Leading Organizations for Quality Improvement Initiative

Tinacherry100$

wk.10.discussion.LeadingOrganizationsforQualityImprovementInitiatives.docx

Home >Nursing homework help >Leading Organizations for Quality Improvement Initiative

Leading Organizations for Quality Improvement Initiatives

This is a graded discussion: 100 points possible

due Jan 24

Discussion

LEADERSHIP FOR CHANGE

What are the characteristics of a transformational leader?

As you have examined this week, a transformational leader is a leader who is able to inspire change and bring out the best in those around them. However, what characteristics does this leader have? Perhaps a transformational leader is trustworthy, inspiring, and charismatic? Perhaps this leader leads with integrity, respect, and empathy? Perhaps this leader is team-focused, encouraging, and positive?

How would you define a transformational leader, and when might you have experienced this type of leadership?

For this Discussion, consider the role of transformational leadership for change. Explore the need for transformational leaders, and describe experiences you may have had with these leaders. Additionally, analyze how these leaders might enhance quality improvement in healthcare organizations and nursing practice.

RESOURCES

LEARNING RESOURCES

Required Readings

· Sipes, C. (2020). Project management for the advanced practice nurse (2nd ed.). Springer Publishing Company.

· Chapter 1, “Basic Project Management for Advanced Practice Nurses and Healthcare Professionals” (pp. 3–16)

· Chapter 2, “Advanced Practice Nurse Role Descriptions and Application of Project Management Concepts” (pp. 17–46)

· Albert, N. M. (2018). Operationalizing a nursing innovation center within a health care system. Nursing Administration QuarterlyLinks to an external site. , 42(1), 43–53. https://doi.org/10.1097/NAQ.0000000000000266

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity. Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

WEEKLY RESOURCES

TO PREPARE:

· Review the Learning Resources for this week, and reflect on potential leadership strategies for promoting change in healthcare organizations and nursing practice.

· Consider the potential impact of project management for supporting transformational leadership approaches for promoting change in organizations.

· Reflect on the relationship between transformational change, leadership strategies, and the need for quality improvement in your healthcare organization or nursing practice.

Post a brief explanation of the relationship between transformational leadership for change and the need for quality improvement. Share any experiences you may have of transformational leadership in your healthcare organization or nursing practice. Then, describe how you would recommend the application of project management approaches to support transformational leadership practices for the promotion of a quality improvement initiative in your healthcare organization or nursing practice. Be sure to include any short- and long-term milestones or goals associated with the quality improvement initiative described. Be specific and provide examples.

Assignment Rubric Details Close

Rubric

NURS_8302_Week10_Discussion_Rubric

NURS_8302_Week10_Discussion_Rubric

Criteria

Ratings

Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMain Posting: Response to the Discussion question is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current scholarly sources.

44 to >39.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Thoroughly responds to the Discussion question(s). Is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current scholarly sources. No less than 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least three current scholarly sources that are correctly cited and formatted.

39 to >34.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Responds to most of the Discussion question(s). Is somewhat reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. 50% of the post has exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least three scholarly sources that are correctly cited and formatted.

34 to >30.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Responds to some of the Discussion question(s). One to two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed. Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Supported by fewer than two scholarly sources that are correctly cited and formatted.

30 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Does not respond to the Discussion question(s). Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria. Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Contains only one or no scholarly sources.

44 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMain Posting: Writing

6 to >5.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Written clearly and concisely. Contains no grammatical or spelling errors. Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. Response is effectively written in Standard Academic English.

5 to >4.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Written clearly and concisely. May contain one to two grammatical or spelling errors. Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. Response is effectively written in Standard Academic English.

4 to >3.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Written somewhat clearly and concisely. May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Contains some APA formatting errors. Edits are needed to follow standards for Standard Academic English.

3 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Not written clearly or concisely. Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style. Does not follow Standard Academic English for most of the post.

6 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMain Posting: Timely and full participation

10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. ... Posts main Discussion by due date.

8 to >7.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Meets requirements for full participation. ... Posts main Discussion by due date.

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Posts main Discussion by due date.

6 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Does not meet requirements for full participation. ... Does not post main Discussion by due date.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFirst Response: Post to colleague's main post that is reflective and justified with scholarly sources.

9 to >8.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. Responds to questions posed by faculty. Uses scholarly sources to support ideas. Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives. Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted.

8 to >7.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting. Uses scholarly sources to support ideas. Demonstrates a beginning synthesis and understanding of learning objectives. Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted.

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response is on topic and may have some depth. Minimal or no scholarly sources provided.

6 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. No sources.

9 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFirst Response: Writing

6 to >5.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions is fully answered, if posed. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more scholarly sources. Response is effectively written in Standard Academic English.

5 to >4.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions is mostly answered, if posed. Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources. Response is written in Academic English.

4 to >3.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. Response to faculty questions is minimally addressed, if posed. Few or no scholarly sources are cited.

3 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication. Response to faculty questions is missing. No scholarly sources are cited.

6 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFirst Response: Timely and full participation

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. ... Posts by due date.

4 to >3.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Meets requirements for full participation. ... Posts by due date.

3 to >2.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Posts by due date.

2 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Does not meet requirements for full participation. ... Does not post by due date.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSecond Response: Post to colleague's main post that is reflective and justified with scholarly sources.

9 to >8.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

8 to >7.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

7 to >6.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response is on topic and may have some depth. Minimal or no scholarly sources provided.

6 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. No sources.

9 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSecond Response: Writing

6 to >5.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

5 to >4.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions is mostly answered, if posed. Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few at least two scholarly sources.... Response is written in Standard Academic English.

4 to >3.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication. Response to faculty questions is minimally addressed, if posed. Few or no scholarly sources are cited.

3 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication. Response to faculty questions is missing. No scholarly sources are cited.

6 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSecond Response: Timely and full participation

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent 90%–100%

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. Posts by due date.

4 to >3.0 pts

Good 80%–89%

Meets requirements for full participation. Posts by due date.

3 to >2.0 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Posts by due date.

2 to >0 pts

Poor 0%–69%

Does not meet requirements for full participation. Does not post by due date.

5 pts

Total Points: 100