September 28

Week #5: How will we leverage various types of organizations to advance the larger dream behind our project? – Blog #5 Fall 2021

How will we leverage various types of organizations to advance the larger dream behind your project?

Organization types –

Nonprofits:

Kazakhstan Foundation for Cultural, Social, and Educational Development (KFCSED) is a nonprofit organization based in Almaty that was founded in December 1999 with the goal of implementing social initiatives in order to encourage women’s development. Their goal to drive social change is focused on three key pillars: 1) empowering women by providing them education, 2) promoting the idea of social responsibility, and 3) strengthening civic engagement. Although Save Tuba is not a gender specific venture, our project shares the goal of using the app to impact the broader community and emphasize the importance of a shared social responsibility and greater civic engagement to improve the quality of life through sustainable behaviors.  KFCSED has multiple initiatives – Impactum is one that specifically works with students to teach them how to turn an idea into a community initiative. Students are able to respond to the social challenges that affect their community. A partnership with KFCSED can help with the planning and execution of one of our AT 5 activities. This partnership would be a direct support to operationalizing one aspect of Save Tuba that happens outside of the app and classroom setting.

Foundations

The following two foundations in Kazakhstan have missions that align to the goals of our venture. As such, they are potential foundations for the team to work on cultivating a relationship with in hopes of ultimately submitting a funding request. The Save Tuba venture will need local financial supporters to sustain the business model. 

  1. Social Corporate Foundation. The Mission of SCF is to promote the development of significant initiatives and non-profit projects, increase the activity of the population in solving their own problems through the implementation of comprehensive educational, information and consulting programs. The extended reach to the community via the Level 5 Action Tasks creates the opportunity for the locals to be part of addressing and resolving the large-scale community issue related to pollution.
  2. Foundation Of The First President Of The Republic Of Kazakhstan — Elbasy. More closely connected to our venture’s immediate target audience, their mission is “to develop the limitless potential of our society, helping talented young people and supporting social projects of public interest.” The Save Tuba project aims to educate students with information and knowledge on sustainable behaviors and then use that knowledge to have a direct impact in the community via the Action Tasks. The ATs will facilitate the transfer of knowledge into practice for the students and the public as they make a positive impact on a real social problem in their community.

Academia

Almaty Management University (AlmaU). The Save Tuba team has established a strong

 partnership with AlmaU during the last two years. AlmaU students collaborate with the Lehigh team on the app design and validation efforts. In addition to translating all app content, surveys, and focus groups questions, the AlmaU team facilitates the focus groups with Kazakh students and teachers. Our partnership with AlmaU is a strength as it provides a known and respected organization within Kazakhstan. Additionally, our partnership with a local higher education institution provides needed credibility that will help our efforts to take our app to scale. AlmaU’s involvement also helps our efforts to grow the pool of partners with similar reputations and ability to make an impact at the population level. 

K-12 System

Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of Kazakhstan – The ultimate goal for Save Tuba is to collaborate with all schools in Kazakhstan to implement the app. Our initial plans include rolling the app in the once capital city of Almaty. To be able to execute at scale and better ensure sustainability of the app, the team is actively pursuing establishing a partnership with the Ministry. A partnership with the Ministry will also provide needed guidance related to the curriculum. The team has developed a scope and sequence that captures a varied list of sustainability topics, which can be refined in partnership with content experts from the Ministry. 

September 18

Week #4: Ethical Decision-Making and Grassroots Diplomacy – Blog #4 Fall 2021

Part 1: Ethical Decision-Making

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

  • HIV/AIDS is prominent in the region and the risk of transmission to a child increases over time during prolonged breastfeeding. 
  • Scientific research shows that gruel does not provide some key nutrients.
  • Approximately 500 women from three contiguous sub-locations are interested in being part of the cooperative.
  • Gruel is currently integrated into a child’s diet until about two years old to supplement breastfeeding. 
  • Pesticides are typically used to grow some of the crops used in the porridge.
  • The goal of the cooperative is to:
    • 1) Improve the nutritional status of children
    • 2) improve the livelihoods of rural households

Ethical Issue: how to wean mothers from breastfeeding their children after the of 6 months to minimize the risk of transmitting HIV while simultaneously encouraging mothers to feed porridge instead of the trusted gruel despite the use of pesticides in the current cash crops.

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

  • Mothers in East Africa 
  • Infants/children
  • We/Us/Me/Donor
  • The Cooperative

Step 3: Assess the motivations of the Stakeholders 

  • Mothers in East Africa 
    • Personal 
      • To not transfer HIV/AIDS to their children, to ensure their children are fed nutrition foods for growth and development, to have some level of breastfeeding and bonding in that way with their child, to create an income and food source for the family
    • Professional
      • To produce shelf-stable porridge, to make money for their families through this venture, and to grow/learn as entrepreneurs
  • Infants/children
    • Personal: 
      • to be fed, to not contract HIV/AIDS
    • Professional: 
      • not applicable
  • We/Us/Me
    • Personal
      • To feed the individual ego as a result of helping others; feel good for doing good
    • Professional
      • To make an impact on the health and well-being of infants/children and mothers in East Africa 
      • You want to be successful to increase your chance of getting more grants 
  • Cooperative
    • Personal
      • Ensure everyone’s children of the Cooperative are fed, support mothers grow the crops needed to create a healthier meal (porridge vs. gruel) to impact growth of children, and help minimize the spread of HIV to children 
    • Professional 
      • Produce enough supplies for the porridge
      • Want to be economically viable 
  • Donor
    • Personal
      • To have a good result, increasing their positive presence and ego as an organization 
      • To grow the agency’s Goodwill
    • Professional 
      • To spark self-sufficiency efforts with families in East Africa
      • To fund efforts that decrease HIV rates of children in East Africa
      • To have that experience and have that enable future involvement in cooperatives similar to this one

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

Potential solution #1: Do nothing other than establishing the cooperative.

  • Ethical Principle or code: Consequence based thinking 
  • Pros
    • Help with livelihoods of those in the cooperative
    • Make an impact on the growth of the children who consume the more nutritious porridge
    • The risk from pesticides is less than the transmission of HIV/AIDS from prolonged breastfeeding
  • Cons
    • Fails to make an impact on reducing the possibility of HIV+ mothers transmitting the virus to their infant children

Potential solution #2: Incorporate the porridge (made with locally grown vegetables/fruits) into the current gruel to make it more familiar but have a new and improved gruel that provides nutrients and protects from the transmission of HIV/AIDS. 

  • Ethical Principle or code: Consequence based thinking 
  • Pros
    • Allows for women to continue feeding their children a slightly altered version of what they are familiar with and trust (gruel) yet incorporates ingredients to impact nutrition and prevent HIV for their children
    • Improves the children’s nutritional status
    • Builds nutrition into the current food which could increase buy in to this food 
  • Cons
    • Some may not want to change from the gruel because they believe it is nutritious
    • Some may see an outsider taking their gruel recipe as an insult and intruding on tradition. 

Potential solution #3: Move forward with establishing the cooperative and simultaneously provide education on HIV transmission, specifically on mother to child transmission via breastfeeding AND education and training related to farming with alternatives to pesticides (ie. plant a variety of species, rotate crops regularly, choose pest-resistant garden plants that provide habitat for wildlife, use gardening techniques that encourage vigorous plant growth and discourage pests).

  • Ethical Principle or code: Virtue based thinking 
  • Pros
    • Would have a positive impact on both cooperative goals of having an impact on the nutritional status of children and livelihoods of the families involved
    • May decrease HIV/AIDS transmission as mothers increase education
    • May increase participation in the cooperative as the food is safe to eat
  • Cons
    • May not decrease HIV/AIDS transmission as fathers don’t receive the education and do not change behavior

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

This case provides an added layer of complexity with the competing issues that need to be addressed. The ethical questions related to breastfeeding or not past six months AND the families’ practice and trust with the gruel vs the donor’s intent for mothers to feed porridge creates sensitive issues to manage in order to have a successful cooperative. Like other cases, the challenge to me is viewing the situation through the context of the mothers (and men) from the East Africa region. Instead of suggesting solutions that would be aligned with my Western/American philosophy, the group discussion continuously circled backed to questioning if this would be something that the mothers/men of East Africa would see as an imposition or if it would be a true possible solution to come from them.

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. 

Despite the concern raised in the class discussion that the best course of action should minimize taking the venture away from its core project of establishing the cooperative, I believe that the third solution (establishing a cooperative in conjunction with HIV and pesticide free farming education) is the best course of action. The issues are too interconnected to do one (the cooperative) without addressing the others (HIV transmission and healthier crops). The cooperative is an excellent strategy that provides multiple benefits to participants and their families. To name a few of the benefits:

  1. Develop the mothers’ farming and entrepreneur skills
  2. Steady source of food and income for the families
  3. Creates an opportunity for mothers to build their identity and have community

The additional benefits related to adding the educational components help minimize the Donor imposing their way of thinking.  Instead, the education provides the mothers with information about preventing the transmission of HIV from mother to child. They also learn about healthy farming alternatives. The education will help them make an informed decision on breastfeeding and the use of pesticides, a decision that should ultimately be theirs (and their families) to make and not the donor.

Unfortunately, the other solutions either ignore the interconnected ethical dilemmas or exclude the mothers from making an informed decision. 

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 solution to establish the cooperative, provide education related to HIV transmission from mother to child via breastfeeding, and education on pesticide free farming will have numerous impacts on the venture since it expands the strategies to accomplish the donor’s intent.

  • Technology – The addition of the educational components will require an educational plan and supporting resources (collateral materials like pamphlets, presentations, and/or videos).  Additionally, all materials will need to be translated and carefully reviewed to ensure they are sensitive to East African culture.
  • Economic – There will be additional costs associated with the collateral materials. Also, there will be a financial impact on the venture if additional staff/instructors are needed to facilitate the educational workshops.
  • Social – The addition of an educational component to the venture may alter how the mothers (and the men in their household) view the opportunity. The addition of an educational component could be threatening if perceived by the community as a way to change their norms and customs.
  • Environmental – The proposed solution would be beneficial to the environment since it will provide healthier alternatives to both cash and substance crops. The lessons learned around farming with alternatives to pesticides benefits both the consumers and the environment.

 

PART 2: Grassroots Diplomacy Strategy Development Methodology

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

  • The cooperative is successful 
  • Mothers make about $3 a day 
  • Mothers work about 9 hours per day
  • Mothers have the opportunity to sell produce grown on their small farms to the cooperative 
  • Transactions (when selling their products at the public market) are at prevailing market rate
  • Mothers are happy working at the cooperative
  • Mothers establish a sense of community and identity
  • Mothers have to turn the money over to males in the home (husband, brother, father)
  • Men waste money earned by mother on alcohol and frivolous things
  • The twin social outcomes of improving the nutritional status of children and the livelihoods of rural households are not being achieved 
  • You (entrepreneur) are loved by the community
  • You do not have direct say in the cooperative’s functioning
  • You are one of seven members of the leadership team leading the operations, other six members are local women who understand the problem and want a change 
  • The women are convinced that nothing can be done (about the mothers turning over their earned profits to the men) because that’s just how it works

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

  • Mothers in East Africa 
  • Infants/children
  • We/Us/Me/Donor 
  • The Cooperative
  • Husbands/Fathers/Brothers (Men in household)

The problem: Mothers are making money and enjoying the cooperative, but are not using the money to provide nutritious diets to their families as fathers and men are using the money for alcohol and other frivolous things.

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

  • Mothers in East Africa 
    • Personal 
      • To not transfer HIV/AIDS to their children, to ensure their children are fed nutrition foods for growth and development, to have some level of breastfeeding and bonding in that way with their child
    • Professional 
      • To produce shelf-stable porridge and make money for their families through this venture.
  • Infants/children
    • Personal: 
      • to be fed, to not contract HIV/AIDS
    • Professional: 
      • not applicable
  • We/Us/Me
    • Personal
      • To feed the individual ego as a result of helping others; feel good for doing good
    • Professional 
      • To make an impact on the health and well-being of infants/children and mothers in East Africa 
  • Cooperative
    • Personal
      • Ensure everyone’s children of the Cooperative are fed, support mothers grow the crops needed to create a healthier meal (porridge vs. gruel) to impact growth of children, and help minimize the spread of HIV to children 
    • Professional 
      • Produce enough supplies for the porridge
      • Want to be economically viable 
  • Donor
    • Personal
      • To have a good result, increasing their positive presence and ego as an organization 
      • To grow the agency’s Goodwill
    • Professional 
      • To spark self-sufficiency efforts with families in East Africa
      • To fund efforts that decrease HIV rates of children in East Africa
      • To have that experience and have that enable future involvement in cooperatives similar to this one
  • Husbands/Fathers/Brothers (Men in household) 
    • Personal 
      • They receive free money that they didn’t work for 
      • They can indulge in pleasures such as drinking with the money
      • They benefit from the crops the mothers bring home 
    • Professional 
      • They may be able to work less because the mother is bringing home money

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

  • Potential Solution #1: Pay the Mothers in an alternative currency (“food stamps” or WIC)

How does it solve the problem?

The mothers are compensated in a form that minimizes misuse of the profits.  The alternative currency will limit the use of the non-cash payment only for the purchase of food – aligning use of the earned profits with the donor’s original intent to improve nutritional status of children and livelihood of the families.

o Pros

  • Money is going towards feeding their families 
  • Money goes to improve livelihood
  • Mothers have more control over the use of the money they earn
  • Mothers feel a sense of empowerment and support from the Leadership Committee

o Cons 

  • Difficulty that comes with setting up a new system as an alternative to cash payment 
  • Husbands/Fathers/Brothers (Men in household) might be against the system
  • Husbands/Fathers/Brothers (Men in household) might discourage the women’s participation with the cooperative 

How does it save the face of those involved? 

  • It saves face by preventing conflict with the men in the household who use the profits for alcohol or frivolous things instead of healthy/nutritious food for the household. The cooperative nor the mothers do not have to confront the men in the household for misuse of the profits.

Implications on relationships –

o Short-term 

  • Mothers get to control their hard-earned money allowing them to have less conflict with the men in their homes
  • Their families may receive more food as they spend the money on the intended use, lessing stress and conflict in the home
  • Cooperative will earn more trust from the Mothers for finding a solution to the conflict that they were willing to forgo

o Long-term 

  • The children (and the household members) have a more nutritious and plentiful diet.  Hence, relationships between participants, the men and the Cooperative leaders can grow and be strong.
  • Decreases drinking from fathers as they cannot afford it causing longer life and increasing their health

Implications on the venture –

o Short-term 

  • Is better positioned to accomplish the second goal of the venture 
  • Mothers are further empowered and contributors to the household livelihood and their child/ren’s well being

o Long-term 

  • create a way for money to be funded to families without male influence on the spending while focusing the money on family needs

Potential Solution #2: Engage the men in the external market responsibilities (conversations about what foods can be grown, offer jobs in the market)

How does it solve the problem? 

    • It brings the men into the conversation about feeding the children, which could influence the spending of money on the family and not on pleasures desired from the men.

o Pros

  • protects the space for the mothers to maintain their sense of community and identity
  • engages the entire household with the goal of improving the livelihood of the families
  • better chance of sustainable behavior (with farming and managing the “business” at the market) if the venture is a shared responsibility beyond the mothers
  • Men are able to earn some of the money and use that to buy their desired goods

o Cons 

  • Incorporating the men, even if for just part of the venture, could limit the experience for the Mothers 
  • Raises the question of who is going to take care of the children

How does it save the face of those involved?

  • This solution allows women to maintain the community established with other mothers of the cooperative while allowing the men to also be providers for the household AND have discretionary earned dollars to buy their alcohol and frivolous things. The solution saves face with the men, especially, by allowing them the opportunity to be part of the venture and earn money instead of the alternative of confronting them for not assisting with the work but taking the profits.

Implications on relationships – 

o Short-term 

  • Less resentment or negative feelings towards the men from the Mothers that earned the money
  • Greater admiration for the leadership committee from the Mothers for finding a win-win solution

o Long-term 

  • families may increase time together as they work out the cooperative (creating a stronger family unit)

Implications on the venture –

o Short-term 

  • may become harder to pay men for work with funding
  • Could dilute the focus initially aimed at the mothers 

o Long-term 

  • creates a more well-rounded venture as both members of the household are involved in the cooperative and market, allowing for even more buy-in from the community
  • Potential Solution #3: Create saving accounts for the mothers to deposit the money before leaving the cooperative and can withdraw within the workday.

How does it solve the problem? 

  • This protects the mothers from having to deal with turning over their hard earned money since they would not have it as currency when they arrive at their homes.  The Collective can assume the responsibility of managing the profits, serving as a middleman between the mothers and the men taking away their profits.

o Pros 

  • it keeps the money from going home to the men for alcohol 
  • The money can be used for the food and family
  • The women will be able to make a direct impact on the family’s livelihood and the food to impact the nutritional status of their children 

o Cons 

  • men might discourage women from going if they don’t see money 
  • Men might feel that the money is being withheld from them

How does it save the face of those involved?

  • This solution saves face for the leadership committee since they don’t have to face a conflict with the men. Although the mothers would not confront the men or refuse to give up the money if asked, this solutions saves face since they are not even put in the situation to even have to consider refusing to give their money to the men.

Implications on relationships – 

o Short-term 

  • Gives women the responsibility and choice of spending habits, thus strengthening their relationship with the cooperative and the leadership committee 

o Long-term 

  • creates equity and could turn into bank accounts for women, changing societal power dynamics in a manner that is not obvious to the men

Implications on the venture –

o Short-term 

  • it fulfills the goal of increasing nutritional status and livelihood of the household 

o Long-term 

  • can turn into another grant to develop a bank and equity building opportunities for women in the community
  • Better ensures the sustainability of the cooperative

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

The class discussion offered similar variations of our team’s solution of providing an alternative payment to cash. Our idea of establishing an Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) system or a voucher system similar to the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infant, and Children “WIC” program seemed to be a solution that resonated with the entire class.

Similar to other cases, our/my challenge with brainstorming solutions is to avoid veering too far away from the original intent of the venture. One of our alternative solutions would be to create a “bank”, which may sound simple to do but would require significant resources (ie staff, technology, record keeping systems).

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.

Although all three solutions suggested by my team provide significant benefits with limited negative implications, I believe that the best course of action would be to provide an alternative form of payment (ie EBT or vouchers) to the mothers. The original intent of the venture would best be accomplished with this solution. The second suggestion of incorporating the men would be a great expansion opportunity in the future, but the immediate intent is to help mothers be able to improve the nutritional status of their children and improve the livelihoods of their households. Including the men would bring a host of challenges that would dilute resources from the main goal.

The creation of an EBT/voucher system could easily be explained by the mothers to the men, helping them save face when confronted at home. The mothers are dealing (or not) with the conflict they feel for having to turni over the money for alcohol and other frivolous things. Instead, this solution will allow the mothers to help with the nutrition of their children and the livelihood of their households.

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

  1. Discuss the idea of establishing an EBT/voucher program with the leadership committee to secure buy-in and consensus.
  2. Jointly create the rules and regulations for managing the EBT/voucher with input from the mothers and the leadership committee
  3. Establish collaboration with markets/stores that the EBT/voucher program can be used in
  4. Recruit volunteers/staff to manage the alternative system (maintain records, maintain partnerships, and grow network of participating markets/stores)
  5. Train the mothers on the EBT/voucher system
  6. Leadership Committee regularly reviews the key performance indicators (number of markets, dollars used by the mothers for food purchase, customer satisfaction)
September 12

Week #3: Grassroots Diplomacy Strategy Development Methodology – Blog #3 Fall 2021

Grassroots Diplomacy Strategy Development Methodology 

The facts in the situation – 

  1. Jack is an American student at a youth center in Kenya
  2. Jack will be staying for five months and is (presumably) at the beginning of his time there
  3. Gifts for the children were sent by an international donor organization
  4. Jack was asked to give out the gifts
  5. The children believed that Jack had gotten them the gifts
  6. Gifts for 196 of the children were presented publicly, but four children did not receive gifts publicly
  7. The four children that did not receive gifts were given a black hat
  8. The children who received the hats were given to them by the staff members, not by Jack.
  9. Some of the kids blamed Jack for feeling “left out” and one kid gave Jack a nasty look
  10. No one is taking responsibility for the missing gifts
  11. The staff were annoyed at Jack for raising the issue and felt that he might cause problems for them in the future
  12. Jack was left to resolve the problem
  13. Staff is all-Kenyan, and many of them come from similar backgrounds

Define the problem and the stakeholders

Problem(s): 

  • Four children did not get a gift and no one took responsibility. How could the staff better prepare for distributing donations/gifts to all children in the center? (How can staff do a better job with empathizing with the children?)
  • Four children were left out which made them feel less important than the other children. How can the children be made to feel better?
  • Credit for the gifts in the eyes of the children went to Jack. How could credit for the gifts be made more clear and given to the international organization that sent them?

Stakeholders –

  • Children receiving a box gift
  • Children receiving a black hat
  • Staff at Youth Center
  • Jack
  • International organization that sent gifts

Personal and professional motivations of the stakeholders – 

  • Children 
    • Personal:
      • Desire to receive something valuable
      • Receive public recognition 
      • Feel included
    • Professional: N/A
  • Staff at Youth Center
    • Personal: 
      • Supporting the community and helping the youth
    • Professional: 
      • Desire to be efficient
      • Desire to maintain order through strict rules
  • Jack
    • Personal: 
      • Help the youth center in Kenya 
      • Make the kids feel good (resolve guilt)
    • Professional: 
      • Help him with relationship building with the children at the center
      • Maintain positive relationships with other center staff members
  • International organization that sent gifts (secondary)
    • Personal: N/A
    • Professional: 
      • Raise their reputation/broadening their exposure
      • Assist meet the basic and human needs of children in Kenya

Alternative solutions – 

  1. Facilitate an empathy workshop for the staff – acknowledging the problem and learning how to deal with the situation if it were to happen again

Pros 

  • Important life skills and way to handle conflict
  • Can make the left out kids feel more special
  • Prevent the problem from recurring

Cons

  • Who would lead the workshop? Jack leading the workshop could be perceived as condescending.
  • Who has the time?  There is limited time to pull the staff away to provide the workshop.
  • Could be perceived by the staff as they did something wrong

How does it save face of those involved?

  • This solution would help save face in the future for students that could potentially be left out. The implementation of the workshop could actually “cost” face for the staff since it would address the situation from the perspective that they failed to do something.

Implications on relationships 

  • Short-term – could damage the relationship between Jack and the staff.
  • Long-term – although the initial experience may weaken the relationship, the long-term impact could be the opposite since staff could see the value of the training after they see the impact that better planning that results in avoiding any children feeling “less than the other”.

Implications on the venture 

  • Short-term – the success of the venture is dependent on Jack’s relationship with both groups.  This solution could slow both the relationship and progress that he can make in the youth center.
  • Long-term – similarly to the impact on Jack’s relationship with the staff, the long-term impact on the venture could be a positive effect. The staff would be able to look at similar future situations differently to better ensure a positive experience for all the children.

2. Provide project management training to the staff

Pros 

  • Further develop the staff’s effort to run an efficient operation

Cons 

  • Might run into problems with scheduling
  • Might create confusion since it’s not how they have facilitated similar efforts in the past

How does it save face of those involved? 

  • This solution would help save face in the future for students that could potentially be left out. The implementation of the training could actually “cost” face for the staff since it would address the situation from the perspective that they failed to do something.

Implications on relationships 

  • Short-term – could weaken the relationship between Jack and the staff.
  • Long-term – staff may see the benefit of the training after it has been implemented, resulting in valuing Jack’s input and training.

Implications on the venture 

  • Short-term – it could have a negative impact on the venture in the short-term since it could be perceived as insulting and contrary to what the staff perceive as having an OK system.
  • Long-term  – in the long run, the training could be beneficial to the youth center since it would help a staff that prides themselves on running an efficient operation.

3. Teach all the children a lesson on appreciation

Pros 

  • The children should be appreciative of the gifts given the circumstances
    • “Get what you get and you don’t get upset”
  • Jack may regain his social status among the children
  • Jack would maintain is good standing with the staff for not approaching the dilemma from the perspective that they did something wrong

Cons 

  • Not very good for the long-term impact because kids could quickly forget and the situation could present itself again
  • Does not change the fact that the “left out” kids did not receive special recognition for their gifts 

How does it save face of those involved? 

  • Without calling out the four children left out, the lesson can help deliver the message of appreciating any gift (no matter how small). The children can save face by not being called out specifically for their reaction to being given a hat instead of a box like the other children.  I will also help the other children save face if they are in the same situation in the future that their four friends experienced.

Implications on relationships 

  • Short-term – it would prevent any damage to his relationship with the staff and could be a way to strengthen his relationship with the children.
  • Long-term – this solution has the potential to strengthen the relationship as time passes since any similar situation in the future could be resolved reminding and emphasizing the importance of appreciating any gift received.

Implications on the venture 

  • Short-term – providing the lesson will allow Jack the opportunity to connect with the children, having a positive impact on the venture
  • Long-term – the lesson would have a positive long-term impact on the venture since it will help children at the center better deal with the situation repeating itself, which has a very high probability it will repeat itself.

Other potential solutions:

  1. Do nothing and let the children move on
  2. Hype up the symbolic value of the hat!
  3. Talk to the kids about the hats in a public forum in order to give them recognition.
  4. Ask the staff to hold another ceremony after dinner the next day in order to give the children the public recognition they missed out on.

Seek additional assistance, as appropriate – 

The group and class discussion provided various insights and solutions for this case. The discussion made it clear that the idea to hype up the hat solution would be one of the best ways to resolve this conflict. It was especially helpful to reflect on recognizing that the “best” solution should be made through the perspective of the Kenyan people.  Many of the solutions offered were from the American perspective on what is socially acceptable and how to correct the situation.

The best course of action – 

Although we identified numerous possible solutions, the best course of action would be the option discussed in class – to somehow elevate the value of the hat by simply wearing it. The four children would feel better about their “simple” gift after seeing that the staff (Jack) is wearing the same hat.  Jack’s simple action helped elevate the significance of the hat without attempting to change the practice of the staff or an explicit lesson to students. His action is an example on how to save face since staff nor students were called out for their behavior or (as in our opinion) lack of response to the situation.

The sequence of “best” actions to implement the solution –

  • Speak with the staff to hear their perspective on the situation – not identifying it as a problem but simply ask them what is the practice for dealing with the situation where some children do not receive donated gift like the other students
  • Honor their advise on what, if any, steps are taken to address the situation
  • After better understanding their norms and practices, consider a similar solution to what was shared in class – as the “guest” in the community, wearing a similar hat will show the four students that were left out in the formal recognition ceremony also feel special.
September 5

Week #2: Lesotho Ethics Case – Blog #2 Fall 2021

Lesotho Ethics Case

Step 1: The Facts.

  • Bringing 10 researchers to Lesotho in Southern Africa to conduct research
  • Will travel throughout Lesotho for a 2 week duration to different communities
  • Need to test their water source for a harmful pathogen
  • Researchers need community members to show them locations of water sources and where and how to store the water
  • Researchers will offer community participants a ride to water location site
  • Researchers are expecting to publish

Ethical Issue(s): 

  • Is it ethical to ask for time and knowledge of locals without compensation for identifying water sources? 
  • Being present in the country for two weeks when they don’t know if they are welcome
  • Would this set a precedent for other researchers to exploit locals in the name of conducting research?

Step 2Stakeholders.

  • Researchers (Primary Stakeholders)
  • Locals (Primary Stakeholders)
  • People in other areas that the pathogen is present (Secondary Stakeholders)
  • Funding agency/university (Secondary Stakeholders)

Step 3: Motivation of Stakeholders.

  • Researchers
    • Personal: Self esteem improvement and confidence in their own knowledge, notoriety and respect in general; boosted ego to have been part of a team that solved an issue to meet basic needs of a significant population
    • Professional: Paper publications increase their chances for promotion, and will lead to other academics in this area to respect them more
  • Locals
    • Personal: access to safe drinking water, recognition from other locals for being part of the “research team”
    • Professional: may lose money if this time takes away from work. 
  • People in other areas that the pathogen is present
    • Personal: access to safe drinking water, the research may reduce costs burdens for other areas as they can uptake found knowledge from the experiment of the case study
    • Professional: Networking possibility with those involved in this venture
  • Funding agency/University
    • Personal: This is a general body, not necessarily “personal” motive
    • Professional: Increased exposure for the organization, Resulting high quality publications may lead to larger grants for the home organization. Prestige to have funded such an important and life-saving project.

Step 4: Alternative solutions.

Solution 1: Pay the locals to assist with the study.

  • Ethical Principle/Code: Duty based
  • Pros
    • Locals are paid for their time and have a better quality of life
    • Locals benefit directly from this partnership
    • Paying the locals may increase interest in participation
    • Recognize the value that locals provide and show respect for their time commitment
  • Cons
    • Could create some power dynamics if the payment method is inappropriate or too extravagant
    • Costs more money
    • May have too many people interested, have to turn away some causing conflict and negative emotions around the team from the community 

Solution 2: Conduct research without the locals.

  • Ethical Principle/Code: Utilitarianism
  • Pros
    • No locals need to lose work time or work money to participate anymore
    • Researchers will get more hands-on experience locating and understanding the water. 
  • Cons
    • No stakeholders within the community will be utilized hindering the community involvement needed for a more efficient study
    • It might look bad when publishing studies that no community members will be contacted and look like a “drop in study” that is not benefiting the community. 
    • Study would be more challenging without the knowledge the locals provide related to the water source locations
    • Data could be less comprehensive if water sources are missed without the knowledge of the locals

Solution 3: Collaborate with the National University of Lesotho to come up with a joint plan.

  • Ethical Principle/Code: 
  • Pros
    • Researchers can be more secure that their methods will be accepted by the locals
    • The locals will likely be more comfortable with participating in the research 
    • More connections and partners on the ground are flourished as a positive consequence 
  • Cons
    • This plan probably requires more time and engagement on the part of the researchers
    • The original team may not have the funds to pay for this large of a partnership causing the team to readjust the budget and drop important items that could lower the rigor of the research.

Step 5: Additional assistance.

The group further discussed and identified a local university in Lesotho as a way to build credibility for the research team. Also, the addition of the local university would allow the research efforts related to the water study and skills developed by the locals to continue beyond the time the external research team is in the country.

Step 6: Best course of action!

I suggest that we do a combination of paying the locals and partner with a local university. Both actions are changes to the original play since additional dollars are needed for the compensation and additional time must be invested to establish a partnership with the local university. However, the additional funds and time are critical for the success of the project AND to design a research project that is most ethical. In determining pay, the team would need to enlist input from the local university to best determine what to offer for compensation and how to go about selecting the locals. As noted in our discussion, compensation can be a number of things (financial, goods, or training). The alternative to not use locals in the study in order to avoid paying them is short-sighted since they are a critical component of the design.  Without the locals, the research team ability to collect the best data is significantly decreased.

Step 7: Implications of the solution.

The solution to both pay locals for their participation and involve the local university will have multiple impact on the venture.

  • Technological~
    • The technical parts of this study will require the use of technological instruments. Including locals will require the researcher team to plan for time to train them on how to correctly use the tools and collect water samples.  Additionally, the research team will need to plan to have sufficient instruments for the larger team – both for the training and actual sample collection.
  • Social ~
    • The blending of an external team along with local representatives (residents and the university) will impact the learning experience beyond the information learned from collecting data. All participants have knowledge/expertise/experience to offer the others, which will impact how everyone walks away from the experience – grown both academically and personally.
  • Economic ~
    • The decision to pay locals (in a mode to be determined) will have a direct impact in the lives of those individuals and their immediate household! Additionally, the inclusion of the local university will create a possible path for the locals to continue on the path of learning/research/work.
  • Environmental ~
    • Again, the decision to include both locals and a local university will have a direct impact on the study by helping provide the best scenario to collect comprehensive data and sustainability for ongoing research. The ultimate goal of the research is to develop chemical additives that make the water safe to drink – this is the biggest impact on the environment we can hope for as a result of combining our research team with locals in Lesotho and a local university!