Zion Lewis 

Ariana Simms

 

Organizations Blog Post 9/28

Multilateral Organizations-

1. Partner to form a union of countries dedicated to keeping police interactions healthy and non-violent. Once formed, create a program and training that officers can participate in.
2. Interact with multilateral police brutality organizations/ race reform that will enable us to obtain and compare data from other countries about the amount of violent police encounters experienced typically.

 

Government Agencies-

1. Review the processes by which the government can call for mandate’s to be issued about certain behavior. Consider the framework of the police system nationally, and attempt to realign it to modern times and the issues most prevalent that we see.
2. Partner with mental health agencies to advocate for added mental health awareness in the justice system’s interactions (commercials, government advertisements)

Non-Profits-

1. Use the space of a non-profit to create a division for giving training sessions as well as distributing informational packets and materials for people interested in our mission.
2. Run a fundraiser with a non-profit focused on police brutality. Being that the fundraiser wouldn’t be paying for people’s salaries, the money made during the fundraiser would allow for spending on informational materials or even developing further advancements.

Foundations-

1. Partner with the Police Foundation (1970), learn how they plan on using tech and other things to advance the mission of improving policing for all. By learning from them, we can use things from their business model in order to advance our venture in regards to different ways that we may be able to improve policing in abstract ways. As the Police Foundation was primarily focused on improving policing with technology.
2. Collaborate with the Chales Koch foundation which is a foundation dedicated to eliminating over policing, policing, due process, and sentencing.

Academia

1. Work with a research university similar to Lehigh to discover more about the region-specific data regarding police stops to analyze any patterns existing or anything that is experienced on college campuses that is different from any other area of society. (big population, small, majority race, etc)
2. Use a local University (Lehigh) space to give a talk about the work that we’re doing and to encourage people to participate in whichever capacity they find comfortable.

Startups

1. Partner with a tech startup looking to develop applications in order to develop a technological aspect to our project that can be accessed by all therefore making it  more accessible, and more known.
2. Create a symbiotic relationship between the venture and a startup, where in return for advertising and utilizing their good/product, they would use ours thus allowing both of our products to grow considering their respective markets are close in identity.

Social Ventures

1. Partner with a venture focused on similar goals but within a different branch of the overarching systemic issue.
2. Work with a closely related venture to develop a product that would encapsulate both of our projects while keeping our original goal paths in mind.

Think Tanks

1. Send our ideas to a think tank dedicated towards working the inner makings of police brutality and ultimately find a solution for a centuries old issue.
2. Using grant money or other funding, pay for our project’s potential solutions to be discovered and published by a think tank team.

K-12 System

1. Use a system of local public schools (separated by school district or region) to hold a series of awareness talks about the realities of police brutality as well as the way in which we plan on combating it and can change it. Discuss the systemic aspects as well.
2. (Includes another partner) However work within the government to at least have Critical race theory continued to be taught in schools as well as units about the systemic history and effects of the policing system in America.

Corporations

1. ‘Sell’ our idea to a corporation, hoping they can either sponsor our project in whichever capacity it is. Consider the typical market for this brand and how they would react to our partnership.
2. Utilize a corporation that cares about our project’s goals, and offer them the opportunity to take aspects of our projects as their likeness so they can make money in return for their name and passive advertisement.

Consulting Firms

1. Contact a social consulting firm like ERPI that would be able to point us in the direction for the goals and desires of our project.
2. Use a business consulting firm to help us discover the most profitable ways to finalize our project in regards to the actual product and the way that police brutality is disencourage and ultimately decreased as a result.

Zion Lewis

Emma Burke

Fatima Mumtaz

Ariana Simms

Grassroots Diplomacy Strategy Development Methodology

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

• 4 kids were given hats 
• Jack is going to be staying at the youth center (schooling, health center, general resources for street kids) 5 months 
• The staff was unconcerned about the 4 kids who were not given the same gifts as the majority 
• Presents sent by an international donation organization
• Staff members allocated and labeled the gifts for the children
• Jack was invited to give out the gifts because of his status as a guest
• The kids were convinced that Jack was the one who got the gifts for them
• Kids are mad about the way they received the gifts rather than just the gift itself.

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

• The kids who did not get a hat, want to get a gift
• Jack who gave the gifts and got the mad faces
• The staff who bought the gifts but didn’t buy enough or care
• The kids who did not get a hat didn’t get the same ceremony like everyone else

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

• Kids
  • Don’t want to be unprofessional and unthankful for their gifts outwardly
  • Are personally unhappy with the hats
  • Want to maintain status and relationships with their peers, staff, and with Jack.
• Jack
  • Seems uncomfortable at the prospect of taking credit for getting the gifts for the kids, but recognizes the value of his relationship with them.
  • Doesn’t want to personally upset the kids who he is to be with for a while
  • Doesn’t want to professionally annoy the staff and seem unprofessional.
• Staff
  • They have professional concerns, don’t want Jack to create issues for them
  • Allocate gifts to the kids where they were available.

 

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: 1
  • going out and getting gifts for the four that didn’t get gifts 
• How does it solve the problem?
  o Pros: 
  • give the four kids gifts and make them feel appreciated
  • Make the kids not hate Jack
• o Cons: 
  • introduces additional costs where funding might not be available
  • Making the staff think lesser of Jack
• How does it save the face of those involved?
  • Protecting Jack’s reputation as the suspected gift giver. He is being fair to all kids by giving a gift.
  • Save the face of the kids who did not receive a gift. Reduces questions from themselves and others about why they specifically did not receive one.
• Implications on relationships
  o Short-term 
  • Kids like him 
  • Staff is annoyed by him
• o Long-term
  • Kids will remember him as thoughtful 
  • Staff may make fun of him
• Implications on the venture
  o Short-term
  • Kids get gifts
• o Long-term
  • What if there are more kids the next year that don’t get gifts? May ruin the budget the center has if money gets spent on getting more presents.
  • Sets precedent that Jack or the Center has the resources to go out and buy gifts, which they might not.

 

• Potential Solution: 2
  • Telling the 4 kids who have given the hats the reality of the situation, that they were 4 gifts short. And then tell the kids that they are going to work to get them the same gifts.
• How does it solve the problem?
• o Pros: 
  • honest with them so they will be less upset about the situation.
  • Eventually going to get them the gifts.
  • Jack will get to explain that he is not the one that is responsible. Avoids hard “no”s, keeping the chance for a gift open without making promises either.
• o Cons
  • Does not resolve the disappointment the children have about not receiving their gifts in the ceremonial fashion 
• How does it save the face of those involved?
  • This saves face for the staff because it would be dealt with in a way that only involved those who were impacted and not publicly. 
  • This saves face for Jack because if the situation is explained to the kids then they would probably be less upset with him specifically
• Implications on relationships
• o Short-term
  • Kids may be temporarily bothered by the fact they didn’t get a specific gift. 
• o Long-term
  • Building honest/truthful communication between center staff, guests, and kids.
• Implications on the venture
• o Short-term
  • Children will be less upset assuming they are going to get gifts
• o Long-term
  • Can be assumed that Jack is going to keep getting them things

 

• Potential Solution: 3
  • Giving the 4 kids who were not gifted the hats in a ceremonial way, a ceremony where they received something
• How does it solve the problem?
  • Solves the issue of them being upset that they didn’t get the hats in the same way that the other students got gifts and makes them feel appreciated 
• o Pros
  • Allows the children to not feel left out
  • Would improve Jack’s relationship with the kids 
• o Cons
  • The staff would be annoyed 
  • Does not resolve the issue quickly
  • Possibly would confuse/upset the other children.
    • They may question why these 4 kids are receiving this special ceremony
• How does it save the face of those involved?
  • Saves face for the 4 children, because it would remove the question of what reasons led to them not ceremonially getting gifts in the first place
  • Would save face for Jack because the kids would not be upset 
  • Would not impact the staff, since there is no blame 
• Implications on relationships
• o Short-term
  • It Will make the kids feel happy
• o Long-term
  • This will negatively impact Jack’s relationship with the staff at the center, they do not see an issue and he is going against them 
• Implications on the venture
• o Short-term
  • Solves the issue without getting the kids new gifts
  • Kids who only got hats may be embarrassed for being put on a show
• o Long-term
  • Makes the staff think lesser of jack because he is wasting time
  • Embarrassing the kids who did not get the hats

 

• Potential Solution: 4
  • Telling all the children who were responsible for sending them the gifts that they received 
• How does it solve the problem?
  • Takes the responsibility away from the staff and jack and solves the issue of the kids being mad at the staff and jack for something that wasn’t there fault
• o Pros
  • Removes animosity towards Jack as the reason 4 kids didn’t get gifts
  • No expectation to spend resources getting additional gifts.
• o Cons
  • Does not resolve the disappointment these children feel
  • Still mad at jack 
  • Makes staff and donor look bad for not getting enough 
• How does it save face of those involved?
  • The failure of four kids to recieve gifts is no longer placed on Jack
  • Removes blame and appreciation from the staff and Jack
• Implications on relationships
• o Short-term
  • Makes them see jack as reasonable for explaining to him
• o Long-term
  • May affect the youth centers relationship with external funding/gift giving 
  • May make youth not trust staff and others as they are coming short 
• Implications on the venture
• o Short-term
  • The children possibly will not see Jack as favorably since they know he was not responsible for the gifts 
• o Long-term
  • Children may fight for toys and gifts since some 

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

• Maybe Jack could ask a single staff member who he trusts more than the rest what they think the best decision would be to do. 

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

• The best course of action would be to do nothing. 

This would save face because it wouldn’t put the kids in a spotlight which would make them embarrassed for being the only ones who didn’t get a gift and it would save face for the staff and Joe because they wouldn’t have to explain why they messed up on giving gifts or anything like that. 

The short-term implications of this would be that the kids would be a little upset for a while but eventually, the next round of gifts would come around and they would be fine. They may have a bad relationship with Jack for a little bit of time as they get over this incident happening but then they will be fine. 

The long term implications of this would be that the kids won’t think of Jack as a person who can give them things all the time and take advantage of that. It will also keep the staff from calling jack names and thinking little of him.

This solution would be better than others because it is the easiest way to go about the situation without ruining the balance that exists between the staff and the kids. It protects Jack from being someone who ruins this balance and loses face in the eyes of both the kids and the staff. 

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

• Step 1: tell jack not to engage with the kids who received the hats and are unhappy. 
• Step 2: make sure the staff know that Jack isn’t going to be doing anything about the situation so that they don’t tease him anymore about it
• Step 3: get Jack introduced to the kids and make him get on their food side in another way other than giving them gifts

 

Testing water sources

 

Is it ethical to conduct this study?

Yes as long as others can build onto it

• Test water sources for disease pathogens 
• Need assistance from the community 
• It is not ethical to conduct the study without a pension considering the members of the community could benefit from a small profit that might help their community immensely. 
• Considering there are several publications willing to work alongside there might be enough money for the citizens to gain 

 

Facts in the Situations: 

• Low and Middle-Income Countries: Lesotho is a small developing country in South Africa 
• Mission: test water sources 
• Pathogen only found in Lesotho
• Community members will have to help find and store water

 

Define Stakeholders and Motivations: 

• Primary: Community members 
  • Money (if provided)
  • Safe water 
  • Knowledge for their own solution 
• Primary: Academic researchers (10)
  • Understanding lifecycle 
  • Educating others on the pathogen 
• Secondary: Scientific community 
  • Absorb information for their future publications and studies 
• Secondary: Low and Middle-Income countries with similar issues
• Secondary: Organizations/agencies the researchers belonging to
• Lesotho’s environment 
• People previously affected by the pathogen

 

Formulate alternative solutions:

1. Members of the research team would find the locations of the water resources themselves in order to remove the issue of compensation.
   1. Pros: This is ethically sound and does not impose upon the community
   2. Cons: Intruding on the community 
2. Using money as an incentive to force the Lesotho community to work with them.
   1. Pros: Can help community members economically
   2. Cons: Community members might find it offensive if not communicated appropriately
3. Emphasizing the importance of the testing 
   1. Pros: Researchers will gain the community’s trust and promote education
   2. Cons: Community being against the testing based on their new knowledge 

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

• Looking for best practices in working with low and medium-income communities
• If compensating, looking for the appropriate rate to pay members

 

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. 

Overall the best course of action would be for the researchers to compensate the citizens in order for there to be an appropriate transaction between the two. Ethically this would allow for the community to understand how gracious and empathetic the researchers feel towards them. 

 

(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.

Although it doesn’t directly affect the venture, our solution will only be able to positively influence and aid the community.