Research as a systematic way of observing and collecting data, analyzing it and deducting conclusions serves to solve human problems. It is not just academic; naturally all animals are researchers.
Through experience they will compare life risks and minimize them as much as possible in the near and far future. But because problems can be specific, researchers too choose one narrow line of emphasis. However, human problems are so many and diverse. They demand that research must be on-going as long as mankind exist -to support life and ensure eco-system balance.
Even as we live, the kind of life matters so much that it must aim at building confidence, creating comfort and making the world a better place to live in -through continuous reductions of uncertainties and life risks. HIV/AIDS being one of the most biting human problems has over years attracted researchers, but the level of it (research) varied greatly, as of now, depending on priorities nations consider.
To some nations, like those in Africa, emphasis is put on maintaining regimes in power. This, as a result, consumes a lot resources to facilitate massive recruitment and training of security personnel, cramp downs suspected traitors and sustaining of defensive wars. On top of that, corruption takes its toll because of prevailing uncertainties about the future of life and jobs.
Countries, mainly developed ones, have tended to emphasize future generations in all their national planning and decision making levels, not only mere current satisfactions. And not until their future is guaranteed by certain minimum standard, they will not settle for the current "satisfactions."
However, in spite of the positive benefits research serves, there exists rebellions towards it. These rebels may be government manifested -through misallocation of resources and corruption; individuals targeted as participants -who put high stakes to participate like demanding money before hand and for different reasons, refusing to cooperate; and research institutions that find fellow researchers competitors rather than partners. Whereas, decision to cooperate is democratic, it is ridiculous not to yet, at the end of it all, one will want to benefit from research.
Frustrating researchers may not stop here; organizations charged with ensuring right research ethics tend to have long processes of approving research proposals against the time set by a given researcher and his or her sponsors.
Still when required to give expert opinions, concerned organizations will hesitate with fear that their weaknesses might be exposed and leak into the ears of donors. Organizations working in the health sector have been the most frustrating. No wonder, corruption in the sector takes the highest toll with recent reports indicating absenteeism at work and drug theft.
Urban areas are more uncooperative than rural areas. In urban areas, hardly will someone give information regarding himself. People there are very sensitive and insecure. They will prefer preserving their privacy to revealing themselves up. They will always think that the researcher is some kind of spy who is gathering and selling their information, or planning some unfriendly moves against them.
And because research generally focuses on a specific problems -even with the fact that human problems are diverse and intertwined, researchers will as much as possible avoid linkages and circular reasoning. While attempting to solve a specific problem, their solutions will always be tagged by worse challenges. Researchers will assume the title, "god" in their expertise or work -regardless of how narrow and number of gaps that may exist -worthy filling. Luckily, in some of their conclusions they will emphasize such weaknesses anyone else would take on in future research.
Research companies and research oriented organizations go so commercial that research objectives soon get compromised. When contracted to perform and establish critical results about social behaviors, they will do anything within their means to maximize revenues -and at any cost.
They achieve that by hiring research assistants and training them for as little as 5 dollars per day -inconsiderate of lunch costs and simultaneous ones. It is lack of motivation that explains research dishonest -involving self-administering questionnaires -rather than finding respondents and assuming results and recommendations -without testing ever them.
On their part, research assistants will choose to give far less than 100% of the desired effort; at most, 50%. Their exploitative nature drives them into forming different questionnaires addressing needs of 50 clients -to be executed just in 2 weeks! More over with each sub-questionnaire having up to 100 questions! Imagine that, in addition to poor remuneration.
Besides the poor pay, the supervisor-research assistant relationship is unhealthy. Training of research assistants characterize threats with dismissal, poor facilitation of learning, and backing -similar to dogs. What a combination! Above all, senior managers expose their management inadequacies in front of their juniors (research) like shouting and negative criticism about task execution.
There is totally no value for juniors as research assistants. In fact it is true economic exploitation, true capitalism at play in research business firms -and new slavery evolving. Realistically, interviewers will not be expected to be genuine on an empty stomachs and heavy work-load -lasting up to 16 hours of day time.
Indeed, it is the most economically pressed -who can work there -and most miserable. Understandable, even the most resilient could be broken and forced out of work. For genuine results, definitely, the fittest ones will not be there. The renown fittest ones are rather those that forge results and individually answer research questions. Rigidity of research tools worsen matters -where if the targeted respond is not found in a particular household, then another must be found some 30 meters away.
Whether they will be in position to attract able and competent research assistants to do their work is another matter. But educated ones will not tolerate such inhuman arrangement. Definitely, it must be school drop outs available for recruitment later in the course of their research business. Then, of course, the quality of results and the firms' reputation will suffer dearly.
There is much evidence that easing research efforts involves utilizing one's immediate resources -including the organization -where the prospective researcher works. In an organization framework, all efforts will be streamlined by the fact that one may not even need permission to carry out research. He or she could enjoy research efforts, publishing and sharing it with parent organization or choose to partner with it for collective research efforts.
Research is an important part of living and nature developments or evolution. It is a universal need that everyone should embrace and support. Given its vitality, why wouldn't it be a human right?
Over the years non-government organizations have conducted research -independently; thanks to the adequate funds from donors. Theirs compared to fully-fledged research firms would be considered credible -given the highest degree of motivation ensured for research assistants.
They well understand that achievement of their research goal is based on the good temperament and strongest cooperation from recruited research assistants. To effectively ensure their cooperation, NGOs with a vital research component strongly employ the number one rule of giving adequate allowances to research assistants -including housing, food and a net wage of not less than 30 dollars in a developing country like Uganda. Indeed the future will require each individual institution or organization to form research and information desks of their own rather than entrusting research-based business firms or companies.
Jacob Waiswa
Situation Health Analyst
www.situationhealthanalysis.blogspot.com
