacted by the introduction of the syringe
10. Local communities and public health

Step 3: Assess the motivations of the Stakeholders

1. Regulatory bodies want to ensure safety standards are met.
2. Patients want access to affordable and safe healthcare. 
3. Healthcare workers want to use medical devices that are simple and safe.
4. Hospitals aim to use cost effective medical equipment. 
5. As the designer, ethical and financial motivations both play a factor into the design process.
6. Insurance companies want to keep liability as low as possible. 
7. Manufacturers want to keep production costs as low as possible.
8. NGOs prioritize the health of the public first.
9. Governments will not want to bring medical equipment into the nation that is going to cause the nation more harm. For example, the spread or introduction of disease. 
10. Local communities and individuals have a stake in preventing the spread of disease.

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

Solution 1: 

Release two different versions of the syringe, one with the auto-disable feature for hospitals and clinics that can afford it and one low-cost version without the safety feature and with red tape warnings and labels. 

Ethical Principle or code:  

Beneficence- doing good by providing equipment that will be beneficial to the health of communities

Justice- fair distribution of syringes and needles to those in need

Promotes accessibility while maintaining safety standards.

Pros: 

• Multiple options are available based on need: Hospitals that are in the most financial need will still be able to access syringes that do not have the safety features, while those hospitals that can afford it are able to get syringes with the safety feature built in.
• Safety feature is still included and recommended.
• Even without the safety feature, syringes will have red tape and warning labels that will contribute to the proper disposal of syringes 

Cons: 

• The costs will be higher for safety feature version
• production costs will be higher as two separate versions will be produced
• Will take time and research to develop a more cost efficient feature
• Syringes with only the red tape may not be handled properly ultimately leading to the spread of disease

Solution 2:

Finish the design of the syringe as is and start mass manufacturing without the safety component.

Ethical Principle or code: 

Beneficence- doing good by providing syringes to those in need.

Pros: 

• Low-Cost and ready design
• Will increase the total amount of syringes created, purchased, and used
• Low-income environments will be able to get syringes 

Cons: 

• Great potential risk for spread of disease, human health at risk
• Safety feature will never be implemented 
• No way to tell what amount of disease was/was not spread from our syringes 

Solution 3:

Release the syringe with only the safety feature version.

Ethical Principle or code: 

Non-maleficence- does no harm and no risk of spreading disease from our syringes. 

Pros: 

• Syringe will be safe to use and prevent the spread of disease
• No additional worker training or education required on disposal

Cons: 

• Syringe will be more costly leading to the target market not being reached fully
• Low-income environments will not have access to the syringes they need
• Hospitals may turn to other companies for a cheaper alternative 

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

The engineering code of ethics emphasizes prioritizing safety in healthcare designs which also aligns with the ethical principle of nonmaleficence. Based on past data, syringes with no safety feature will lead to an increase in disease as they are not disposed of properly. Not only spreading disease, these unprotected needles will lead to additional needlestick hazards. Personally, I know that if we release our devices exclusively with no safety feature it is very possible that our company will do more harm than good. 

REVISED

• Identifies stakeholders and their motivations
• Defends the best course of action vis-a-vis other approaches.
• Analyzes impact of the decision on the venture

1. Regulatory bodies want to ensure safety standards are met. They are on top of investigating upcoming products that will be used on human subjects.Their job is to screen these new products. Our new syringe is part of their work.
2. Patients want access to affordable and safe healthcare. Like the story prompt suggests, a low-cost and accessible syringe will lessen the financial burden for patients all over the world. However, the syringe will be the most impactful in areas where healthcare is not guaranteed. This will leave more patients being saved potentially.
3. Healthcare workers want to use medical devices that are simple and safe. Healthcare Workers are interested in saving and supporting their patients. With safe syringes at their disposal, they can carry out their work and secure human lives.
4. Hospitals aim to use cost effective medical equipment. If these syringes are affordable and low-cost to make, hospitals can save money with these new syringes. Hospitals can allocate their budget to other needed supplies. 
5. As the designer, ethical and financial motivations both play a factor into the design process. With a successful syringe made, the designer can spread their work around the world and gain recognition. Furthermore, with  a successful design and a ready market available that needs that design, the designer will definitely be gaining profit.
6. Manufacturers want to keep production costs as low as possible. Low prices equate to more products being produced. More products produced mean more various customers reached and  willing to pay for these products
7. NGOs prioritize the health of the public first.They can promote the syringe and aid in delivering these syringes to areas needed most. This will boost and bolster their focus and image on supporting human rights.

If we were to fulfill the solution of producing these syringes despite having the faulty safety feature, we would create a lot of risk and false hope for the majority of our stakeholders. I think hospitals, NGOS, and especially the patients would suffer the most. There may be instances where the syringes do work and everybody (all stakeholders) win and gain the maximum benefit. However, there is that chance of the syringes failing and producing harm. Knowing this information and still moving forward with the production of these syringes will create a lot of backlash amongst the public.This will ruin the reputations of the stakeholders involved and especially the designer will be held accountable. Furthermore, the blueprint of the syringe would be discarded and not further revised.

Another solution posed is to release the syringe with the correct safety feature on. However, the cost of making that syringe will be transparent to the public. This syringe will no longer be low-cost and instead be sold as a regular syringe. Stakeholders involved in selling, distributing, and manufacturing the syringe will receive benefit as the design is circulating. Hospitals will still be able to use the product, but not all patients will have access to this syringe and not all patients can afford this type of healthcare. This solution is half win and half lose. However, this solution is not revolutionary as it does not create a huge impact and solve the larger issue at hand.Furthermore, the solution does not bring anything new to the market. However, compared to solution 1, patients who do have access to this syringe will be guaranteed safeness. The only downside is that only a select amount of patients will have access to this syringe.

The other solution is to not release the syringe at all, but instead to release the blueprint and designs of the syringe.The designer gets ro have some recognition as their designs are being circulated, but are open to revisions and modifications. Compared to the other solutions, nothing will be mass produced. The designer will be known for their transparency and efforts instead, thus instilling credibility. Hospitals and NGOs will not have a faulty syringe to work with, but will be on the lookout for further revisions in the future. Patients will not be at risk as the original syringe will not be produced at all. Unfortunately, there is nothing that will serve the patients this time around. However, this solution is the best one as moral principles are applied and the focus is still on securing human health and life. The downside is that nothing changes in the market and no profit will be made. Only good credibility is introduced.