Jacques Pelman Cinq387 Blog 4

Team members: Jacques Pelman, Rozhin Zahrouni, Nathaly Rodriguez, Ami Yoshimura

Ethical Decision-Making

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

  • 35% of children have stunted growth
  • The research group received a grant 
  • The longer the mothers breastfeed the more likely the babies are to be exposed to HIV/AIDS
    • After 6 months almost guaranteed to be infected
    • Few women are tested for the virus 
  • 500 women interested in cooperative 
  • The food may contain pesticides which may transfer in the breastfeeding process
  • Crops are grown in the area 
  • Mothers are concerned about the health effects of pesticides 
  • There is a taste testing that the mothers will take part in

Step 2&3: Define the problem and the stakeholders – those with a vested interest in the outcome & their personal/professional motivations

  • Mother
    • Highly believe that the gruel is beneficial for their children
    • Can’t easily trust foreigners who say they are supposed experts on telling the mothers what to feed their children
  • Kids
    • Want good tasting food, may reject food if tastes bad
    • Want/Need to eat 
    • Don’t want potential adverse health complications 
  • Researchers
    • Want to make the cooperative succeed
    • Want to gain publicity and build up their credibility.
    • Want to help the children from being stunted from eating non-nutritious gruel
    • Want to give the kids a nutritious porridge
    • The ingredients of the porridge may give potential adverse health complications as a result of the pesticide, but the porridge would still be healthier than the gruel
    • Want to convince the mothers that the porridge is more nutritious for their children

Secondary Stakeholders:

  • Government (Secondary)
    • Want to improve the livelihood of those in East Africa 
  • Donors (Secondary)
    • Want their investments to be fruitful
  • Men (secondary)
    • May take money from the women
    • May want their children to be healthy

        

Ethical Problem:

  • Children being infected by HIV/ AIDs through breast milk vs being infected by pesticides 

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

  1. Having an educational portion led by respected members that guide mothers through wean process 
    • Ethical code: consequence-based thinking this would help most people even if they do not buy our product
    • Pros: 
      •  Fosters community and healthier children
    • Cons:  
      • May cost way more money to compensate the respected members more than they already are
      • Incredibly time-consuming 
      • Less likely to scale 
  1. Create a gruel additive that will nutritionally enhance the gruel with packaging 
    • Ethical code: virtue-based because a person who is a professional would try to create a product to solve the solution
    • Pros: 
      • Adding more food ingredients by enhancing the original gruel recipe
      • Healthier children
      • The packaging would have an education component about nutrition and suggestions on how to use the product
    • Cons:
      • Very small amounts of social change to change the current formula
  1. Continue with breast milk until the babies are 4 months old instead of 2 months
    • Ethical code: duty-based thinking model because this would be our recommendation along with the WHO on how to prevent potential HIV transmission
    • Pros:
      • Reducing the risk of HIV/AIDS
      • Receive more nutritional 
      • More diversity 
    • Cons:
      • The potential risk of health effects from pesticides earlier than usual 
      • Families and children may be reluctant to use it

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

  • Use alternative home-made made milk powder that is cost-effective and natural
  • Thought leaders and those experienced in operating successful cooperatives 

    Peers and the Professor helped us optimize our rough ideas into a more polished solution.  

    Personal experience about how babies work.

Step 6: Select the best course of action-that which satisfies the highest core ethical values. Explain reasoning and justify it. Discuss Your stance vis-a-vis other approaches discussed in the class.

  • The best course of action is options 2 and 3.
  • This solution is also ideal and is better than including option 1 because it will ultimately scale better, which is a huge component of this situation and problem. Having an educational component is not only incredibly time-intensive but also extremely expensive. 
  • All stakeholders will be somewhat satisfied with the solution, with this consensus

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

  1. We would create and perfect our product and packaging and test the tastes and convenience of it with children and mothers.
  2. Next, we would create the packaging and what exactly it would say and make it easy to understand. After this, we would mass-produce the product. The information on the package would include when exactly to start weaning the baby onto the formula. 
  3. Lastly, we would make sure the product is at an adequate price that is available to most if not all mothers. An extra step would be to continue to take customer surveys to help improve the product.

Grassroots Diplomacy Strategy

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

  • 35% of children have stunted growth
  • The research group received a grant 
  • The longer the mothers breastfeed the more likely the babies are to be exposed to HIV/AIDS
    • After 6 months almost guaranteed to be infected
    • Few women are tested for the virus 
  • 500 women interested in cooperative 
  • The food may contain pesticides which may transfer in the breastfeeding process
  • Crops are grown in the area 
  • Mothers are concerned about the health effects of pesticides 
  • There is a taste testing that the mothers will take part in
  • The women work for about nine hours every day and earn KES 300 (about $3).
  • They are not necessarily opposed to the men taking away their money but are upset that their hard-earned money is not used to feed their children.
  • Cooperative lets them grow their money, unlike banks that take away money to save money 
    • Men are less likely to take money away from women when its a larger sum that has been saved up 

Step 2&3: Define the problem and the stakeholders-those with a vested interest in the outcome

  • Mother
    • Personal:
      • Highly believe that the gruel is beneficial for their children
      • Can’t easily trust foreigners who say they are supposed experts on telling the mothers what to feed their children
    • Profesional 
      • Want a source of income and keeping their income for essentials
  • Kids
    • Personal:
      • Want good tasting food, may reject food if tastes bad
      • Want/Need to eat 
      • Don’t want potential adverse health complications 
  • Researchers
    • Personal:
      • Want to gain acknowledgment and build their resume by working in this project
    • Profesional: 
      • Want to give the kids a nutritious porridge
      • The ingredients of the porridge may give potential adverse health complications as a result of the pesticide, but the porridge would still be healthier than the gruel
      • Want to convince the mothers that the porridge is more nutritious for their children 

Secondary Stakeholders:

  • Government (Secondary)
    • Want to improve the livelihood of those in East Africa 
  • Donors (Secondary)
    • Want their investments to be fruitful
  • Men (secondary)
    • May take money from the women
    • May want their children to be healthy

Step 4: Formulate (at least three) alternative solutions-based on information available

Solution 1: Give choice between food and other essentials as payment instead of money

  • How does it solve the problem?
    •  Pros:
      • Prevents husbands from taking extra money in certain situations Children are more likely to be more well-fed.
    • Cons: 
      • May take the extra money away from the mothers
  •  How does it save face of those involved?
    • It saves the face of the coop. from having to tell the patriarchal side of the families how to use their money. This way the woman can use their work profits in the way that they want to spend it – on their children and household instead of alcohol and other things that their patriarch could spend the woman’s work income on. This choice would grant the woman the liberty to not have to give up their money to their male counterparts to use on stuff that does not bring the family any benefits or food. 
  • Implications on the venture
    • Short-term
      • The woman would be able to choose to receive food in place of their money income, which will mean that those families will be able to eat better food without having to worry about unnecessarily spending the money
      • The men of the family may tell the women working in the family to receive the money instead of the food, so the women may not be able to have the individual choice in the matter.
      • They can choose between money and food in case an emergency comes up where they need money (e.g. hospital bills, debt, etc).
    • Long-term
      • The families that we’re able to get food instead of money can give their kids and other family members nutritious meals.
      • The families that constantly choose money instead of food, may still come across the same problem of not being able to use their money for food and other beneficial things for the family as they would have to give up their money to their male counterparts.

Solution 2: Give food and other home essentials such as diaper or clothes

  • How does it solve the problem?  
    • Pros: 
      • Prevents husbands from taking extra money
      • Children are more likely to be more well-fed. 
    • Cons:
      • Takes the extra money away from the mothers
      • Potential for conflict between women and men, especially since women did not have an issue giving them the money
        • Can give a negative light to the cooperative that leads to losing workers 
  • How does it save face of those involved?
    • It saves face on the Co-op by making sure the social goal is achieved. It saves the face of the women by still bringing home goods by working and improving the lives of the children. Stops the men from using their money on booze and other nonessentials entirely. However, this may anger the men because they won’t have extra money for the nonessentials. 
  • Implications on relationships
    • Short-term
      • Solves the issue of women wanting the children to have their essentials
    • Long-term
      • Men can still take the items and sell them for booze if they are that desperate for money
      • Can create distrust in relationships since the women have been receiving some sum of money already so if it suddenly stops that can lead to issues. 

Solution 3: Giving a smaller portion (⅓) of money earned to women for their usage (that can and may likely be taken by men), but keeping a larger majority (⅔) inequity within the Co-op, while also providing small servings of porridge every day. 

  • How does it solve the problem?
    • Pros: 
      • Allows the moms to not cause strain on their relationships while still getting some money.
      • Creates a good and convenient way of saving money.
      • Still allows the children to have a better quality of life
      • Equity stake in the Co-op will exponentially increase as it scales, which means the money that they might cash out in the future will be much higher than when started and men will be much less likely to use it for other things.
      • Still provides some “beer money” for men, while the money in equity can’t be taken away immediately 
      • Still will be able to have food due to the small servings of porridge that is provided. 
    •  Cons:
      • Men still have the opportunity to take all the money
      • If women don’t trust the Co-op entirely they may be skeptical about saving their money there.
      • If an emergency happens the women may not be able to easily withdrawal their savings 
  • How does it save face of those involved?
    • It saves face on the Co-op by making sure the social goal is achieved. It saves the face of the women by still bringing home goods by working and improving the lives of the children. Discourages the men from using their money on booze and other nonessentials entirely.
  • Implications on the relationship
    • Short-term:
      • Both men and women are happy since they are both getting what they want
    • Long-term:
      • A potential issue is when men see that women receive the other sum of money, they may try to cash out all the equity and use it for themselves

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

  • Thought leaders and those experienced in operating successful cooperatives 
  • Peers and the Professor helped us optimize our rough ideas into a more polished solution.  
  • Personal experience about how babies function, e.g. what nutrition they need to grow and what they normally consume.

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 course of action would be solution 3 because it creates a situation where you are still providing money when it is needed for the women in the area of big cash withdrawals. You satisfy the men by the small income. There is still some food being given to the women and their families which allows the children’s quality of life to improve.
  • In comparison, the other ideas fall short in terms of not being able to facilitate a stable relationship where in the second option the men may get mad at the women and it wouldn’t allow the women to buy things that they need cash for. The first idea falls short because the men will have full opportunity to take the money.

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:
    • Giving them access to a system on a computer that allows them to see how much has gone to the men vs how much is being saved in their account. It can be as simple as an excel spreadsheet or more high tech depending on budget 
  • Economic:
    • Create an ability for the family to save up money for large purchases like weddings, home improvements, and funerals. Doing all this while still providing them with healthy food to give to their children. 
  • Social: 
    • It would create more agreement between the relationship of the women and the male figures in their lives as this would give the men their needed money to spend frivolously and the women the credits and food to support their family otherwise.
  • Environmental:
    • If there are no conflicts between women and men in terms of money, cooperation is more likely to continue running. This means that the land will continue to be used for agriculture. 

One thought on “Jacques Pelman Cinq387 Blog 4

  1. Hi all, nice work here. i noticed in part 1 a lot of your solutions don’t address both sides of the problem (breast feeding and introducing potentially harmful porridge) so make sure to keep in mine the whole problem when creating a solution. In part 2 I would have loved to see the steps you would take to implement your decision as those are important to show your understanding of the saving face aspect.
    Here is your grade. Please do not approve this comment or it will become public.

    Identifies the ethical issue: 10

    Identifies stakeholders and motivations: 10

    Selects best course of action and provides analysis: 7

    Defends best course of action vis-a-vis other approaches: 10

    Analyzes impact of the decision on the venture: 7

    Overall: 8.8

Leave a Reply