• Interdependence: The relationship, dependence, and connectedness of different systems on each other

Examples: 

• Ukweli relies on Hassan to accomplish his mission of distributing test strips and collecting data to ultimately reduce maternal mortality in Sierra Leone, and Hassan relies on Ukweli to get paid.
• The Malnutrition team relied on Bettah bakery for baking space, while Bettah bakery relied on us for business knowledge and help to grow.

 

• Holism: Individual parts are dependent on each other and produce more value together than they would on their own

Examples:

• The Malnutrition team has many bioengineers that have taken similar classes, but when put together, they know more than what they know themselves
• The Sickle Cell (SC) Screening team needs to pair their final test strip with a treatment program. Without the treatment program, the knowledge from the test strip (positive for SC or negative for SC) is useless because medication/treatment is necessary. 

 

• Multifinality: Achieving different outcomes from the same original process, “win-win for everyone” 

Examples: 

• The network we have formed in GSIF has our own goals for our own projects, but overall, GSIF wants to find sustainable solutions to health and development problems in Sierra Leone
• Mushrooms team creates income for Jwara and rice farmers and addresses issues of nutrition in poor communities.
• Khanjan satisfies his own ego and keeps his job when we succeed  

• Equifinality: There are many approaches that can be taken to reach the same goal

Examples: 

• • There are several different recipes that the Malnutrition team can use to lower child malnutrition rates in Sierra Leone
  • There are many different aspects (travel to clinics, light in birthing rooms, ANC days)  of maternal healthcare that can be focused on by the Safe Motherhood Documentary in order to reduce material death/improve maternal healthcare. 

 

• Differentiation: Within a given system, specific and unique parts are performing specific functions distinct from one another.

Examples: 

• In the Ukweli operation, Wancheng is responsible for shipping the test trips to Freetown, Allieu is responsible for getting them to Makeni and Hassan is in charge of getting the strips to the clinics and CHWs. Each needs the other in the larger operation to function, but each is also its own subsystem.
• For all teams we must be able to balance and divide our personal and professional relationships. We have to be able to disagree, agree, and build off of each others ideas in order to make progress as a group. 

 

• Regulation: Making sure that intentions and actions match up with each other.
  Examples:
  • The Malnutrition team will be having clinical trials to make sure that we are actually reducing child malnutrition the way we say we are
  • The Sickle Cell group will be running many confirmatory tests, including a clinical trial (with a verification test, the gold standard), in order to insure the test strip is able to diagnose Sickle Cell Disease with a certain level of accuracy.

 

• Abstraction: viewing a system from a birds eye view approach, thinking through complex scenarios with a level of higher context and in broader terms
  • Thinking of the Ukweli operation through a context of the larger Ministry of Health perspective and what they need and deal with at a nationwide perspective
  • Expanding projects to multiple countries eg. whatever Khanjan is doing in Liberia and Madagascar

 

• Leverage Points: A small area within a given system where a small change can be made in order to produce big change.
  • CHWs are an easily accessible and effective part of the healthcare system
  • By charging a fee (~$5) to mothers giving birth at home, mothers will go to the clinic saving many lives.
  • A small change in the Malnutrition team’s product can make a huge change in the effectivity of our product.

2. Emergence is when a whole bunch of sub-systems combine to create one system that cannot function without the existence and support of any of its connected sub-systems. A bee hive is one example of emergence, in which a complex system of hierarchy and designated functions combines to produce one unified and productive bee community.

Part 3: The solution to water hyacinth

Processing Side 

1. Employ community to gather hyacinth and pay for the supply by the kilo

 

Marketing Side 

1. Partner with the fishermen to sell the briquettes with the fish, they can make money and will help the entrepreneur collect the hyacinth. Only fisherman than want to be involved will be hired/become a partner. The other fisherman who aren’t involved originally will feel like they are missing out once they see the success of the original fisherman and will then want to join the venture. 

 

Other

1. Sell briquettes to community
2. Partner with a certain group of fishermen, in a certain area and provide discounted or free briquettes.

Friends of Ukweli

1. Hassan 
   1. Acts as a translator while we are on the ground. He currently is our community outreach employee and later he will be the distribution manager once we obtain product registration. 
   2. Hassan helped us with translation and country relations. We gave him money.
   3. Not a symbiotic relationship yet because we have not properly compensated him, he’s being paid federal minimum wage and is our most important employee. He should be compensated at a surplus rate, not the other way around.

or

1. 1. Symbiotic because we are providing some sort of livelihood. We benefit in that he gets our test strips into the market and publicized.
   2. Transitioning to the Distribution contract will make our partnership stronger
2. Carrie Jo
   1. World Hope Consultant on healthcare issues
   2. helped us meet the DMO in 2018 and find data on Koinadugu, Tonkolili, and Bombali districts. Helped Jordan with radio programs.
   3. CHAMPs project lead, useful to our venture because we can model our venture off of some of the things CHAMPs employs (ex: messaging strategy)
   4. Symbiotic relationship: Carrie Jo wants to improve maternal health in Sierra Leone, was even willing to give up some of World Hopes talk segments to promote our venture. We ask her for advice on how to establish relationships on the ground. 
3. Lori Herz
   1. Laboratory/ Technology advice for the project. 
   2. Not a symbiotic relationship. (She does get acknowledgments on the papers) We basically go and ask her for advice for chemistry stuff. 
   3. She gives us lab space. 
4. Allieu
   1. The Ukweli team relied on Allieu, as the health director of WHI, to assist operations in Sierra Leone, providing logistical support for Hassan and to champion our product at the Pharmacy Control Board. 
   2. Allieu pushed our product at the PCB and helps Hassan manage his job of distributing test strips to clinics. He also helps out with getting the test strips from the Freetown port to the WHI Makeni office.
   3. Symbiotic because Allieu took this project on as part of his paid job responsibilities, and Ukweli benefits from his expertise and knowledge in-country
   4. This partnership could be strengthened by Allieu internalizing our venture’s mission more and pushing the PCB and MOHS to procure our test strip nationwide. Ukweli could also strengthen the partnership by providing earmarked funds for his responsibilities with the venture, instead of allowing Ukweli to fall as a side gig to his larger role with WHI. 
5. Sue Baggott 
   1. She served as an outside partner to Ukweli in regards to funding acquisition.
   2. Sue provided us with insights regarding how to go about crowdfunding prior to fieldwork and checked in on us while on Mountaintop
   3. Not a symbiotic relationship, we gave her a gift from SL (I think?) but other than that we didn’t really do anything to help her out. She seems to enjoy advising and helping people with venture creation
   4. Continue to utilize her for help on potential funding sources to strengthen the partnership
6. Saidu
   1. Mr. Country Director 
   2. John Lyon and Khanjan connected us with Saidu
   3. He makes big funding decisions, facilitates decision-making forums
   4. Yes it is a symbiotic relationship because he wants World Hope to have as many successful projects as possible. Also his livelihood. We benefit because he makes progress happen with people on the ground. 
   5. Hasson and Allieu report to him, he holds them accountable which helps us
7. Bockarie
   1. Works in the finances office and keeps track of the test strip inventory. He also gives Hassan support on the ground. He sends updates every week. 
   2. He helps us by keeping us updated with what is happening on the ground. We help him in the way we help Allieu. It is his job. 
   3. This is a symbiotic relationship he gets paid. 
8. Sylvester 
   1. Finance administrator and Makeni office lead (unofficially)
   2. Oversight on Hassan, he helps us with storage of test strips
   3. We provide him an impactful project and more capital in the office
   4. Symbiotic because he benefits from being a good manager

 

What constitutes the partnership 

How did the partner help you? How did you help them 

Was this a symbiotic relationship? Why or Why not 

What would help strengthen this partnership and make it more equitable? 

 

Coalitions

 

Friends of Ukweli Coalition

• • Our Vision: 
    • 0 maternal mortality rate
    • Government of SL (Ministry of Health) Takes over the operations and distributes throughout the country
    • Expansion into Liberia and surrounding countries in West Africa
    • Focused on repairing damaged healthcare systems in developing contexts
    • Want more hospital partners to get the screen-diagnose-treat continuum 
  • Would invite:

 

• WHO

 

• • • We Care Solar
    • Malnutrition team
    • Documentary team

 

• Government of Sierra Leone: MOHS, Pharmacy Board

 

• • • Funders in US and international markets
      • Grand Challenges Canada 
      • Venture Well
      • USAID
      • Gates Foundation
      • NORAD
      • DFID

 

• Nurse society (from Freetown)

• World Hope International

 

• • • Human rights NGOs and some doctors
    • Doctors Without Borders (MSF) to collect clinical data on maternal mortality
      • They already work in Sierra Leone https://www.msf.org/sierra-leone
      • https://www.msf.org/new-hospital-counter-high-mortality-rates
    • Focus1000
    • Marie Stopes

 

• IEEE representatives

 

 

Case 1:

 

1: Facts of situation:

• The 14 million trees in India have been used extensively over the past 2,000 years for medicinal purposes, food production, toiletries, fuel, and pesticides
• Azadirachta indica (Neem) a tree indigenous to India
• Neem is sacred
• Neem is used for medical purposes, food production, toiletries, fuel, and pesticides
• India employes about 100k people and used in pesticide industry
• Pesticides are used widely across India
• Chetan lives in Agra, India and operates a small business of neem tree products
• including pesticides, skin creams, contraceptives, lamp oil and many other products
• Family owned biz Chetan has HS education
• Chetan employs 60 people
• Does quality control reference 
• Chetan does not know the exact name of the neem seed extract, Azadirachtin
• Has cultural knowledge but not a lot of knowledge in the science end
• Tom Johnson is developing neem seed pesticides (affiliated with OOPS)
• Johnson’s co invested 5mil to conduct safety and performance tests over last decade
• Tom’s company has certification (patent) through the EPA to sell pesticides (worldwide patent)
• Tom has made profit of 12.5 million during his first year
• OOPS wants to set up biz in India
• Economy of scale at play bc OOPS selling all over world and will likely put Chetan out of business
• OOPS is demanding a royalty from Chetan’s business and other small industries that make neem-based insecticides

 

What rights does Chetan have and is it ethical for the US company to uphold their patent rights? 

 

Define problem and stakeholders Motivations

• Chetan
  • Professional
  • Chetan wants to maintain his business without the royalties charged by OOPS ruining his venture
  • Wants to see his families generation long venture continue
  • Personal
  • Can be assumed that Chetan would struggle supporting his family members if his co. collapses bc royalties
• OOPS
  • Prof: They want the business to work in India. 
  • Personal: they want to provide effective organic solutions to pesticides so people do not get sick and that they can protect the patent 
• Tom Johnson
  • Prof: Tom wants money and he wants his business to be successful. He wants to tap into the market in India 
  • Personal: He might want to give back.. I.e. help indians
• Chetan’s Family
  • Prof: not really
  • Personal: Wants to see the business grow. Distrust for westerners. They know the market very well. They hold the plant sacred and might be sus of the westerners. 
• Chetan’s employees (60+)
  • Personal: Want to keep their jobs to provide for their families. Same distrust of western influence as Chetan’s family. 
  • Professional: Want a stable job that gives them income. Love u @ maria THX
• OOPS investors
  • Personal: n/a
  • Professional: Want the company to be as successful and profitable as possible. Also want the company to act ethically so that there are no scandals. 
• Other small Indian ventures that will have to pay royalties
  • These ventures will be charged royalty by OOPS on products that are tied to their patent. This would negatively impact their ventured greatly and may put them out of business
• Indian People
  • Personal: want the product to stay the same price or go down 

 

Alternate Solutions (4)

1. Legal way (Patent binding)
   1. Because Tom obtained the patent so Chetan has no option to pay the royalty
      1. Pros: Tom gets mad money and he is successful 
      2. Cons: Tom puts people out of business and he is disliked by many people 
2. Something in between: Tom Johnson and OOPS understand that entering the Indian market and collecting royalties from Chetan’s business will put Chetan out of business. To compromise, OOPS hires Chetan and his employees for a standard working wage. 

OR OOPS buys Chetan’s company

1. 1. Pros: Chetan and his employees already know how to make neem based products. Chetan and his employees retain a job. 
   2. Cons: Wages under OOPS might not be the same as the wages Chetan and his employees were making independently. 
2. “Moral Way”

 

Case 2: 

 

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

• OOPS launched 6 months ago, crushing market
• 20 different products
• neem based soap – most successful 
• OOPS wrapper features a photo of Tom Johnson
• Chetans wrapper features a photo of the founders great grandfather
• Chetan has tried to confince Tom to leave the market or collab
• Tom will not leave market 
• Tom is open to collaboration if it will make him money
• Chetans business if suffering will have to lay of half his staff
• Employees and families have worked with him for centuries
• Chetan will not suffer as much from declining business because of his investments
• Chetan s employees know he met with Tom 
• Believe chetan has cut a deal with Tom/OOPS
• Employees feel cheated and abandon 
• Some employees have resigned to their fate
• Some are confident Chetan will find a way out 
• Some want to physically want to beat Chetan up 

 

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

• Problem: Tom is dominating the neem product industry and small business owners like Chetan and his employees are in danger of going bankrupt and want tom to leave the market or collaborate. 
• Stakeholders 
  • OOPS 
  • Tom
  • Chetan
  • Chetan’s family
  • Chetan’s employees 
  • Employees’ family
  • Neem customers
  • Other small neem product businesses
  • Neem growers/gardeners

 

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

Stakeholders.

1. OOPS
   1. Personal/professional: want to keep business growing and keep control over the market 
2. Tom
   1. Personal: wants to be the top dog
   2. Professional: want OOPS to grow bigger and make more money. Provide neem products for indians. 
3. Chetan
   1. Personal: family legacy is on the stake. Employees are friends and he doesn’t want to seem like a bad friend by betraying them. 
   2. Professional: don’t want to go out of business and don’t want to lay off their long term loyal employees
4. Chetan’s family
   1. Personal: family legacy. They’d feel sad if they have to fire employees who are also their friends. Also don’t want to feel financially unstable when invested money later decreases too low. 
5. Chetan’s employees
   1. Personal: they’re long term employees and so are their relatives so it’s a personal business to them. 
   2. Professional: they need the money to make a living so they can’t be fired. 
6. Employees’ family
   1. personal/professional: they need their breadwinners to make money to provide at home otherwise they could starve and die. 
7. Neem customers
   1. Personal: Desire to get neem products at the cheapest price
8. Other small neem product businesses
   1. Professional: Continue making money/grow profits
   2. Personal: Keep their employees’ jobs
9. Neem growers/gardeners 
   1. persona/Professional: want to make money selling neem 

 

Step 4: Formulate (at least three) alternative solutions – based on information available, to have a win-win situation for your relationship and your venture. Approaches [1/2/3: repeat for every action]

• Solution 1: Chetan leaves his business and negotiates with Tom to find jobs for his employees at OOPS

• • How does it solve the problem?
  • o Pros: Chetan’s employees have jobs 
  • o Cons
• • How does it save face of those involved?
  • Chetan like the hero helping to find jobs for employees
• • Implications on relationships
  • o Short-term: Chetan and Tom develop strong partnership
  • o Long-term: Sustains good terms in the long form with employees
• • Implications on the venture
  • o Short-term: Chetan has to part ways with his business
  • o Long-term: This may be for the better in the long run to work toward joint mission

 

• Solution 2:Cut a deal with Tom to use Chetans’ business’ image and brand name to further penetrate the Indian market, Chetan receives compensation from this deal (for using his brand) and his employees receive jobs.

• • How does it solve the problem?
  • o Pros: Chetan gets to continue employing his workers, and his family’s legacy will continue on 
  • o Cons: Will likely have to surrender business capital and/or oversight. Chetan won’t have much of a say in how the business is run. 
• • How does it save face of those involved?
  • Chetan will be able to continue employing the same families and continue to generate a profit. Tom will grow his business and profit margin.
• • Implications on relationships
  • o Short-term: Chetan will maintain his relationship with his employees and generate a relationship with Tom and OOPS
  • o Long-term: Chetan’s relationship with his employees may remain strong, but as his business and Tom’s continue to dominate the market, there could be increased tensions with other Indian Neem businesses and their employees
• • Implications on the venture
  • o Short-term: No layoffs will occur, management will likely change
  • o Long-term: the employees’ jobs will be safe, the overall business structure will be permanently altered, they will edge out other small Neem businesses

 

• Solution 3: Chetan and Tom do nothing. Chetan will help his employees find jobs (letters of rec). 

 

• How does it solve the problem?
  • o Pros: Chetan’s employees can find new jobs and provide for their families and maybe even find a new passion outside of producing and selling neem. Tom won’t be bothered by Chetan’s family business anymore. 
  • o Cons: Chetan’s family legacy dies. Employees may not be able to find a job because Chetan is not guaranteeing them one. 
• • How does it save face of those involved?
  • Tom won’t be bothered if he doesn’t collaborate and if he gets rid of his competition
  • Chetan won’t feel too bad since he’s still helping his employees but at least he isn’t cheating them and going behind their back to collaborate with Tom without giving them benefits.
• • Implications on relationships
  • o Short-term: Chetan will probably hate Tom. Employees might dislike Chetan for not fighting harder. 
  • o Long-term: in the long run, everyone will find their own ways and be fine. 
• • Implications on the venture
  • o Short-term: OOPS will continue running without interruption, at least from Chetan’s business. 
  • o Long-term: bye Chetan’s business. Tom will continue dominating the industry. If the employees try hard enough, they’ll all probably find some kind of job. Some may find better ones and others may find worse ones. 

 

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

 

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

 

Solution 1 is the best course of action because although Chetan gives up something, the greater good is benefited, and Chetan isn’t totally lost, either. Together, Tom and Chetan can collaborate on figuring out the best solution that maximizes benefits and minimizes harm, rather than one man attempting to constantly best the other at the expense of jobs and innocent people’s livelihoods. This solution has the most potential to sustain longer form relationships and work toward a joint mission with as few lost jobs and hurt feelings as possible.  

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

 

1. Convince the workers that Solution 1 will benefit them the most, going with a bottom-up approach.
2. Get Chetan on board, citing widespread agreement among the workers. 
3. Devise plan to save the workers and execute the mission. 
4. Business will be better off in the end after all the complexities are sorted out.