Ethical Consideration

The researcher used the ethical principles in research in the conduct of the study
especially during the data gathering procedure. In the conduct of the study, three basic
principles were observed: the principles of respect of persons, beneficence and justice. In the
observance of respect for persons, two ethical convictions were further observed: first, those
individuals should be treated as autonomous agents, and second, that persons with
diminished autonomy were entitled to protection. In affording beneficence, respondents
were treated in an ethical manner not only by respecting their decisions and protecting them
from harm, but also by making efforts to secure their well-being. Two general rules were
observed in the observance of beneficence: (a) do not harm and (b) maximize possible
benefits and minimize possible harms. Lastly, the principle of justice was applied. In the
treatment of respondents the principle of "fairness in distribution" or "what is deserved” was
observed. To further observe justice, the following were also observed: (a) to each person an
equal share, (b) to each person according to individual need, (c) to each person according to
individual effort, (d) to each person according to societal contribution, and (e) to each
person according to merit.
a. Risk-benefit assessment
Risks. There were risks involved in the said undertaking as to the threats of the lack
of time to finish the undertaking considering this research was time – consuming and the
privacy involved in it that there was a need to ensure that the responses would be held with
strict confidentiality and would only be used for study purposes.
Benefit. The benefit of the said undertaking ensured that it improves the present
Village Justice System implementation in the Province of Southern Leyte through finding
ways on how to improve its system being used.
b. Consent, documentation of informed consent
The respondents filled out the informed consent that ensures their voluntary
participation to the research undertaking and that they thoroughly understood the nature and
purpose of the said undertaking. They were briefed in order that they would understand the
research undertaking and ensures cooperation in order to yield positive outcome or result.
This Informed consent also provides that they would be interviewed or had to answer the
questionnaire for approximately one hour and 30 minutes about their experiences in terms of
employee benefit packages received. The interview was voice recorded and took place in
Holy Child Multi-Purpose Cooperative (HCMPC) in Bato, Leyte. It was also conveyed that
the participation of the respondents in the research undertaking was entirely voluntary and
they might withdraw from the study at any time they wish. It also assured the respondents
that the information would be held with strict confidentiality. The research undertaking was
thoroughly explained to the respondents making sure that they understood the consent form
and agreed to participate. They were then asked to sign in with their signature and the date
in which they signed. The consent involved a clear discussion of (1) respondents’ status that
allowed the respondents to know that the information they provided would only be used for
research purposes; (2) study goals which reflected the overall goals to determine the impact
of identified employee benefit packages on the employee productivity, work motivation and
job satisfaction of the said cooperative; (3) type of data that were collected from the
prospective respondents; (4) procedures on how the study was done and where data
collection was done through personal interview with the respondents and through answering
questionnaires; (5) nature of the commitment where the interaction process with the
respondent took for approximately 1 hour of their time; (6) selection of respondent which
was done through total population sampling (complete enumeration) and where the
respondents included employees of Holy Child Multi-Purpose Cooperative only; (7)
potential risks where respondents were associated with potential risks of loss of time and
privacy during the participation of respondents most especially during the interview process;
(8) potential benefits in which this study also benefited the respondents through the
improvement of ways/solution in improving the employee benefit packages in the
cooperative; (9) newly introduced employee benefit packages and other employee programs
that could benefit the respondents; (10) compensation where this study was mainly non-
monetary and snacks were provided to the respondents as a way of incentive or
compensation; (11) confidentiality pledge where a certificate of confidentiality was given to
respondents to protect the study from force of involuntary disclosure and the information
given will be kept confidential and would only be used in research purposes; (12) voluntary
consent where the participation was strictly voluntary and respondents were not forced to
participate in the study; (13) right to withdraw and withhold information where every
respondent of this study had the right to withdraw from participation at any time and should
be treated in the usual and customary fashion; (14) contact information where it was stated
in the consent the contact information of Mr. Melchor Obligado of Saint Joseph College-
Accountancy Department, through email melchorobligado.oc@gmail.com and Telephone
Number 416-8607; and (15) sound recordings that happened during the interview and were
carefully kept after the transcription of data.

c. Authorization to access private information

The respondents were informed that they do not have access to the research but only
the researcher since he has the authority over the research undertaking. The respondents
were also informed on the output or the results of the research undertaking since they were
the beneficiaries of the research. Inquiry audit was facilitated by the researcher through
seeking information of knowledgeable persons, outside the entity, the purpose of which to
ensure performing the audit procedures. Researcher took into consideration the disclosure of
quality enhancement strategies to ensure that the research was substantial and enriching
through collaborative effort. It ensured that descriptions of the responses were thick and
narratively done. It ensured that the researcher’s credibility was observed through ensuring
that they could be trusted with the data and that the responses of the respondents were held
with strictest confidentiality. The researcher showed commitment in the research
undertaking through making an elaborate discussion of the subject matter and the responses
of the respondents were recorded and were given analysis and interpretation.
d. Confidentiality procedures
The research ensured confidentiality through ensuring that the responses were kept
with strict confidentiality and for study purposes only through safe-keeping of instruments
after it had been used to ensure the confidentiality of the research process. In the case of
questionnaires, names were not placed in the questionnaire. No personal information of the
respondents was included in the questionnaire. If he/she needed to and if there were doubts,
the contact details of Mr. Melchor Obligado of Saint Joseph College-Accountancy
Department was given to the respondent through email address
melchorobligado.oc@gmail.com and Telephone No. 416-8607.

e. Debriefings, Communication and Referrals

Along with being gracious and polite, the researcher phrased questions tactfully. A
debriefing was conducted after data collection was completed to permit respondents to ask
questions or air complaints. Further, after the study, the researcher communicated with the
respondents to let them know that their participation was appreciated through a letter. Lastly,
referrals were done should research findings deem it proper, when there were inquiries that
needed to be answered to avoid confusion and ensure clearer understanding of the research
undertaking. It could not be avoided that there would be conflict of interests between the
members and it is important to deal with it in such a diplomatic way in meeting halfway. It
is important that the researchers conveyed exchange of communication and feedbacks in
meeting halfway for the welfare of the people.

f. Incentives or Compensation
No incentives or compensation were afforded to the respondents of the study, considering
that the study entailed only answering a questionnaire and questions through interview and
was voluntary in nature. It was non-monetary, therefore, snacks and word of gratitude were
the means of thanking the respondents in participating in the study. However, one direct
benefit that was afforded to the respondents was the potential to yield generalizable
knowledge about the problem being studied and non-material compensation to participant,
which might come in the form of a social services education, conference or other creative
benefits.

g. Conflict of Interest
Should conflict of interest exist in the study and in order to maintain the
independence and integrity of Holy Child Multi-Purpose Cooperative (HCMPC), employees
of HCMPC must identify, eliminate, minimize or otherwise manage real, potential or
perceived conflicts of interest.
In the study, there was no conflict of interest that arose. The environment as well as
the respondents were not personally connected and not influenced by the researcher
therefore, there was no bias associated with the study. Respondents were chosen based on
the inclusion and exclusion criteria set. No recruitment through advertisement was needed in
the study as it is pure answering questionnaires. Assent was not applied in the study
considering that the respondents were all above 18 years old and were therefore capacitated
to give consent.
 This study was not collaborative in nature, thus, the researcher being the author held
the intellectual property rights as well as the publication rights and information and
responsibility sharing. Thus, terms of reference would not be applicable in the study.