Ulan, Nathaly, Hugo, Josue, and Alondra

1.  What is Air Quality Almaty (AQA) trying to achieve/hoping to change? 
   • AQA is the first informational and interactive mobile application, committed to providing individualized advice synthesized from over a hundred research papers and case studies. AQA aims to be an app that prioritizes engagement amongst its users and provides guidance through feasible everyday changes one could take to limit the exposure to the dangers that come along with poor air quality. 
2. What is the customer’s incentive for uploading our app?  
   • AQA provides users with a chance to prevent future health issues from the poor air quality around them. 
   • The government will also have an incentive because of the possible decline in health costs due to people engaging in healthier behavior. 
   • Costs of Poor Air Quality and Poor Behaviors: 
     1. Morbidity Cost Estimate: $1.59-1.686 million in Kazakhstan. 
     2. Mortality Cost Estimate: $15.9 billion-$16.86 billion in Kazakhstan.
     3. VSL Range for Almaty: $4.472747 million-$7.44967 million
     4. VSL Range for Kazakhstan: $2.65011 million-$2.8196 million
     5. Total Cost (Mortality + Morbidity): $17.49 billion-$18.372 billion
     6. .01* Cost= $174.4 million-$183.72 million
3.  Who will our partners be?- What will our partnerships look like?
   • AlmatyU– We need to better establish the relationship between the venture and AlmatyU. Kazakhstan residents as partners will greatly contribute to the effectiveness of AQA’s survey. 
     1. The tasks wouldn’t be demanding. Some tasks could include distributing our survey, contributing more data to the venture’s database, and reporting back on any feedback directly from survey takers and users.  AlmatyU team can also give us a better perspective on how to reword our surveys so that it is culturally relevant/appropriate to Kazakhstan residents.   
   • IQ Air– AQA will highly depend on IQ Air sources of air pollution and air quality for Kazakhstan. Since we would need large amounts of data setting up a partnership would help us in.
4. Where do we source our data?
   • Currently we have a Google Sheets database with our customer segments. Over 100 articles and scientific pieces have been synthesized to navigate the best advice that can be given out based on individual characteristics and lifestyles. 
   • We are working towards a better system that effectively works to input data and translate the data into easily understood graphs, charts, etc on our app’s platform. 
5. How do smart cities fit into the project?
   • Smart city technology can monitor, in real time, the air quality of areas and send alerts to people so they may avoid those areas. 
   • Kazakhstan residents will be better equipped to combat the growing issue of poor air quality. Since many of the issues are not an easy change and are embedded in the way society functions, AQA will prioritize individual actions that can be done. 
6. How will we personalize our users’ data?
   • When users first sign up for the app they will take a short survey that obtains basic information about their demographics. As the user continues to use the app they will be asked more questions about their daily habits. Based on the collected information, they will be given specific insights/goals to help them reduce their risk. 
7. How do you incorporate civic action in your app? 
   • AQA can have a feature that will allow users to challenge other users or friends that have not downloaded the app to a challenge measuring who is incorporating the given advice in their daily lives.
   • A reward system that will motivate users to recommend the app to their friends 
     1. Example: Cash App motivates their users to recommend the app to contacts by giving them $5 when the person downloads it. 
8. What role does the government play in AQA? 
   • In the past, citizens have tried to protest against the poor air quality, however the government would jail those involved. One of the main contributors to the poor air quality are coal factories/ coal based heating, which plays a huge role in Kazakhstan’s economy. 
     1. This means our project has to have clear benefits economically for the government.
9. What role does social media play in this venture?
   • Social media can be used as part of marketing strategy, since many citizens already go to social media as a way to raise awareness.
10. How will you market this venture? 
    • Our venture blogs will help build credibility. Our team should promote our blog and share it with AlmatyU. 
    • Creation of a website. It would allow our team to start our online platform which will present information about our venture, our goals, our works, etc. 
    • Creation of an app is an essential part of our venture, so having that on the app store, google app store, etc will allow the public to access it.
    • Our venture needs to pursue publishing a paper or a scientific piece that will build credibility. 
    • Have promotional videos capturing our venture’s purpose and how we’re working on the issues. 
    • Build a social media platform. Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, and Twitter would be great ways to capture attention. Be actively engaged with informational presentations and posts. 
    • QR Code on informational posters placed in relevant public spaces
      1. For example, a playground saying something along the lines of “Hey Mom, Make sure you check the air quality levels before you let your child play in this park”. Then, having a QR code that will direct the audience to our mobile application. 
11. Who will become our long-term target customers?( What customer segment are we going to focus on? )
    • Customers that are the most susceptible to the air pollutions (Asthmatics, elderly, pre- existing health conditions, pregnant women)
    • People that have the least amount of resources to help reduce their exposure to air pollution
    • Customers that are most likely to develop adverse health effects from long term air pollution exposure
    • Note: We are still doing research on these to detect which customer segment or segments we mainly want to focus on
12. What other cities can we use as examples when looking towards solutions?
    • Looking to California and seeing what policies and solutions they implement to tackle the poor air quality from the fires and how covid fits into the situation
    • Other Cities that endure poor air quality due to industrialization
      1. Ex: Beijing, Mexico City, LA, Santiago, etc
      2. See how their governments are dealing w/ the issues, learn from them 
      3. How has COVID factored into dealing with poor air quality and what were the after effects in terms of pollution changes
13. How does your venture compare to other approaches already in the market to solve the air pollution problem in Almaty? 
    • AUA- basically just showcases air quality data
    • IQAir
      1. -tracks air quality through their own air quality monitors that people purchase
      2. Map our air quality trackers on world map that shows distribution of air pollution 
    • We differ because of the personalization in insights we provide along with the data to minimize user’s exposure
14. How can we incentivize community members to come up with solutions and act together to help reduce air pollution and reduce exposure to poor air quality
    • Creating app features that promote community involvement
      1. Having more local farmers markets that are within walking distance
      2. Promoting carpooling 
      3. Promoting bike riding lessons
    • Incentive widespread energy use reductions that allow people to either use less energy or make things more energy efficient
15. Who will be the main engineers of the application?
    • We are going to outsource app developers
    • Hopefully we can partner with IQAir to help with developing our app 
16. How will your venture be sustainable in the future?
    • Our venture will be sustainable through subscription-based memberships  ux
    • If we partner with a larger organization we can get a steady inflow of funds and be sustained through their already existing infrastructure 
17. How can we better utilize NGO organizations and nonprofits in Kazakhstan to help support our ideas and solutions? 
    • Utilize their base for marketing and to gain credibility in the public impact sector
    • Connections / networking with other important stakeholders in the city 
18. What are examples of your insights?
    • Choosing to walk over riding a personal vehicle can reduce your exposure to air pollution
    • Keeping babies inside during poor air quality index
    • Doing prolonged cardio exercise outdoors increases your risk of developing cardiovascular issues
    • Incorporation indoor plants that help remove pollutants from the air
19. How will you fund your venture? 
    • Applying for grants 
    • Partnering with larger organizations like IQAir
    • Funding from venture capitalists
20. How can we better utilize our relationship with AlmaU? 
    • They know how to read russian, so they can translate news articles and government policies for us
    • They are up to date with current events and can help us stay in the loop of what new updates are happening
    • They are more knowledgeable about living in the city and cultural understanding that we can utilize. 
    • They have better cultural understanding that could help us to build relationships with local community 

Group: Kendall Prime, Conner Calzone, and Gabby Alves

Ethical Decision-Making Methodology 

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

• • 35% of the children are stunted due to poor nutrition
  • Maize and bananas are the items most commonly made into a gruel and fed to infants beginning at ~2 months of age to 24 months of age
  • Mothers believe that the gruel is good for kids, but science says it lacks some key nutrients
  • High rate of HIV in mothers create risk of child getting HIV during prolonged breastfeeding
    • WHO recommends exclusive breastfeeding until an infant is 6 months of age
    • This increases the risk of the children having the HIV transmitted to them
    • They aren’t able to identify who has HIV and who doesn’t
  • We received a grant to help combat the poor nutrition of children in the area 
    • has sufficient funds for the women’s group to process and market a nutritious, shelf-stable porridge made from a large mix of locally grown produce
  • Nutritious porridge is supposed to wean children off of breast milk at 6 months of age
  • The foods used to make the porridge contain pesticides that can affect the health of infants
  • We need to figure out how to develop the cooperative
  • Women are skeptical because the porridge is something they haven’t used before (new product) 

• Ethical issue: We are choosing whether to potentially infect the children with HIV and/or run the risk of being nutritiously deficient with the gruel versus a better nutrition but potentially adverse health side effects from the pesticides that may be in the porridge, which is also a product that is not a cultural norm.  

Step 2 & 3: Define the Stakeholders and assess their motivations (personal and professional)

• Me (Grant Recipient): 
  • Professional: Wants a successful and sustainable venture to be achieved to boost credibility and improve reputation in the field (good publicity).  Want to earn money from grant
  • Personal: To improve the nutrition of children and the livelihood of households.  
• Donor : 
  • Professional: Gives the donor a good reputation of trying to do something impactful
  • Personal: The donor’s intent is to simultaneously improve the nutritional status of children and improve the livelihoods of rural households
• Women in the Cooperative: 
  • Professional: women’s group to process and market a nutritious, shelf-stable porridge made from a large mix of locally grown produce 
  • Personal: Want to improve the overall quality of life for their communities children and mothers
• Mothers: 
  • Professional: Work opportunities 
  • Personal: healthy children and and improve their livelihoods, 
• Infants: 
  • Professional: Probably don’t have any professional yet…
  • Personal: The children need to be given the proper nutrients from a young age while limiting their risk of contracting HIV.  Want to also prevent health effects from pesticides. 
• Farmers: 
  • Professional: Can make more money from selling produce to make the porridge 
  • Personal: Helping out the health and livelihood of mothers and children in the local communities

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

1. Part of Porridge production is having women in cooperative farm crops without pesticides

1. 1. Pros: 
      1. The women can make money from growing their own vegetables 
      2. The food they feed their children will be more nutritious 
      3. There won’t be any pesticides in the food or there will be significantly less depending on if the women can completely supplant the other cash crops 
      4. Preventing the children’s chances of getting HIV
      5. Less expensive to fund the production of food if the women are providing the crops
      6. The women will not need to breast-feed as much, reducing the chance of HIV being transmitted being transferred to the babies
   2. Cons: 
      1. There might be more inconsistency with crops
      2. The crops are more susceptible to infestation and can go bad
      3. There might not be enough women to farm to help grow crops 
   3. Ethical Principle: The women are still feeding their children with nutritious food that will help their children reduce the chances of getting HIV and being affected by the impacts of pesticide consumption.

1. Use market power to pressure farmers to stop using pesticides by advertising certified pesticide free porridge

1. 1. Pros: 
      1. No more pesticides which are unhealthy for the infants and may cause further growth stunting
      2. This creates long term change around farm culture and pesticide use, making vegetables safer for the entire community
      3. Empowers women in our cooperative by showing the power of cooperative, making more women interested in joining
      4. The women will not need to breast-feed as much, reducing the chance of HIV being transmitted being transferred to the babies
   2. Cons:
      1. Might not work (cannot predict reaction)
      2. Farmers may lose sales due to this shift in technique
      3. Farmers might lie about pesticide usage for the sake of selling crops
      4. This is more of a long term movement, and does not satisfy immediate need for pesticide-free vegetables
   3. Ethical Principle: This is duty based thinking because it is our duty to deliver safe nutrition to the children of the mothers in our cooperative.

1. Create a gruel product that has additive nutrient supplements with the key nutrients the current recipe is lacking. We can create this gruel in place of the porridge, but still keep operations running.

1. 1. Pros:
      1. Already a loved product by the community, so there is no need to convince the community to feed it to their kids
      2. Nutritional supplements can be easily added to any food and does not have any flavor
      3. The kids will finally have the nutrients that the original gruel was lacking
      4. Mothers won’t have to buy separate ingredients for the gruel; it will be premade with the added nutrients
      5. The women will not need to breast-feed as much, reducing the chance of HIV being transmitted being transferred to the babies
   2. Cons:
      1. Similarly, the villagers may be skeptical of these premade products
      2. Mothers may want to just keep making gruel on their own instead of buying one that’s premade
      3. Depending on the grant funding, there might be an issue with buying the vitamin supplements if they are expensive (typically inexpensive, though, but since we don’t know the amount of the grant, there’s no way to know for sure)
   3. Ethical Principle: The gruel with the added nutrition won’t included added pesticides that are bad for the children and will help bring added nutrition to their diet and lowering the risk of getting HIV from the mother

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

• Peers: The malnutrition team has discussed adding supplements to some of their recipes to make them more nutrient rich
• Inner reflection: the risk of HIV is in my opinion, worse than the risk of lacking some nutrients

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.

• I think the solution 3, creating a gruel that just has added vitamin nutrients to it, because it allows for the children to still get the nutrients they need without being exposed to potentially harmful pesticides and reducing their risk of getting HIV from breastfeeding from the mothers.  It also helps make the gruel more appealing to the mothers since they want to feel comfortable using a product they are familiar with.
  • For me as the grant recipient it will help me achieve my goal of providing proper nutrition to the children and improving the overall quality of life through the women’s cooperative.  It will give me good credibility and make a good impression on the donor who issued the grant
  • For the donor this will look extremely well for the donor and give them good publicity along with achieving their goal of improving the nutrition of children and they’ll know that their grant was put to good use.
  • For the women in the cooperative, it will help them achieve their goal of improving the children’s nutrition without giving them pesticides and they can help make the women feeding their children feel more comfortable about using the gruel since it is the same product they’ve been using before
  • For the mothers this solution would make them more comfortable with trying the gruel for their children and will still be giving their kids the nutrition they need with out compromising their health to HIV or pesticides
  • For the infants, they will be getting the nutrition they need without being exposed to pesticides and reducing their risks of HIV
  • For the farmers, this is probably not the best solution for them because then they won’t be selling as many crops to the cooperative to make the gruel since it won’t consist of the cash crops.  However, if they switched their crops to what is used to make the gruel then they can still make money off of the cooperative while contributing to benefitting the health of the children.
• I chose alternative 3 in place of alternative 1 mainly because the women are hesitant to give their children the porridge. Even if it is made without pesticides, the women purchasing the porridge may not believe this. They would have to try something new and different to what they are currently using, which is the main reason the mothers are hesitant to switch from gruel to porridge. Also, alternative 1 does not change the taste of the current food product that is being given to the children; it simply adds to the nutritional value. 
• I chose alternative 3 in place of alternative 2 because there is no guarantee that using market power will effectively pressure the farmers to not use the pesticides. Even if it does, the lack of pesticides does not change the fact that it’s a new product that the mothers don’t want to try. Alternative 3 allows us to keep the gruel, but just fortify it. 
• One of the downsides to alternative 1 is that the mothers may be hesitant to purchase premade gruel. They may prefer to make it on their own. This is something that cannot be predicted until put in this scenario. A possible solution to this hypothetical situation is to have the women in the cooperative all watch the making of this nutrient-fortified gruel and see for themselves that it’s extremely similar to the current gruel. Once they see it’s essentially the same, they will be inclined to use it on their own children, and tell others about it. Word of mouth is one of the most effective ways to advertise in African countries, so having the 500 women in the cooperative vouching for the premade gruel would help convince other mothers.

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

•  Economic:
  • Money would be coming in due to the sales of gruel
  • Provides business to vitamin supplement companies that we would be purchasing the vitamin nutrient supplements from
  • It will allow for improvement in overall quality of life and that tends to lead to more economic productivity.
  • The sales will hopefully provide more income for the women in the cooperative that will help out their families economically
• Social:
  • Less work for the mothers since the gruel is already premade
  • Children will receive the nutrients they need
  • Mothers don’t need to change what they are currently doing, so there is no expected cultural change
  • Overall quality of life will be improved by improvement of health of children
• Technology
  • The gruel recipe is being slightly altered, but will still be used to feed the children so reduce the risk of HIV
• Environment
  • There would be the affects of having to import all the nutrient supplements into the country which requires lots of packaging and travel to get the supplements to the cooperative

Grassroots Diplomacy Strategy Development Methodology 

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

• The women work for about nine hours every day and earn KES 300 (about $3)

• They have the opportunity to sell the produce grown on their small farms to the cooperative.
• The women like this arrangement because it saves them a trip (time + money) to the village market to sell their produce. 
• When a woman brings her hard earned money home, she has no choice but to turn it over to her husband, father, or brothers.
• The men do not use this money on their family, and spend it on frivolous things such as alcohol
• Social outcomes of the venture are not being achieved (improve women’s livelihood)
• I am one of seven members on the oversight committee this year and I have 6 months left of my position
• The other six members on the committee are also women and want things to change
• Women are convinced that this is the way things are and don’t see this as an issue that their money is being taken but:
  • They are upset their hard earning money is not used to feed the children

Step 2 & 3: Define the problem and the stakeholders, and their personal and professional motivations – 

• Me (the entrepreneur): 
  • Personal: Want the women to be happy and for their money to spent on their children, not frivolous things
  • Professional: Want to improve the venture so the women aren’t upset
• Women in the cooperative:
  • Personal: Want their husbands to stop spending money on frivolous things, want to spend their money on their children and other necessities
  • Professional: Want to get through each day on the job, they are enjoying their current jobs and want to keep them
• Oversight committee: 
  • Personal: They also want their children to be fed nutritious food and to prevent their husbands from overspending on alcohol or their friends families from being subject to alcoholism 
  • Professional: Some may want to get reelected, some 
• Families (including husbands)
  • Personal: They want their families to improve their overall quality of life by reducing how much the husbands are drinking and spending on alcohol and the husbands would benefit physically and mentally from reducing their alcohol consumption to be more productive for the rest of their family members
  • Professional: The women in the families want to continue working in the cooperative and would want to see more of their money invested into benefitting the family.  The husbands could have more opportunities to work if they are spending less time drinking and being unproductive due to alcohol consumption,

Step 4, 5, and 6: Formulate an alternative solution

1. Cooperative acts as an equity bank for the workers so that they can cash out directly, or through other products (family needs) and establish a general store that takes workers credit/acts as a bank. This store is open to the public and cooperative has another stream of income. The store offers beer for credit but quota is 2 six packs a week. Caveat AND incentive for saving: you can only take out one third of your savings at once (unless reason for emergency)
   1. Pros:
      1. Incentivizes men to not take money because they get more if they wait
      2. Creates a long term savings plan for women’s livelihood
      3. By offering beer for credit but establishing a quota, the men are still satisfied and get their beer, but don’t overspend on it. This way, there is money left to be spent on necessities in the home
   2. Cons:  
      1. Women aren’t receiving all their money are once so it might be harder for them to trust the process of splitting their income up into thirds
   3. Saving face: 
      1. Me: This helps give a solution that caters towards the women on the committee while also benefiting women that are working in the cooperative
      2. Women in Cooperative: This helps the women keep some of their money without having their husbands waste it on alcohol.  It allows them to not have to hide the money from the husbands and feel like their money is being protected from not being in a bank.
      3. Oversight Committee:  
      4. Families: This benefits families so that they can utilize the money being made by the women in smarter way and improve the overall quality of life for the family
   4. Relationship short-term implications: 
      1. Me:
         1. I am at first nervous to pitch this idea to the committee because I’m worried about how they may react. Once the committee approves, I will tell the other women in the cooperative about the decision – I’m assuming the women will like the idea but the men will be hesitant, so there may be a slight awkwardness in the beginning.
      2. Women in Cooperative:
         1. The women in the cooperative are happy because their money will be going towards their kids more. They are happy with me and the oversight committee for making this decision.
      3. Oversight Committee:
         1. The oversight committee also wants things to change, so my relationship with them is still great. They are excited that things are going to be different, especially because they thought they couldn’t do anything about it.
      4. Families:
         1. The families may feel some tension amongst themselves since the men won’t be able to spend their money frivolously anymore and will be upset about it.
   5. Relationship long-term implications:
      1. Me:
         1. Hopefully this establishes a better relationship between the women in the cooperative and myself because they see that I am trying to help them improve their home life without directly influencing anything at their homes or taking extreme action
      2. Women in Cooperative:
         1.  The women in the cooperative will have better at home relationships with their husbands with the reduction of alcohol consumption 
      3. Oversight Committee:
         1.  The committee will still have good relationships with myself when seeing the benefits that families are seeing as the women build equity and have their husbands reducing their alcohol consumption
      4. Families:
         1. Relationships within families will improve since the father’s/ husbands won’t be consuming excessive amounts of alcohol anymore and will can be more productive and involved in the family.
   6. Venture short-term implications:
      1. Me:
         1. Will need to try and find a way to advertise the general store so that more people will come and it will end up being sustainable in the long run
      2. Women in Cooperative:
         1. They might feel like they aren’t getting enough money since they can only take so much of their income out and it might not be enough initially to live on.  They will also have to deal with the backlash from husbands if they start to experience withdrawal symptoms .
      3. Oversight Committee:
         1. The women on the committee might think that the idea was bad if the women in the cooperative are suffering from their husbands being angry about not having as much alcohol and might have second thoughts or try to give more money to the women working so the husbands can continue to drink
      4. Families:
         1. Families might suffer from the husbands being mad about no more alcohol.
   7. Venture long-term implications:
      1. Me:
         1. I will help improve the quality of life for the women in the cooperative because I am helping them save money and reducing their husbands alcohol consumption.  The general store will also provide more income for the cooperative making it even more sustainable.  The cooperative will also benefit from having people retain equity in it.
      2. Women in Cooperative:
         1.  The women in the cooperative will have more money to spend because they can keep it in the cooperative.  They will still be able to provide for their families and have more control over how much their husband drinks.  They will also be able to build up equity in the cooperative so that they have more assets in the long run.
      3. Oversight Committee:
         1. They will feel like they are helping the women in the cooperative improve the overall quality of life for their families.  They will also have the benefit of knowing they were the ones that contributed to helping out the community families
      4. Families:
         1. Husbands with the reduced consumption of alcohol can become more-productive in society and potentially work within the cooperative.  Women will be able to save more of their money and have more assets that will improve their economic status and make sure that they can continue to live a sustainable life.

Other ideas mentioned in class were an incentive for women to save up enough money in the cooperative to eventually get some type of reward or prize.  So the more the save the better chance they will have of getting whatever type of gift is being given away.  This solution is valid, but it still runs the risk of the husband gaining control of the money and taking it for alcohol anyways.

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

1. Validate my idea with the council
2. Validate my idea with 25 men and 25 women one on one
3. After my idea is validated, I will announce the new system and get general feedback at a community meeting to directly engage community voice
4. Higher trustworthy people to keep track of the money and equity each woman has in the cooperative
5. Need to find someone to provide money to initially invest in the build up of the general store
6. Start the general store by finding a location and building or begin building the infrastructure
7. Need to higher people to work in the general store
8. Search for companies to provide product in the general store
9. Use women in the cooperative to market the general store and cooperative to get more business and publicity
10. Take surveys of the women over time to see how their family life has improved and how their husbands alcohol consumption habits have been to assess the success of the solution

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

• Kids (3-16) live at the center
• Jack lives at the center (for 5 months)
• Staff lives at the center
• One kid without toys directly blamed Jack. Kids with toys love Jack.
• Staff members are not concerned about the children’s feelings towards materialistic objects
• The way the ceremony was staged convinced the kids that Jack gave them the toys
• Staff were convinced Jack was making a big deal out of the situation and might become a “children’s right activist” and create unnecessary problems 
• Potentially bigger underlying reason for why the staff members didn’t give gifts out to the 4 kids
• Staff felt blamed by Jack’s concern
• Jack wants to make a good impression on the kids at the center to establish good relationships
• Black hat has a negative stigma to it

Step 2 and 3: Define the problem and the stakeholders – those with a vested interest in the outcome and Determine and distinguish between the personal and professional motivations of the stakeholders. 

Dilemma: Jack wants to do the right thing without putting blame on anyone or apologizing too much. Also, this action will create expectations for future actions. Jack doesn’t want to jeopardize current relationships.

Stakeholders:

• Children without toys: 
  • Personal interest: 
    • want toys
    •  want the ceremony too (a matter of respect)
  • Professional: 
    • can use this in the future to take advantage of Jack
• Children with toys:
  • Personal
    • New toys! They like jack because he gave them the toys
    • Feeling special and valued
    • Might tease kids who did not get gifts
• Staff members: 
  • Professionally: 
    • They don’t want Jack to question how good they are at their job (rude)
    • Jack’s action will change the work dynamic between them and the kids
    • Cannot control how many gifts are sent 
    • Smooth operations
  • Personal: 
    • Feel defensive of Jack’s concerns (he just got here, how should he know better)
    • Didn’t want to set the precedent of gifts being a reward
• Jack:
  • Personal: 
    • Wants to be liked and welcomed, make everyone happy
    • Feels personally blamed by the kids and at the same time the kids gave him all the credit for the gifts
  • Professional:
    • Good relationship with all the kids will be better in the long run
    • Wants to have a good rep because he is living there for five months
• Donor Org (secondary): 
  • Professional: 
    • Good press, maybe a tax write off
  • Personal: 
    • Feeling of gratitude and giving back to another community

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] • Potential Solution • How does it solve the problem? o Pros o Cons • How does it save face of those involved? • Implications on relationships o Short-term o Long-term • Implications on the venture o Short-term o Long-term 

• If economically feasible, buy the children gifts and make a special occasion of it

1. 1. 1. How does it solve the problem?
         1. It allows the kids that were forgotten to feel included and that they are just as special as all the other kids
      2. Pros: 
         1. The children will be happy.
         2. Kids will gain a sense of inclusion and importance 
         3. All of the children will have received gifts of equal value.
      3. Cons: 
         1. The staff might not agree with the decision. This might create some division between Jack and the staff.
         2. Creates a financial burden that Jack hadn’t planned for.
         3. May create a situation where children start approaching Jack asking him to buy them other things.
      4. How does it save face of those involved?
         1. Jack: Feels less bad after a look of shame from a kid with a hat.
         2. Staff members: makes them look like they didn’t forget anyone
         3. Children without toys: it makes them not look left out and appear included versus being excluded with just a black hat
      5. Implications on relationships
         1. Short-term
            1. Makes the kids feel included and the 4 kids trust Jack again
         2. Long-term
            1. The kids might take advantage of Jack because he was nice to them and got them special gifts
            2. It might hurt his relationship with other children because they think he is favoring the 4 kids that didn’t get gifts
            3. The staff might start to dislike Jack because he could be causing more problems and going against what they said. They could blame him for any issues related to this in the future. Also, they could see it as using money to win the children over.
      6. Implications on the venture (venture is the working relationship between youth center and americans)
         1. Short-term
            1. Will improve immediate relationships with kids 
            2. sour relationship with coworkers
            3. Will fix this dilemma and keep the relationship between center and Jack (the american)
         2. Long-term
            1. Youth center members might see American workers as a charity 
            2. Might hurt other American’s opportunities to work at that center

• Add more value to the hats (make the hat a special role to those select children)

1. 1. 1. How does it solve the problem?
         1. It gives the kids a sense of importance and value, which they didn’t get with not getting as special of a gift
         2. Makes them feel more included in the group, like they’re as important as all the other kids
      2. Pros: 
         1. The kids would feel honored despite not partaking in the gift ceremony
         2. The kids would not blame Jack for being left out
         3. The workers won’t feel that Jack is upstaging their own job performance
      3. Cons: 
         1. Unsure of how this would affect the social dynamic of kids (might give them a power trip over the kids with toys)
         2. Unsure if the kids will be accepting of this “added value” and could still be upset
         3. Workers might see this as Jack interfering with the current way of things and think he is meddling too much
      4. How does it save face of those involved?
         1. Jack: It gives Jack a way to still be on good terms with the kids and without stepping on the staff members toes
         2. Staff members: It makes them look like they didn’t forget any of the kids and that they still value everyone in the center equally
         3. Kids without toys: It makes them feel special even though they didn’t get the same gifts as everyone else and can feel included with the other kids that got gits, not embarrassed
         4. Kids with toys: They might feel threatened by the new role children were given
      5. Implications on relationships
         1. Short-term
            1. Staff can trust that Jack has the best intent for the children
            2. Children might think Jack plays favorites (can create distrust with Jack)
         2. Long-term
            1. Jack and the staff would continue to be strong and stable 
            2. Jack can develop a strong relationship with all the children
      6. Implications on the venture
         1. Short-term
            1. Venture partnership will grow tighter as staff realizes the american worker is quick to improvise and satisfy the needs of the children without upstaging current workers 
         2. Long-term
            1. Venture continues stable partnership and keep open ties with American involvement at the youth center 

• Do nothing to ensure the relationship between Jack and the staff remains stable and healthy 

1. 1. How does it solve the problem?
      1. The children all got a gift technically…
      2. It allows Jack to stay on good terms with the staff members and shifts his level of importance for relationships to the staff over the kids
   2. Pros: 
      1. The relationship will continue to be strong and stable (assuming it was already stable)
      2. Children are pretty resilient and will likely bounce back from not receiving the gift. Jack should be able to build his relationship with the 4 kids back up pretty quickly.
      3. Staff members will see that Jack is respecting their advice and not a “children’s rights activist” 
   3. Cons: 
      1. Relationship between Jack and children will suffer. Kids could be mean.
      2. The kids could have an influence on the staff members and make them have a negative outlook on Jack because he can’t get along with the kids
      3. Staff members might see Jack as complaining and not an action taker
   4. How does it save face of those involved? 
      1. Staff: Don’t feel like Jack is taking over and going over their heads to fix a problem. 
      2. Jack: Absorbs the blame but preserves relationship with staff
      3. Kids with no toys: They are still bitter (hopefully resilient)
      4. Kids with toys: Might feel more important than kids with no toys

1. 1. Implications on relationships
      1. Short-term
         1. Children will have a tainted view on Jack 
         2. Staff will see Jack as an obedient worker 
      2. Long-term
         1. Neutrality between children will remain the same (staff or jack isn’t playing favorites)
   2. Implications on the venture
      1. Short-term
         1. Relations between children and american worker might struggle 
      2. Long-term
         1. Establish could relationships between the staff members and American workers so there will continue to be opportunities for new volunteers to come visit

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

• From what was talked about in class it was interesting to hear Khanjan thought that giving the children the black hat and trying to make it seem more meaningful was the best solution.  His explanation made sense and really brought to light the significance of trying to save both Jack’s relationship with the children and the staff workers.  I also really liked what one of my peers said in class about making the black hats a special gift/ meaningful symbol among Jack and the children.  It was more specific than just saying that Jack should try and make the hats more meaningful.  It made the hat representative of more than just a gift for the children to feel included with all the other children in the center.

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.  

• I think that the best course of action is to add more value to the hats for the kids who didn’t get toys so the hat will play a special role to them.
  • For Jack:
    • This solves his problem of keeping a good relationship with all the children at the center because it will stop the kids who didn’t get toys from blaming him that they didn’t receive toys at the ceremony.  Jack wants to be on good terms with both the children and the staff and this solution also allows Jack to not overstep the staff’s decision to not do anything about the children who didn’t get toys.
    • This saves face for Jack because again he is mending his relationship with the kids who didn’t get toys while also keeping a good relationship with the staff members.
    • The short term implications of this for Jack are that he has a pleasant time continuing to work at the center with the children and with the staff members.  This will also strengthen the relationship between the center and the venture organization since Jack did such a good job to make the kids happy without disrupting the way the center run things by buy new gifts for example.
    • The long term implications are that Jack will have the staff members to fall back on for good recommendations and potentially finding another volunteer job nearby.  Without keeping the staff relationship Jack wouldn’t have as much career opportunity to move forward.  For the venture it will bring more opportunity for other volunteers from America to come work at the clinic since Jack built such strong relationships.
  • For the Staff:
    • This solves the problem because now the kids are no longer upset, however the staff didn’t really pay much attention to that so to them it doesn’t make much of a difference if the children were upset or not.
    • This saves face for the staff because it allows the kids to feel the same amount of value for being at the center and the staff members won’t have to deal with future backlash or misbehavior from the kids still being upset about not getting toys if they didn’t get anything.
    • On the short term the staff will be satisfied that the kids are no longer complaining about not getting a toy and that Jack hasn’t done anything to make him untrustworthy to follow protocols.
    • The long term implications for the staff are that they have a positive impression on Jack and the venture so they will want to continue getting volunteers.
  • For the kids with and without toys:
    • This solves the problem for the kids without toys because they will no longer feel left out without them receiving new gifts that would’ve cost Jack money and without them developing a sense of favoritism from Jack if he would’ve went to buy them new toys.  This solution also helps keep the kids that did receive toys to not feel like Jack is favoriting the kids who did get toys.
    • It saves face for the kids because now all the kids feel like they received something special and valuable.
    • The short term implications for the kids are the best because they kids will all have a good relationship with Jack and enjoy the rest of their time with him and can trust him.  Unlike if Jack did nothing, then they wouldn’t have a positive outlook on Jack.
    • The long term implications for the kids are the best because they will think that volunteers are fun and will be more welcoming to the next volunteers that come around.
• Overall this solution makes the most sense because it gets all the benefits of different solutions.  If Jack decided to do nothing, then he would ruin his relationship with the children.  Making the black hat seem more special will protect his relationship with the children and make his time at the center more enjoyable.  If Jack decided to go out and buy gifts for the kids without toys, yes he would still have a good relationship with the kids, but there are a lot more down sides to this solution.  Not only would Jack be risking his relationship with the center staff, he would be using his money to pay for new toys and run the risk of the kids taking advantage of him in the future since he showed that he was willing to do what it takes to get on their good side.  It can also leave out all the other children and make them think Jack is favoriting the kids that didn’t get toys and then the kids who did get toys won’t like Jack as much.  The black hat solution lets Jack stabalize all his relationships in the clinic and saves him money.

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

1. Later that night pull the children individually out of bed without the other kids waking up
2. Ask them to bring their black hats
3. Bring all the children back to the room that the gift ceremony took place
4. Have the 4 kids sit in a line
5. Ask for the black hats back
6. Tell an adventurous tale that involves the black hats and how they helped the characters in the story ultimately become successful and achieve their goals
7. Tell the children that with the black hat they will be able to accomplish anything they put their mind to
8. Individually call each child up to receive their hat back and say a few words about the characteristics of that kid that Jack finds the most admirable
9. At the end Jack tells the kids that the hats are special in that they are each individually meant for them, that only they can harness the power of the magic hats and that the secret needs to be just between the 5 of them
10. Bring all the kids back up to bed

Ethical or not?

If we are more transparent and give them more of an education (e.g. pathogens in water, boil water) on what we are doing, then yes.

Step 1: Determine the facts in the situation

• I am an academic researcher expecting several publications out of the research study in Lesotho
• There are clear signs that Lesotho water has disease causing pathogens 
• Their methods for storing water are different and uncommon compared to previous knowledge of the research team 
• Driving the community members up the lake in exchange for information is considered good enough payment – do not expect actual pay
• We need to rely heavily on indigenous knowledge to move towards a clear problem statement or solution 
• The research team and I are experts in pathogen/ disease research (health medicine and society)
• Research funded by an outside source, university/lab/government that expects a clear outcome
• We are hoping that the chemical additives will make the water safer to drink, but there will be costs involved that we are unsure they can afford 
• assume all IRB’s have been obtained 
• Assume we would get assistance from the local community
• There may be implications of not being able to complete the study (funding, brand, relationships may be affected) – to avoid this, ahead of time, do research on stakeholders
• Ethical Issue: Whether or not it is ethical to use the local to advance our research without proper compensation and if our work will lead to more dramatic issues in the future that the locals will be unaware of.

Step 2 and 3: Stakeholders and Motivations

• Local water company
  • Get out product/earn revenue
  • Help those patients involved
• University/lab/government (Funding agency)
  • Treat spread of disease
  • Reputation of gaining academic knowledge on pathogen
  • Funding agency will have their name attached to the possible solution
  • More advertising – want to be a world leader in the field – want to build up their brand
  • More partners

• Research team
  • Help patients involved
  • Further their career and potentially making money 
  • Earn more money to continue doing research and get continuous funding
• Local people
  • Create healthier living environment 
  • Have safer water to drink
  • Lessen the risk of contracting a disease-causing pathogen
  • Excitement to learn and socialize – but their vulnerability may result in wanting you to hear what you want to hear – they do not want to come off as ignorant – they may reinforce your ideas because they think you’re smart and want to agree. On the other hand, some may be weary to trust an outsider so make sure you talk to the right people 
  • Negotiating entry
  • Cleaner water may lead to more tourism/more business connections 
• Tertiary Stakeholder Hospital/ health care workers (third party to the solution in its direct implications)
  • Treat people with the illness
  • Make sure hospital isn’t always at capacity – prevent future cases
  • can devote their resources to something else 
• Academic Journal
  • Getting new and credible information that will better their reputation and add to their plethora of knowledge
• Yourself (Researcher)
  • Help local communities involved
  • (Hopefully) Actual interest/passion for social impact 
  • Understand the lifecycle and characteristics of the pathogen and the chemical
  • Boost credentials
  • Maintain your job and further career

Alternative Solutions

• Send prepaid sampling supplies and provide incentives to the people to gather water samples/take surveys seeing where people get water from
  • Pros:
    • Save travelling expenses 
  • Cons:
    • Samples could be taken incorrectly
  • Principle:  It’s better to pay the locals to do the work for the research team and help send the samples to us then debating what locals should be paid or compensated that would’ve helped us if we were collecting samples 
• To find water sources on our own without any local assistance 
  • Pros:
    • Removes ethical dilemma regarding the community
    • Allows for more room to not worry about how the research can affect the community
  • Cons:
    • could be gathering water where they do not drink from and it could take much longer than if you asked the community
    • the water samples might not be sufficient and the pathogen could not be in the ones that are found
  • Principle: This will allow us to not worry about the locals in the community and focus on the task at hand that we were given.  There would be no need for compensation and the implications of our research in the future can be unrelated to the locals since they didn’t contribute to the research.
• Have community health workers travel with you during your field work so that there is a trusted person with you to help prevent push back
  • Pros:
    • would lessen the chance of push back 
    • easily define a person to give compensation too
    • easily conduct research in the short time period allotted
  • cons:
    • would have to spend more money on bringing that health care worker along 
    • would have to be able to identify that health worker and get in contact with them
    • also have to make sure they have the time and patience to help with the research being conducted
    • they could ask for more compensation than the research team has to offer them, still undefined about how much to compensate the person
  • Principle: There is a clearly defined person that can be compensated for helping the research team find the water sources

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

• During our class discussion there were many good points that were brought up according to how to compensate people and what truly matters in terms of the ethical dilemma in the study.  Khanjan helped clarify so ethical principles to consider and what was truly important in the case study.  As a researcher it is important to focus on the ethical dilemmas that are correlated to the act of doing the research, not necessarily what others might use the research for in the future.

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.

• I think that selecting the community health worker to help lead the team to the different water sources in the area is the most ethical option.
  • For me and my research team it helps reduce the confusion about who to compensate for helping with our research and will give us a trusted person in the community to help us.
  • For the university/organization that is funding the research, they will benefit from knowing that we have a reliable person helping direct what water to test and makes the results of the research that much better.  However, the university/organization that is funding the project might have to pay extra money if the community health worker needs to be compensated for more than what was anticipated to be spending
  • For the community, they will benefit from having their water sources properly tested and getting information on what is going on in the water.  However, since the community health worker is the one being compensated there won’t be any other benefits to the overall community.
  • Hospitals will benefit because they will have less people hopefully getting sick once it is determined if the pathogen is in the water that the locals drink.  Hospitals also benefit from having the community health worker on the forefront of the research so they can report back to let the hospitals know what kinds of tests are being done.
• Other solutions aren’t as beneficial because they won’t get the overall best results for the study.  If there is no assistance from the locals then the samples could be not as great as they should be and reduce the quality of research.  This looks bad on the university funding the project , the academic journal and the research teams credibility.  If the locals are put in charge of collecting samples and shipping them to the research team, there is also the risk of losing credibility and won’t leave a good reputation if the samples are taken wrong and the research later is proven to be inaccurate.

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.

• The implications of conducting this research can greatly influence the locals living situation and cause many benefits/ issues
  • Technology: The research is meant to better understand the pathogen living in the area and the research can lead to new technologies that can clean the water.  This would be helpful not only to clean the water where the study was done, but could also lead to other water cleaning methods for other areas if there is a profound discovery.  The water cleaning technology could then be implemented in Lesotho and allow for the people to have clean drinking water and clean water for other uses.
  • Economic:  If a new water cleaning technology is discovered and implemented in Lesotho it will create an economic impact on whatever company decides to sell this technology to the country,  The university that funded the original research will most likely also make money off this technology.  However, the locals will suffer economically if the government has to pay for the water to be cleaned and can take money away from the people or make it more expensive to get water.
  • Social: The social implications are what if the locals don’t want chemicals in their drinking water once a new technology is created?  Maybe they don’t want any outside help or anything to change the way they live.  Socially for the research team it is extremely beneficial because their reputation will go up and make it easier to accumulate more grants and funding for more projects.  It also gives the university that funded the project and the journal that published the papers a better reputation.
  • Environmentally:  The environment could greatly suffer from a discovery of new water cleaning technology.  The water in Lesotho could have a lot of wildlife in it and the ecosystem could be severely damaged with the addition of added chemicals.  With the development of these chemicals there could also be environmental externalities like byproducts of the chemicals that would need to be disposed of and enter the overall environment.