Case Study 2 Grassroots Diplomacy

 

Discussion notes

Step 1: determine facts

  1. Jack is American on a social venture
  2. Jack is at a youth center in Kenya
  3. Int. donor Org. sent gifts for the children at the center
  4. Kids are younger than 14, 4 of them did not receive gifts ceremoniously
  5. Jack was in charge of handing out gifts
  6. Jack was thanked for the gifts by the kids
  7. Kids were convinced the gifts were from jack
  8. Jack is going to be there for 5 months (lots of contact w/ the kids)
  9. Kids that didn’t get gifts blamed jack
  10. The staff did not care about the kids not getting gifts
  11. Staff calls Jack a “children’s rights activist” because they were annoyed that Jack brought up the 4 kids not receiving gifts and how he felt awkward
    1. Insight: Jack might not understand the constraints that they are working in
      1. Could have wrongfully/rightfully criticized how the staff run the center 

 

Step 2: Stakeholders 

Personal

Professional 

Both

  1. Jack
    1. Want to be liked by the kids/wants them to be happy (save face)
    2. Wants to keep a good relationship with the center staff
    3. Doesn’t want to be that awk gringo
  2. Kids that got gifts
    1. Like jack for getting gifts
    2. Think the white man will get him gifts
  3. Kids that did not get gifts
    1. Want to have the same dignity as the kids that received them ceremoniously
    2. Thinks the white man doesn’t care about them
  4. Youth center staff
    1. Don’t want their work to be seen as unfair
    2. Does not care about the issues of the kids
    3. Get Jack to make a specific kind of effort with the kids
    4. Want to be seen as people who are doing well and care about the kids
  5. Int. donor Org. (Gift funders)
    1. Want to look good, need to uphold a reputation that they are doing good, therefore they sent gifts to the children at this center
    2. Wanna successfully present nice gesture
  6. University (Jack)
    1. Want to look good
    2. Want the social venture to prosper 
  7. Parents of the kids
    1. Want to send a kid to good youth center
  8. Locals (Will hear about situation from parents of kids)

 

Step 3: Determine and distinguish between the personal, professional, or both motivations of the stakeholders.

  1. a.b.c.’s

 

Step 4: Formulate at least three alternative solutions

    1. Jack finds/makes/orders gifts to ceremoniously give to the other kids in front of the group
      1. Solution pros: all the kids would be happy and get their gifts
      2. Solution cons: 
      3. Saving face:
      4. Relationships impact ST: The staff might be annoyed with him.
      5. Relationships impact LT: This makes the staff feel that he is a child activist, thus they might feel and aversion from him, as well as possibly not doing this event again and not want to work with him
      6. Venture impacts ST: There might be some impact on the way people look at jack and the venture based on the actions and the fact that he has to redo the event because he got the number wrong. Huge planing impact and cost. 
      7. Venture impacts LT: People will remember this event and it might help people forget about this event, but it might also make them remember it forever.
    2. Jack waits for new gifts to come and gives them to the black hat kids first
      1. Solution pros: makes the black hat kids feel special/included
      2. Solution cons: what if not enough gifts come again and other kids don’t get a gift 
      3. Saving face: 
      4. Relationships impact ST:  new gifts = fun, and excitement in kids
      5. Relationships impact LT: other kids might be annoyed these kids got both hats and gifts
      6. Venture impacts ST: He will probs take a hit for not giving gifts, and screwing the poach. Lots of time and effort 
      7. Venture impacts LT: Might fix a social problem, in the end, may make it worse.

 

  • Jack wears a black hat every day (frequently) to make the other kids feel special

 

    1. Solution pros: the kids may feel more included, respected, or dignified since the adult is also wearing their hat, solves the issue with the staff because they all move on, simple, fast, easy
    2. Solution cons: it’s not as ceremonious as the other gifted kids
      1. May also cause problems among the kids who have the hats and don’t have the hat
    3. Saving face:
    4. Relationships impact ST: saves face w kids who didn’t get gifts before, excites them
    5. Relationships impact LT: extreme tensions among kids who do and don’t have hats
    6. Venture impacts ST: tension from the staff thinking Jack initially overreacted may last but will hopefully fade 
    7. Venture impacts LT: mends the relationships with all the children and quietly solves the issue with the staff as long as no one holds a grudge
  1. Jack approaches the staff to try and save his own face by suggesting they change their perspectives on working with the children
    1. Solution pros: Changes the staff mentality to help improve Jack’s experience for the rest of the time he will work there
    2. Solution cons: Coming up with a solution that approaches the stern admins instead of the children.
    3. Saving face:  Potential for failure means the potential for securing loss of social influence. He may lose dignity in the eyes of the staff. The conversation would be very straight-forward, and potentially change opinions overnight, leading to better relationship development overall. 
    4. Relationships impact ST: tension with staff. Children are still mad.
    5. Relationships impact LT: Eased relationship with staff and Jack. Staff and children have a better relationship. 
    6. Venture impacts ST: Less productivity and collaboration.
    7. Venture impacts LT: Increased levels of collaboration that would otherwise not be achievable. 

 

Step 5: Seek additional assistance as necessary

  1. Kenyan gift culture: Kenyan Gift Culture
    1. Guests invited to someone’s home may bring a small gift of appreciation.
    2. Common gifts to give are flowers and tea leaves.
    3. In rural areas of Kenya, coffee, sugar, flour, and maize are usually given. These gifts are presented in a woven bag (‘kiondo’ in Kikuyu). The host will return the bag at the end of the visit after placing gifts for their visitor inside.
    4. It is impolite to return a kiondo empty.
  2. American Gift Culture:  American Culture
    1. If you are invited to a wedding, baby showers, bar mitzvah, or other celebration, it is expected that you will bring a gift. Unless you know the host very well, the gift should be modest in value, about $20.
    2. For a wedding, the bride will have “registered” at one or two local department stores, indicating the items and styling she prefers. You can buy the couple a gift that isn’t listed, but most people buy something listed on the registry. If you buy an item listed on the registry, be sure to tell the store that you are doing this, so that the couple doesn’t receive duplicate gifts. For a baby shower, bring a gift appropriate for a newborn baby. For a bar mitzvah, bring a gift appropriate for a 13-year-old boy. Bar Mitzvah gifts tend to be more formal in nature. For example, a gold-plated Cross pen is quite common. Personalizing the pen by engraving the recipient’s full name will be appreciated.
    3. If you wish to give a gift when you leave to return to your home country, the best gift is something that is unique to your country. It does not need to be especially valuable or rare, just reminiscent of your home. Possibilities include a book about your country, an inexpensive handicraft or piece of art, or something else that reflects your culture. If the children collect coins and stamps, they would be very pleased with a set of your country’s coins or a selection of mint stamps from your country. Items that are common in your country but difficult to find in the USA are also good.
    4. If you owe a debt of deep gratitude to an American host family, a common way of repaying it is to take the family to a form of entertainment, such as a baseball, basketball, or hockey game, the ballet, or to a good restaurant.
    5. When giving gifts to a business acquaintance, do not give anything of a personal nature, especially to a woman. Do not give cosmetics. A scarf is ok, but other types of clothing are not. Something appropriate for the office is the best. But gift-giving is not as important in America as it is in other countries, so there is nothing wrong with not giving a gift.
    6. If you need help selecting a gift, talk to a salesperson at a department store. Tell them about the person who will be receiving the gift and the reason for the gift, and they will help you find something appropriate and within your budget.

Step 6: Select the best course of action

I would pick the hat personally if I was in jack situation. I think that by using the hat method, you prevent any issues with the staff at the NGO, you also can make the kids feel better knowing that jack is wearing the hat, so they know he thinks its a good gift. Now there is a possibility that this concept backfires with the kids who got real gifts, but I feel that repair jacks reputation, and specifically the perception of how people view the NGO should be a priority because it makes everyone’s job easier if the villagers aren’t mad at the NGO.

In regards to giving the kids new gifts, I think there’s the little actual reward to gain for doing this in any matter. Yes, the kids will feel better knowing that they got gifts but then you make more a scene out of it amplifying what went wrong. Also, you might make the kids who only got a gift and not a hat feels bad, so by just wearing the hat jack makes the kids with hats feel better, doesn’t drag everyone through the event again, also the NGO works can’t accuse him of being a child-focused individual who cares too much. 

 

I think the only other good method might be talking with the staff and having them try and change their perspective as well as nudge them to count a little better next time, but that’s a rabbit hole, that I am pretty sure and American who is working abroad doesn’t want to fall down, plus he will probably just damage his relationship with the people a bunch all for some kids who didn’t get gifts. I am not sure a working relationship should be damaged over such a small thing, in the scheme of the realm this NGO probably works in.

 

Step 7: List sequences of actions to implement the solution (perspective of Jack)

  1. Talk about hat
  2. Buy a black hat
  3. Make sure its on right
  4. Take off the hat (if on)
  5. Go to bed
  6. Wake up
  7. do it all again for a couple of days.
  8. If kids aren’t seeing hat makes sure kids see it, and understand the meaning of him wearing a hat.
  9. Also, who doesn’t like wearing hats?

Fall Week 2

  1. Facts of the case 
    1. The goal is to test the water form the source for known disease-causing pathogens 
    2. These pathogens can only be found in this one region of Lesotho
    3. There are no immediate term benefits the community for the research besides the economic benefit of stimulation from the foreigners.
    4. The only contribution completely necessary from the village is the researchers using the water source. Would it be nice for on the ground help, yes, but not necessary?
    5. The 11 researchers will be staying for 14 days to complete their research.
    6. This research may lead to additional benefits to the world, or may not: unclear.
    7. They plan to publish the research they conducted while in-country as well as everything they learned in relation to the research from the samples.
    8. They are not required to pay any locals for helping them find samples or for using resources to help them as well.

 

  1. Stakeholders (Letters) and Motivations (Roman Numerals)
    1. You and research team- 11 people on the ground doing research.
      1. Stands to gain from an additional citation on their record
      2. Professional clout in possible groundbreaking research
      3. Fieldwork in a new place/New experience
      4. New grant opportunities, based on how well research goes.
    2. The community members of the village
      1. May benefit from solutions in the future, if the research creates something new.
      2. Possible more researchers coming if they discover something groundbreaking.
      3. Economic Stimulator of having foreigners staying there.
    3. Local workers (If deciding to pay them)
      1. Compensation for work
      2.  Possible better jobs or stigma for working with the foreigners
      3. Additional skills and a better resume
    4. Anyone who reads the report
      1. Make a profit from the solution
      2. Additional knowledge from the reading report.
      3. Ability to prevent themselves from pathogens.
    5. The University
      1. Gains clout from research in a foreign country as well as better recognition.
      2. Publication and citations on their records
      3. Possible grants from research which can lead to better facilities and faculty.
    6. Government of Lesotho
      1. Can gain clean water from possible research afterward
      2. It can better help communities understand what is going on with their water.
      3. Money flowing into the communities from foreigners
      4. Recognition of research and being better well known due to the research.
    7. Funding institution (If different than University)
      1. They have their money at stake for them
      2. They have their name on this research
      3. They will be able to say they have a global impact
      4. This research might help their bottom line in the end.
    8. South Africa
      1. May be affected by these pathogens based on geological problems or the way water flows in the region spreading these pathogens.
  2. The ethical questions at hand are, in this case:  
    1. Should people be compensated for their time and resources in helping them find water samples?
      1. Pay them for time and resources:
        1. By paying them you may get better results and better samples, but they also may try and hold you for more money. You also have to deal with what is a fair rate, and who you should pick to help you. 
        2. One of the ways to solve is to find the average wage for the area and then pay the chief to help you get the best men/woman for the job.
      2. Pay them for resources only:
        1. By paying them only for the resources they need to get you to your samples you may get better results and better samples, but the people no longer have an incentive to find you good samples. You won’t have to deal with what is a fair rate, you just have to reimburse for the cost of items. It might be more difficult because locals will or may not be motivated to help you find what you need.
        2. This lowers the cost on your end while still having them not have to pay for anything out of their pocket. Still have to sort out, who you want helping you.
      3. Don’t pay them:
        1. By not paying the locals, you will not have a lot of added cost and you won’t have to sort out whos getting paid and how much. You also won’t have to reimburse for cost incurred to them.
        2. This strategy is the lowest cost but I think the most difficult because you have to be able to convince people to help you and find you exactly what you need while not really incentivizing them to do so.
    2. Should the village be compensated for the scientists taking water samples?
      1. Pay them: 
        1. You are taking their resource without anything physical in exchange.
        2. It is a public resource so by taking it you are acting almost the same as the locals.
      2. Don’t pay them (Distribute information):
        1. You are taking their research without giving anything in return so the least you could do would give them a layman term of what you have gathered because more will be unable to access the research once it is published.
      3. Don’t pay them (At all):
        1. You are just using a naturally occurring and public resource, therefore, you owe nothing to them from taking it. Is there a possible stigma of the locals not knowing what the foreigners are doing and thus them believing that they are harming them, yes. But by reaching out to the chef we are putting that on him.
    3. Is it ethical to conduct this study from a human standpoint? Are there any immediate impacts to humans from this study?
      1. Yes: 
        1. As long as the people you get to help you are not affected by the pathogen specifically based on your work, then it is ethical.
      2. No:
        1. If you know that them coming in contact with this disease will harm them then the study is unethical from that point.

 

  1. Additional points.
    1. Ebola team: Did not pay anyone except for reimbursements, we also made sure anyone involved knew exactly what the goal of the study was. Also, most people will be unable to access the research.
    2. Clinical trials do research/trials and then finish without providing real solutions, similar to the course of action this project could take. Their research is also not accessible to most people anyway.

 

  1. If I were to conduct this study I would pay the locals and well are reimbursed for the cost of incurred costs. The cost for the locals for the team would likely be minimal. You have the best chance of gathering the best data, and you are not making people pay for out of the pocket expenses. You also make sure then that these people don’t feel like they are forced to help you, and feel good for what they are doing. This strategy will result in the best data, as well as all stakeholders, being the best off. When it comes to compensating locals for the actual water, I don’t think they need to be paid for it because it is a public resource, therefore, the team taking water versus a regular person is the same. To make this a little more formal I would reach out to the ministry of water and got their approval which might also help to have a name on the project as well. This will make it feel like we are working for the government and therefore not taking a resource from them but more using it. Finally, when it comes to the overall question of is this study ethical I think the answer is yes no matter if you are paying them or not as well as if you are paying them for the water samples. The water sources is public property and therefore up for taking and the people are not being forced to help you so paying them will help but is not necessary. I think the only thing that jumps out would be if the researchers knew that by having locals help them put the locals at an increased risk of being affected by these pathogens, then I feel like the study is unethical unless they declare that to them. 

 

  1. Implications of our best course of action 
    1. Economically
      1. We are increasing the employment rate and put cash into the economy
      2. We are also adding skills to the area
    2. Stigma
      1. We might be adding stigma by having foreigners work there.
    3. Research
      1. New research into this pathogen as well as the research that comes from it will fund the price of paying people on the ground.