OpX project ethics questioned
Operational Excellence Development Program stirs controversy
SPENCER BISPHAM / ASST. NEWS EDITOR / THE USD VISTA
Throughout this semester, a study conducted in the Shiley-Marcos School of Engineering has been criticized by students and faculty for what they claim are possible unethical implications.
The project, titled the “Operational Excellence Development (OpX) Program,” is headed by three different professors: Associate Professor of Industrial Engineering, Dr. Bradley Chase, Professor of Operations and Supply Chain Management Dr. Simon Croom, and Professor of Industrial Systems and Engineering (ISYE) Dr. Leonard Perry. Students in Dr. Perry’s ISYE 492 class are currently collecting data that aims to improve the efficiency of USD Facilities workers’ completion of daily cleaning tasks. These students meet regularly with members of facilities staff while they are cleaning, time them, and record the method(s) they use to accomplish the job. They use this information to provide Facilities Management with feedback on how their staff can do these tasks more effectively.
According to Chell Roberts, Dean of the School of Engineering, the project has been in the works for some time.
“Dr. Perry and Dr. Croom received funding through a Strategic Initiative proposal about two years ago to work with USD Facilities Management on process improvement,” Roberts said in an email. “It is my understanding that the class project used the same methodology to continue working with Facilities Management. However, I do not believe that there was any funding from that original work involved.”
USD’s Institutional Effectiveness and Strategic Initiatives are a set of goals which exist to “describe what USD will do to achieve its vision,” and more specifically, provide funding to explore specific areas where efficiency could be improved.
Associate Vice President for University Marketing and Communications Peter Marlow explained how this project from Dr. Perry’s class relates to these goals.
“Through strategic funding grants awarded to faculty, staff and administrators, various proposals are funded that align with and support the five goals of USD’s Envisioning 2024 strategic plan,” Marlow said. “Currently, there are 10 projects in place within Facilities Management which include, Special Services, Custodial, Housekeeping, Law School Custodial and Warehouse Operations. This particular proposal supported goal three of the university’s strategic plan: Improving Structural and Operational Effectiveness.”
Despite the intent behind the OpX Program, some of the USD community has taken issue with the context in which the data is being collected. Dr. Alberto Dr. Pulido, current Chair of the Ethnic Studies Department, first saw the interactions between students and staff taking place over a month ago.
Dr. Pulido first brought the project to the attention of Dean Roberts after speaking with members of the facilities staff about what was happening.
“People on this floor [of Maher Hall] noticed students sort of following around the staff,” Dr. Pulido said. “My initial reaction was to write to the Dean of the engineering school because the faculty member who was identified was in the engineering school. I didn’t write to the faculty member directly because the Dean is in charge of the college.”
Dr. Pulido also mentioned that this a sensitive topic.
“I was fairly upset, for a lot of reasons,” Dr. Pulido said. “The real difficult thing about talking about this, which the Provost assured me not to worry about, is that I don’t want to identify anyone from facilities because I don’t want them to be penalized or terminated. The facilities people don’t want to share; they have jobs.”
In an email (not addressed to the Dean) obtained by The USD Vista, Dr. Pulido outlined specifically what upset him.
“Maybe you haven’t noticed but the majority, if not all of our facility staff at USD is stratified along racial and gender lines,” Dr. Pulido wrote. “They are predominantly women of color, Latina/Mexicana (with the exception of management), and they have dedicated their lives to keeping our campus clean and safe in a COVID world. Many of them commute daily from Tijuana to keep food on the tables for their families. I know because I talk to them on a daily basis. They are not meant to be studied.”
In the same message, Dr. Pulido questioned if the appropriate steps had been taken before beginning the project.
“My next question for you is did this professor file for a human subjects review?” Dr. Pulido asked. “I have received mixed messages that such a step is not required if the research is not going to be published. Is this the USD policy and for all I know maybe it did go through a human subjects review and was approved which is an even greater concern.”
The human subjects review process, also referred to as an Institutional Review Board (IRB), is a standard review process in the United States for any research project that involves human subjects. According to USD, the role of IRB is “to safeguard the rights and welfare of participants in research activities conducted or supported by the University and ensure that the project complies with federal standards.”
The question of whether or not IRB was used in this OpX project was brought up at a meeting on March 2 and again when the Association of Chicanx Activists (AChA) presented their perceived issues with OpX project to Associated Student Government (ASG) the next day. However, it was not fully addressed until a third meeting, open to the public, held on Friday, March 4, in the University Center Room 128.
During that third meeting, students, faculty, and administrators from all over campus took the opportunity to address the concerns over how the Facilities workers were and are being treated.
When asked how the workers were being informed about the specifics of the OpX Program, USD’s Interim Vice Provost Dr. Roger Pace, clarified the position of the university during the meeting.
“This isn’t research, so consent isn’t something that you need to obtain with this stuff, understanding the work that’s being performed,” Dr. Pace said. “But it’s still appropriate to explain what’s happening to the employees, so that the employees realize their specific performance is not being evaluated. We’re trying to understand the overall job and how it applies in other areas.”
Dr. Pace specifically addressed why the project is not considered research and thus why IRB is not required.
“The distinction is the generalizable knowledge piece,” Pace said. “The things that you learn by watching workers in one workplace isn’t generalizable to other places, and that’s the distinction. That is why [it] did not require IRB approval at this time.”
Also during the meeting, Associate Dean of the School of Engineering Dr. Rick Olson added that following some ethical guidelines would still be helpful.
“Just because it wasn’t in IRB doesn’t mean we shouldnt apply the principles and ethics to the human participants,” Dr. Olson said. “IRB is a specific process, but it’s not the only ethical guide we have. Whether it went through IRB or not, we should have a sensitivity to the people we’re dealing with. There’s historical context we need to take into account.”
Three days after the March 4 meeting, Professor of Operations and Supply Chain Management Dr. Simon Croom sent out an email to the School of Business to address the controversy.
In the email, Dr. Croom came to the defense of the study.
“At the heart of my very serious concern about the accusations being made, is the implication that the program is being conducted with less than desirable motives, demonstrating behaviors that are not only not within the community of care we enshrine at USD, but most disconcerting, that there is malicious intent,” Dr. Croom said.
When The USD Vista reached out for individual comments on the controversy surrounding the OpX Program, Dr. Croom, Dr. Perry, and Dr. Chase all declined.
In the weeks following these exchanges, the discourse surrounding the Operational Excellence Development Program has calmed. Facilities Management repeatedly referred the Vista to Dr. Peter Marlow when asked to speak with the employees who are involved in the study, despite our ability to obtain the following quote.
Adelberto, an employee of USD Facilities who is participating in the study, said that the experience has been good so far.
(Translated from Spanish) “It’s been good,” Adelberto said. “There are two or three men and women who are participating; they [the students] take notes.”
The students in Dr. Perry’s class continue to collect data from Facilities staff.campus for the OpX project.