The name is absent

Appendix 1

identifiable codes and flows). MERIA^,s profile of values and ideals was completely
congruent with those represented by the manager.

Our second meeting, this time with the doctor and social worker assigned to our
project, however, was completely unproductive. Our expectations, our understandings of
local needs and effective solutions, and even our understanding of what “outreach” is and
how it operates were completely different. In fact, the very idea that Roma could benefit
from a vaccination program seemed nonsensical to the doctor and social worker. While
the local organization employed the current EU terminology, they nonetheless oriented,
or redefined the concepts so they fit the established local systems of thought.
Consequently the partnership failed: The organization operated based on a philosophy
and strategy indicative of a different cross-section of codes and flows from those
represented by and which guide MERIA. In trying to negotiate a working partnership
despite this initial stumbling block, it was possible to identify exactly how the two
organizations differed. For example, aspects of the Greek sociopolitical history were
affecting local understandings of minority-hood and equity. This history, in addition to a
collection of embedded codes (in language and the media), engendered a particular
reaction to MERIA and our program proposal. Despite the failed partnership, exploring
how we could come together allowed local codes and flows to interact with our
controlled (known) codes and flows, and I was able to better understand how they
influence that particular site and the field in general.

Without MERIA, it may have been possible to gather this data, especially if a
foreign organization were to have approached the local organization to cooperate on a
given project. MERIA, however, allowed me to accomplish the same end in an expedited

<<   196   197   198   199   200   201   202   >>

More intriguing information