There are a number of factors that come to mind when reflecting on how and why I came to my topic. The clear frontrunner is my aspiration to study topics related to my identity as a Cuban, but the specific subject of FDI in Cuba came from an observation and conclusion that the allowance of FDI in Cuba contradicts many of the communist ideological values that the Cuban revolution expressed. Another reason for research is to explore and bring attention to the subject of international business negations that have existed outside of the new focus of business relations of Cuba and the U.S. after the thawing of relations. It is often forgotten that Cuba had been performing similar partnerships with countries other than the U.S. before the thawing of relations and I use this lesser known fact to motivate my research. I am also interested in bringing attention to how much Cuban government has changed in economic terms since the beginning of the revolution. I feel that although these reasons are heavily influenced by my personal background it would also fall into Aristotle idea of contributing to a “richer world” because it is intended to create more knowledge.

I feel like some of my motives have a clear interpretivist approach since some of my motivations are to find a change in dialog but I have decided to pursue a Neo-Positivist Case Study approach because I feel that the best to explore changes and growth of FDI in Cuba is by analyzing the subject using eras to compare and contrast them. This approach still allows me to analyze the change in dialogue. I think that my research makes the normative assumption that the inclusion of Cuba in FDI is key to a less oppressive and ideologically different Cuban government.

In all, the ultimate goal is help create a broader understanding of the context of business negotiations in Cuba. Many times, any type of dealings with the Cuban government are politically charged, but this also comes with an emotional charge that often leads actors blind.