Professor X and Dr Y have been funded by their government research council in Europe, to investigate ways of providing advice about diagnosing common diseases in cattle and other farm animals in sub-Saharan Africa. Professor X is a veterinary specialist; Dr Y is a computer scientist. In the first phase of their work, they are collaborating with an NGO in one district of Northern Tanzania to design and test a proposed solution. The solution includes a mechanism so that farmers in the villages can request advice from a veterinary advisor based in the market town.
The trials were going fairly well with farmers making good use of the service, which resulted in 10 to 20 queries a day being handled. However, after some re-organisation in the NGO, the veterinary advisor asked for a raise, and cited the extra work of dealing with the electronic queries as one reason for the request. The NGO was unwilling to pay the extra, so the advisor refused to answer the queries unless his income was increased. Professor X & Dr Y did not have any spare resources in their budget to cover these extra expenses.
- What should Prof X & Dr Y do?
- What might they have done differently to avoid this situation?
- What are the ethics, roles & relationships relevant to this situation?
- What other questions do we need to ask about this scenario?
When leaving a comment, please specify the question(s) you are answering. Thanks!
ReplyDeleteCulture and Perception
ReplyDeleteOn the face of it this looks like a case of culture and perception. What do I mean by this? For most folk in Africa, specifically
the poor and those in rural areas anyone from the City or foreign land is financially better off than they are, especially if you are White. The swahili word for this is MZUNGU which can be used to describe White people or black people that apparently have money. The Vet advisor may well have perceived this as an opportunity make a quick dollar!
What should Prof X and Dr Y?
Assuming that it is a case of CULTURE AND PERCEPTION, chances are that there is nothing much the Prof and Dr can do but pay up or face losing the services all together.
However they could try and negotiate directly with Vet Advisor and be open about the amount money available to them/project, failing this they should find the Village Chief and explain their predicament, aims and objectives of the project. The Vilalge Chief often has a lot of clout and should not be ignored in projects such as this. He (almost always a HE) is best placed to influence any local decisions.
What might they have done differently to avoid this situations?
* Should have anticipated level of service take up and implications for the Vet Advisor
* Should have involved the Viialge Chief and Vet Advisor in the project design, including money available
What are the ethics, roles and relationships relevant to this situation?
A scenario such as this requires inclusive decision making right from inception to implementaiton. The role of the Vet Advisor would have to be spelt out especially where the budget is limited. The project leaders would get more out of him if he perceived his role to be one of serving his community.
It is not enough to expect that he would take on the extra work free of charge, especially if this is going to stretch him beyond his capacity
What other questions do we ned to ask about this scenario
* Does the Vet Advisor feel that his role is integral to the success of this project or does his feel that he is merely providing a service to the NGO?
* Where Prof Y and DR X aware of the size of district nor the capacity of the Vet advisor prior to enganging him?
* could they have used more than one Vet Advisor?
* What will happen if the NGO moves on? will the locals ahve the capacity to take up the scheme and run with it?
* Does the scheme have the support of the local and or national government?
How much did the Prof and DR know about the culture of this district?