Advertisement

Journal of Maritime Archaeology

, Volume 14, Issue 3, pp 355–368 | Cite as

Choice, Values and Building Capability: A Case Study from Vietnam

  • Paddy O’TooleEmail author
  • Mark Staniforth
Original Paper

Abstract

Capability building enables people, groups, organisations and nations to achieve a greater range of activities. A program of capability building activities in Vietnam over the past decade provides the case study for this paper. From these activities and the progress of the program we have constructed an explicit approach of capability building that deals with maritime archaeology and underwater cultural heritage. The aim of this paper is to explain how the elements of our value-based approach interact to establish and enhance capability through knowledge capital development. Our notion of capability building is based on a programme taking place over an extended period of time. The extended time period is necessary to achieve long-term change or at least critical reflection on the part of the host organisation. This process causes a direct exposure to the ethical and disciplinary tenets of maritime archaeology on the part of the host organisation, but some initial congruence of values is considered critical in order to achieve effective outcomes. The program is based on principles of commitment to empowerment, participative learning, learning reinforcement mechanisms, and intensive communication with the stakeholders of the host organisation. We argue that training alone does not work and so the approach underlying the programme encompasses an integrated approach by supplementing training in a variety of forms with advice, mentoring, academic research and cultural heritage management-based approaches to help answer specific problems faced by the host organisation.

Keywords

Maritime archaeology Capability building Vietnam 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Argyris C (1999) On organizational learning. Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  2. Argyris C, Schön DA (1974) Theory in practice: Increasing professional effectiveness. Jossey-Bass, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  3. Bargh JA, Morsella E (2008) The unconscious mind. Perspect Psychol Sci 3:73–79.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6916.2008.00064.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chiappero-Martinetti E (2008) Complexity and vagueness in the capability approach: strengths or weaknesses? In: Comim F, Qizilbash M, Alkire S (eds) The capability approach: concepts, measures and applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 268–309.  https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511492587.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Eade D (2010) Capacity building: who builds whose capacity? In: Cornwall J, Eade D (eds) Deconstructing development discourse buzzwords and fuzzwords. Practical Action Publishing, Rugby, pp 203–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Elizur D, Sagie A (1999) Facets of personal values: a structural analysis of life and work values. Appl Psychol 48:73–87.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.1999.tb00049 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Favis RL (2012) UNESCO regional capacity building programme on safeguarding the underwater cultural heritage of Asia and the Pacific. In: Staniforth M et al (eds) Proceedings on the Asia-Pacific regional conference on underwater cultural heritage. Asian Academy for Heritage Management, Manila, pp 653–667Google Scholar
  8. Fitzsimmons GJ, Williams P (2000) Asking questions can change choice behavior: does it do so automatically or effortfully? J Exp Psychol Appl 6:195–206.  https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-898X.6.3.195 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Grossman R, Salas E (2011) The transfer of training: what really matters. Int J Train Dev 15:103–120.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2419.2011.00373.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Heng K (2014) Management and protection of maritime and underwater heritage: capacity building/development, Cambodia. In: Staniforth M, Le-Thi L (eds) Proceedings of the international symposium on underwater archaeology in Vietnam and Southeast Asia: cooperation for development. Institute of Archaeology, Quang Ngaai, Vietnam, pp 199–205Google Scholar
  11. Hoffmann T (1999) The meanings of competency. J Eur Ind Train 23:275–285.  https://doi.org/10.1108/03090599910284650 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hofstede G (n.d.) Hofstede insights—Australia. https://www.hofstede-insights.com/country/australia/. Accessed 30 Mar 2019
  13. Hofstede G (1980) Culture’s consequences: international differences in work-related values. Sage, Beverly HillsGoogle Scholar
  14. Hofstede G (2011) Dimensionalizing cultures: the Hofstede model in context. Online Read Psychol Cult 00:00.  https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Holton R (2006) The act of choice. Philos Imprint 6:1–15Google Scholar
  16. Ibrahim SS (2006) From individual to collective capabilities: the capability approach as a conceptual framework for self-help. J Hum Dev 7:397–416.  https://doi.org/10.1080/14649880600815982 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jeffery B, Parthesius R (2012) Planning for the future: benefits in building local and regional capacities in implementing maritime and underwater cultural heritage programmes. In: Tan H (ed) Maritime archaeology in southeast Asia: innovation and adaptation. Asian Civilisations Museum, Singapore, pp 165–182Google Scholar
  18. Kapucu N, Healy BF, Arslan T (2011) Survival of the fittest: capacity building for small nonprofit organizations. Eval Program Plann 34:236–245.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2011.03.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Manders MR, Underwood CJ (2012) Training manual for the UNESCO Foundation Course on the protection and management of underwater cultural heritage in Asia and the Pacific. UNESCO, BangkokGoogle Scholar
  20. Manders MR, Underwood CJ (2015) UNESCO field school on underwater cultural heritage 2009–2011, Thailand capacity building in the Asian and Pacific region. In: Tripathi S (ed) Shipwrecks around the world: revelations of the past. Delta Book World, New Delhi, pp 730–748Google Scholar
  21. Moore S, Walsh GA, Risquez A (2007) Teaching at college and university: effective strategies and key principles. Open University Press, BerkshireGoogle Scholar
  22. Muffels R, Headey B (2013) Capabilities and choices: do they make sense for understanding objective and subjective well-being? An empirical test of Sen’s capability framework on German and British panel data. Soc Indic Res 110:1159–1185.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-011-9978-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. O’Toole P (2011) How organisations remember: retaining knowledge through organizational action. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Robeyns I (2005) The capability approach: a theoretical survey. J Hum Dev 6:93–114.  https://doi.org/10.1080/146498805200034266 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Schwartz SH (1994) Are there universal aspects in the structure and contents of human values? J Soc Issues 50:19–45.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1994.tb01196.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Sen A (1985) Commodities and capabilities. Oxford University Press, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  27. Sen A (1989) Development as capability expansion. J Dev Plan 19:41–58Google Scholar
  28. Sen A (2003) Capability and well-being. The quality of life. In: Nussbaum M, Sen A (eds), Oxford Scholarship Online. https://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/0198287976.001.0001/acprof-9780198287971-chapter-3. Accessed 30 Nov 2018
  29. Seraphin KD, Harrison GM, Philippoff J, Brandon PR, Nguyen TTT, Lawton BE, Vallin LM (2017) Teaching aquatic science as inquiry through professional development: teacher characteristics and student outcomes. J Res Sci Teach 54:1219–1245.  https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21403 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Smith ML, Seward C (2009) The relational ontology of Amartya Sen’s capability approach: incorporating social and individual causes. J Hum Dev Capab 10:213–235.  https://doi.org/10.1080/19452820902940927 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Staniforth M (2012) First wrecked, now pillaged: Vietnam’s underwater treasure. The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/first-wrecked-now-pillaged-vietnams-underwater-treasure-10219. Accessed 15 Nov 2018
  32. Staniforth M (2014) Raising awareness about underwater cultural heritage in Vietnam. In: Proceedings of the 18th ICOMOS general assembly and scientific symposiumGoogle Scholar
  33. Staniforth M, O’Toole P (2017) A value-based model for capability building in maritime archaeology in the developing world. In: Proceedings of the IKUWA 6 conference, Fremantle, WA. (in press)Google Scholar
  34. Stark M, Piphal H (2017) After angkor: an archaeological perspective on heritage and capacity-building in Cambodia. In: Newson P, Young R (eds) Post-conflict archaeology and cultural heritage: rebuilding knowledge, memory and community from war-damaged material culture. Routledge, New York, pp 195–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Thorne L, Saunders SB (2002) The socio-cultural embeddedness of individuals’ ethical reasoning in organizations (cross-cultural ethics). J Bus Ethics 35:1–14.  https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012679026061 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Trompenaars F (1993) Riding the waves of culture: understanding cultural diversity in business. Economist Books, LondonGoogle Scholar
  37. Ulrich D, Brockbank W, Yeung AK, Lake DG (1995) Human resource competencies: an empirical assessment. Hum Resour Manag 34:471–596.  https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.3930340402 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Velada R, Caetano A, Michel JW, Lyons BD, Kavanagh MJ (2007) The effects of training design, individual characteristics and work environment on transfer of training. Int J Train Dev 11:194–282.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2419.2007.00286.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wahjudin J (2012) Human resources development in Indonesia’s underwater archaeology. In: Staniforth M et al (eds) Proceedings on the Asia-Pacific regional conference on underwater cultural heritage. Asian Academy for Heritage Management, Manila, pp 589–596Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of EducationMonash UniversityClaytonAustralia
  2. 2.College of Humanities, Arts and Social SciencesFlinders UniversityBedford ParkAustralia

Personalised recommendations