Leading Organizations for Quality Improvement Initiative

Tinacherry100$

wk.11.discussion.LeadingOrganizationsforQualityImprovementInitiative1.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 26

Discussion

EVALUATING AND SUSTAINING CHANGE

Change is the law of life.

- John F. Kennedy

Change is inevitable. There is no getting around it, but that does not mean change always has to be negative. Society often places a negative connotation to change, but what if the change is for the best? What if change is what sustains growth and encourages improvement?

In nursing practice, change is unavoidable. How should change be evaluated, maintained, and sustained in nursing practice? What role does leadership have in change management? Consider the role of change management in nursing, and reflect on how change management may differ from change leadership.

For this Discussion, compare change management and change leadership. Reflect on the potential impact of leadership approaches on change, and consider how leadership may influence change 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 6, “Monitoring and Controlling: Project Management—Phase 4” (pp. 145–168)

· Kotter, J. (n.d.). The 8-step process for leading change Links to an external site. . https://www.kotterinc.com/8-steps-process-for-leading-change/

Required Media

· Kotter, J. (2012, February 6). Change management vs change leadership—what’s the difference? Links to an external site. [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ssUnbrhf_U&t=46s

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 the mechanisms available to evaluate change in healthcare organizations and nursing practice.

· How is change management related to change leadership?

· Consider how leadership approaches may contribute to evaluation processes for change management, as well as for the support of sustaining changes in healthcare organizations and nursing practice.

· What does it mean to sustain changes in healthcare organizations or nursing practice, and how might leadership support these aims?

· Reflect on when you should stop measuring change in an organization, and why.

Post a brief comparison between change management and change leadership. Be specific. Explain how leadership approaches may relate to processes for evaluation of and sustainment of change in a healthcare organization or nursing practice. Then, explain the function of leadership in evaluating, maintaining, and sustaining change. What is the influence of leadership on these aims? Be sure to include a brief explanation of whether you should stop measuring change in an organization, and explain why. Be specific and provide examples.

Assignment Rubric Details Close

Rubric

NURS_8302_Week11_Discussion_Rubric

NURS_8302_Week11_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