Walden NURS6053  Week 7 Workplace Environment Assessment

Want create site? With you can do it easy.

Walden NURS6053 Week 7 Workplace Environment Assessment

I work in a large county jail which houses over 3,000 inmates. In my role I am the nursing supervisor for mental health services which are provided by a contract company. Because of this unique setting, I am a part of an organization within a larger organization. In this discussion post I will discuss the Clark Health Workplace Inventory (CHWI) results of my contract organization which operates within the larger organization of the county Sheriff’s department.

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
Walden NURS6053  Week 7 Workplace Environment Assessment
From $8/Page
Order Essay

In completing the Clark Healthy Workplace Inventory (CHWI), I identified that my organizational culture is not “…assessed on an ongoing basis, and measures are

Walden NURS6053 Week 7 Workplace Environment Assessment

Walden NURS6053 Week 7 Workplace Environment Assessment

taken to improve it based on results of that assessment” (Clark, 2015). Other areas of incivility I noted in my organization included the lack of a comprehensive mentoring program, the inability to retain the best and brightest employees, and that my organization does not possess a high level of employee engagement, job satisfaction, and morale (Clark, 2015).

In only three of the areas on the CHWI did I rank my workplace in the completely true (5) column (Clark, 2015). These areas are that the employees are viewed as assets and valued partners within the organization, the organization provides competitive salaries, compensation, benefits and other rewards, and there are sufficient opportunities for advancement (Clark, 2015). In fact, this inventory helped me to recognize that my organization values tangible results for their customers, and because of this, they place significant emphasis on the success of the employees.  My organization incentivizes staff to perform through compensation rather than a pleasing culture of values emphasis, shared vision, or collegiality. This is not to say that my organization is not a good place to work, but it certainly is not the most civil environment I have encountered in my career. In addition, the jail setting is paramilitary by nature. Authoritative and assertive communication is the norm.

One example of incivility that I encountered in my workplace occurred via an email exchange with the attending psychiatrist, an individual who is the direct supervisor for all mental health medication providers in the jail. I had written an email to him inquiring about the system for assigning psychiatrists to evaluate patients. I also asked how long it typically takes to complete initial psychiatric evaluations and initial medication orders, and if we could discuss options to improve this system. I attached a report I generated from our electronic medical record system which showed the extensive backlog of psychiatrist appointments. This report was 196 pages long, with some appointments waiting more that 72 days since the appointment was scheduled.

I do not wish to give details about the psychiatrist’s response to my direct, but professional and civil inquiry. In general, this provider’s email response included aggressively worded comments suggesting that I should focus on my own responsibilities and mind my own business, in addition to other very direct and clearly angry comments. This written response was so uncivil and inappropriate that the highest-ranking administrator at my facility, an individual who is responsible for all healthcare delivery in our jail, responded immediately in my defense. He stated that the inquiry was in fact from him, and I was only the messenger. He deflected his incivility toward me, something I think an effective leader should do.

Broome & Marshall state that it is to be expected that diverse teams of people are going to have different perspectives (p. 224). However, one of the things I appreciate the most about my organization is the intensity of its focus on providing services to tangibly and measurably meet national standards of mental health care delivery in the correctional setting. These standards are published by the National Commission on Correctional Health Care (NCCHC) and these standards require that mental health evaluations occur within 14 days of the request for such services (National Commission on Correctional Health Care, 2018). A benefit of working within a paramilitary setting such as corrections is the support for rapid identification of problems and implementation of solutions. A drawback of working in a paramilitary setting such as corrections is the reality that incivility is sometimes tolerated, with an attitude that staff should suck it up so to speak.

One tool that has been found to increase civility in the workplace is TeamSTEPPS (Krivanek et al., 2020). TeamSTEPPS is a system of communication tools that are especially designed to improve safety in healthcare communication (Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, n.d.). Use of standardized tools to frame conversations between providers with diverse perspectives can improve civility. In addition, in a paramilitary setting such as corrections, tools are an effective, concrete way to teach communications. Finally, tools such as TeamSTEPPS help to eliminate biases in communications thereby improving civility.

References

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (n.d.) TeamSTEPPS 2.0. self-paced course. Retrieved from https://www.ahrq.gov/teamstepps/instructor/onlinecourse.html

Broome, M., & Marshall, E. S. (2021). Transformational leadership in nursing: From expert clinician to influential leader (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Springer.

Clark, C. M. (2015). Conversations to inspire and promote a more civil workplace. American Nurse Today, 10(11), 18-23. Retrieved from https://www.americannursetoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/ant11-CE-Civility-1023.pdf

Krivanek, M. J., Dolansky, M. A., Goliat, L., & Petty, G. (2020). Implementing TeamSTEPPS to Facilitate Workplace Civility and Nurse Retention. Journal for Nurses in Professional Development, 36(5), 259–265. https://doi-org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1097/NND.0000000000000666

National Commission on Correctional Health Care. (2018). Standards for health services in jails (2018). Available from https://my.ncchc.org/productdetails?id=a1Bf200001E7Ur6EAF

Week 7 Discussion

Workplace Environment Assessment

How healthy is your workplace?

You may believe that your existing company runs smoothly, or you may believe that it has numerous flaws. You may encounter or perhaps observe something that causes you to pause. Nonetheless, just as you would not attempt to diagnose a patient solely on the basis of observation, you should refrain from attempting to assess the health of your work environment solely on the basis of observation and opinion.
Often, difficulties are perceived as problems by some but not by others; similarly, concerns may run far deeper than leadership understands.

Walden NURS6053 Week 7 Workplace Environment Assessment

Walden NURS6053 Week 7 Workplace Environment Assessment

There are many factors and measures that may impact organizational health. Among these is civility. While an organization can institute policies designed to promote such things as civility, how can it be sure these are managed effectively? In this Discussion, you will examine the use of tools in measuring workplace civility.

To Prepare:

Review the Resources and examine the Clark Healthy Workplace Inventory, found on page 20 of Clark (2015).

Review and complete the Work Environment Assessment Template in the Resources.

Assignment: Workplace Environment Assessment

Clearly, diagnosis is a critical aspect of healthcare. However, the ultimate purpose of a diagnosis is the development and application of a series of treatments or protocols. Isolated recognition of a health issue does little to resolve it.

In this module’s Discussion, you applied the Clark Healthy Workplace Inventory to diagnose potential problems with the civility of your organization. In this Portfolio Assignment, you will continue to analyze the results and apply published research to the development of a proposed treatment for any issues uncovered by the assessment.

To Prepare:

  • Review the Resources and examine the Clark Healthy Workplace Inventory, found on page 20 of Clark (2015).
  • Review the Work Environment Assessment Template.
  • Reflect on the output of your Discussion post regarding your evaluation of workplace civility and the feedback received from colleagues.
  • Select and review one or more of the following articles found in the Resources:
    • Clark, Olender, Cardoni, and Kenski (2011)
    • Clark (2018)
    • Clark (2015)
    • Griffin and Clark (2014)

The Assignment (3-6 pages total):

Part 1: Work Environment Assessment (1-2 pages)

  • Review the Work Environment Assessment Template you completed for this Module’s Discussion.
  • Describe the results of the Work Environment Assessment you completed on your workplace.
  • Identify two things that surprised you about the results and one idea you believed prior to conducting the Assessment that was confirmed.
  • Explain what the results of the Assessment suggest about the health and civility of your workplace.

Part 2: Reviewing the Literature (1-2 pages)

  • Briefly describe the theory or concept presented in the article(s) you selected.
  • Explain how the theory or concept presented in the article(s) relates to the results of your Work Environment Assessment.
  • Explain how your organization could apply the theory highlighted in your selected article(s) to improve organizational health and/or create stronger work teams. Be specific and provide examples.

Part 3: Evidence-Based Strategies to Create High-Performance Interprofessional Teams (1–2 pages)

  • Recommend at least two strategies, supported in the literature, that can be implemented to address any shortcomings revealed in your Work Environment Assessment.
  • Recommend at least two strategies that can be implemented to bolster successful practices revealed in your Work Environment Assessment.

By Day 7 of Week 9

Submit your Workplace Environment Assessment Assignment.

Submission and Grading Information

To submit your completed Assignment for review and grading, do the following:

  • Please save your Assignment using the naming convention “WK9Assgn+last name+first initial.(extension)” as the name.
  • Click the Week 9 Assignment Rubric to review the Grading Criteria for the Assignment.
  • Click the Week 9 Assignment link. You will also be able to “View Rubric” for grading criteria from this area.
  • Next, from the Attach File area, click on the Browse My Computer button. Find the document you saved as “WK9Assgn+last name+first initial.(extension)” and click Open.
  • If applicable: From the Plagiarism Tools area, click the checkbox for I agree to submit my paper(s) to the Global Reference Database.
  • Click on the Submit button to complete your submission.

Walden NURS6053  Week 7 Workplace Environment Assessment

Walden NURS6053  Week 7 Workplace Environment Assessment

Grading Criteria

To access your rubric:

Week 9 Assignment Rubric

Check Your Assignment Draft for Authenticity

To check your Assignment Draft for Authenticity:

Submit your Week 9 Assignment draft and review the originality report

Submit Your Assignment by Day 7 of Week 9

To participate in this Assignment:

Week 9 Assignment

Next Module

To go to the next module:

Module 5

You must proofread your paper. But do not strictly rely on your computer’s spell-checker and grammar-checker; failure to do so indicates a lack of effort on your part and you can expect your grade to suffer accordingly. Papers with numerous misspelled words and grammatical mistakes will be penalized. Read over your paper – in silence and then aloud – before handing it in and make corrections as necessary. Often it is advantageous to have a friend proofread your paper for obvious errors. Handwritten corrections are preferable to uncorrected mistakes.

Use a standard 10 to 12 point (10 to 12 characters per inch) typeface. Smaller or compressed type and papers with small margins or single-spacing are hard to read. It is better to let your essay run over the recommended number of pages than to try to compress it into fewer pages.

Likewise, large type, large margins, large indentations, triple-spacing, increased leading (space between lines), increased kerning (space between letters), and any other such attempts at “padding” to increase the length of a paper are unacceptable, wasteful of trees, and will not fool your professor.

The paper must be neatly formatted, double-spaced with a one-inch margin on the top, bottom, and sides of each page. When submitting hard copy, be sure to use white paper and print out using dark ink. If it is hard to read your essay, it will also be hard to follow your argument.

Name: NURS_6053_Module04_Week07_Discussion_Rubric

Excellent Good Fair Poor
Main Posting
Points Range: 45 (45%) – 50 (50%)

Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.

Supported by at least three current, credible sources.

Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

Points Range: 40 (40%) – 44 (44%)

Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.

Supported by at least three credible sources.

Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

Points Range: 35 (35%) – 39 (39%)

Responds to some of the discussion question(s).

One or 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.

Post is cited with two credible sources.

Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

Contains some APA formatting errors.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 34 (34%)

Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately.

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 credible sources.

Not written clearly or concisely.

Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.

Main Post: Timeliness
Points Range: 10 (10%) – 10 (10%)
Posts main post by day 3.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not post by day 3.
First Response
Points Range: 17 (17%) – 18 (18%)

Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.

Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.

Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

Points Range: 15 (15%) – 16 (16%)

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

Points Range: 13 (13%) – 14 (14%)

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.

Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 12 (12%)

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.

Responses to faculty questions are missing.

No credible sources are cited.

Second Response
Points Range: 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)

Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.

Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.

Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

Points Range: 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

Points Range: 12 (12%) – 13 (13%)

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.

Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 11 (11%)

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.

Responses to faculty questions are missing.

No credible sources are cited.

Participation
Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.
Total Points: 100
Did you find apk for android? You can find new and apps.

Calculate the price
Make an order in advance and get the best price
Pages (550 words)
$0.00
*Price with a welcome 20% discount applied.
Pro tip: If you want to save more money and pay the lowest price, you need to set a more extended deadline.
We know how difficult it is to be a student these days. That's why our prices are one of the most affordable on the market, and there are no hidden fees.

Instead, we offer bonuses, discounts, and free services to make your experience outstanding.
How it works
Receive a 100% original paper that will pass Turnitin from a top essay writing service
step 1
Upload your instructions
Fill out the order form and provide paper details. You can even attach screenshots or add additional instructions later. If something is not clear or missing, the writer will contact you for clarification.
Pro service tips
How to get the most out of your experience with Top Writers 4Me
One writer throughout the entire course
If you like the writer, you can hire them again. Just copy & paste their ID on the order form ("Preferred Writer's ID" field). This way, your vocabulary will be uniform, and the writer will be aware of your needs.
The same paper from different writers
You can order essay or any other work from two different writers to choose the best one or give another version to a friend. This can be done through the add-on "Same paper from another writer."
Copy of sources used by the writer
Our college essay writers work with ScienceDirect and other databases. They can send you articles or materials used in PDF or through screenshots. Just tick the "Copy of sources" field on the order form.
Testimonials
See why 10k+ students have chosen us as their sole writing assistance provider
Check out the latest reviews and opinions submitted by real customers worldwide and make an informed decision.
English 101
Great work! Thanks!
Customer 452567, August 2nd, 2022
Nursing
Good job. Thank you
Customer 452487, September 16th, 2021
Healthcare Writing & Communications
Excellent!! You’re awesome, thank you very much for all of your hard work & help!!
Customer 452483, October 24th, 2021
Nursing
Excellent job! super recommended.
Customer 452487, August 24th, 2021
Nursing
Excellent writing !! Definitely I will use your services again... Thank you.
Customer 452487, August 22nd, 2021
Communications
Well done! I thank you very much!
Customer 452483, July 9th, 2021
Communications
Thank you for your hard work; I enjoyed reading the essay and appreciate your writing.
Customer 452483, July 18th, 2021
Communications
EXCELLENT JOB!!! VERY PLEASED :)
Customer 452483, July 5th, 2021
Mathematics
Thank you, great work!
Customer 452483, July 19th, 2021
Nursing
Good job! Thank you
Customer 452487, October 17th, 2021
Group Dynamics
Great job. I appreciate it.
Customer 452521, November 22nd, 2021
Nursing
Excellent!!! Thank you.
Customer 452487, September 13th, 2021
1159
Customer reviews in total
96%
Current satisfaction rate
2 pages
Average paper length
47%
Customers referred by a friend
OUR GIFT TO YOU
20% OFF your first order
Use a coupon TOP20 and enjoy expert help with any task at the most affordable price.
Claim my 20% OFF Order in Chat
Open chat
Chat with us Live Here
Get in Touch with Our Live Chat Agents via WhatsApp on +1(346) 416-0954. Get Unlimited Access to Answers on Any Queries With Your Paper.