Want create site? With Free visual composer you can do it easy.

Describe an organizational change model that can be used in a dynamic health care environment

Describe an organizational change model that can be used in a dynamic health care environment

Topic 3 DQ 1

Change management in healthcare organizations is critical to the overall goal of providing patients with better and more quality care. Changes pose challenges for these organizations and providers, necessitating the selection of appropriate change models for use in a dynamic health care setting. Lewin’s three-stage change framework is one of the change models that can be used. Lewin’s change model is a three-stage process that evaluates two areas: the organizational environment’s change process and how to challenge the status quo in order to achieve effective transformation. According to the model, an individual’s behavior in response to proposed change is determined by group behaviors. The implication is that in order to effect change, leaders must view individual behavior as a reflection of the group’s perception of change (Hussain et al., 2018). Unfreezing, change process, and refreezing are the three stages of change in the model. The unfreezing process entails informing employees of the change and securing their acceptance and buy-in via effective communication. The second stage involves implementing the change through knowledge sharing and effective leadership, while the third stage is refreezing, during which the changed aspects become ingrained in the organization’s culture through sustained application and corrective measures as necessary.

The model asserts that managing organizational change requires an understanding of each stage, as well as effective leadership

Describe an organizational change model that can be used in a dynamic health care environment

Describe an organizational change model that can be used in a dynamic health care environment

characteristics and styles, such as the application of servant, transformational, and situational leadership approaches (Nilsen et al., 2020). The model emphasizes the critical role of stakeholders, particularly nurses, as change agents committed to overall performance and productivity improvement. Stakeholders champion change and develop strategies for achieving and sustaining organizational changes that result in higher-quality care. Additionally, they communicate effectively to aid in the implementation of new processes and ways of doing things. Describe a model of organizational change suitable for use in a dynamic health care environment.

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS:Describe an organizational change model that can be used in a dynamic health care environment

References

Hussain, S. T., Lei, S., Akram, T., Haider, M. J., Hussain, S. H., & Ali, M. (2018). Kurt Lewin’s

change model: A critical review of the role of leadership and employee involvement in organizational change. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 3(3), 123-127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2016.07.002

Nilsen, P., Seing, I., Ericsson, C., Birken, S. A., & Schildmeijer, K. (2020). Characteristics of

successful changes in health care organizations: an interview study with physicians, registered nurses and assistant nurses. BMC health services research, 20(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-4999-8. Describe an organizational change model that can be used in a dynamic health care environment

Name:  Discussion Rubric

  Excellent

90–100

Good

80–89

Fair

70–79

Poor

0–69

Main 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 credible sources.

40 (40%) – 44 (44%)

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 credible sources.

No less than 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.

Supported by at least three current credible sources.

35 (35%) – 39 (39%)

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 credible references.

31 (31%) – 34 (34%)

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.

Cited with fewer than two credible references.

0 (0%) – 30 (30%)

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 credible references.

Main Posting:

Writing

6 (6%) – 6 (6%)

Written clearly and concisely.

Contains no grammatical or spelling errors.

Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Written concisely.

May contain one to two grammatical or spelling errors.

Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Written somewhat concisely.

May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

Contains some APA formatting errors.

0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

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 Posting:

Timely and full participation

9 (9%) – 10 (10%)

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.

Posts main Discussion by due date.

8 (8%) – 8 (8%)

Meets requirements for full participation.

Posts main Discussion by due date.

7 (7%) – 7 (7%)

Posts main Discussion by due date.

0 (0%) – 6 (6%)

Does not meet requirements for full participation.

Does not post main Discussion by due date.

First Response:

Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.

9 (9%) – 9 (9%)

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

Responds to questions posed by faculty.

The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

8 (8%) – 8 (8%)

Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.

7 (7%) – 7 (7%)

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

0 (0%) – 6 (6%)

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

First Response:

Writing

6 (6%) – 6 (6%)

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response to faculty questions are fully 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.

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed.

Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources.

Response is written in standard, edited English.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication.

Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

Few or no credible sources are cited.

0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication.

Response to faculty questions are missing.

No credible sources are cited.

First Response:

Timely and full participation

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.

Posts by due date.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Meets requirements for full participation.

Posts by due date.

3 (3%) – 3 (3%)

Posts by due date.

0 (0%) – 2 (2%)

Does not meet requirements for full participation.

Does not post by due date.

Second Response:
Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.
9 (9%) – 9 (9%)

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

Responds to questions posed by faculty.

The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

8 (8%) – 8 (8%)

Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.

7 (7%) – 7 (7%)

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

0 (0%) – 6 (6%)

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

Second Response:
Writing
6 (6%) – 6 (6%)

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response to faculty questions are fully 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.

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed.

Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources.

Response is written in standard, edited English.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication.

Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

Few or no credible sources are cited.

0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication.

Response to faculty questions are missing.

No credible sources are cited.

Second Response:
Timely and full participation
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.

Posts by due date.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Meets requirements for full participation.

Posts by due date.

3 (3%) – 3 (3%)

Posts by due date.

0 (0%) – 2 (2%)

Does not meet requirements for full participation.

Does not post by due date.

Total Points: 100

Name:  Discussion Rubric

Did you find apk for android? You can find new Free Android Games and apps.