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

NURS 6053 Discussion: Workplace Environment Assessment

NURS 6053 Discussion: Workplace Environment Assessment

NURS 6053 Discussion: Workplace Environment Assessment

How healthy is your workplace?

You may think your current organization operates seamlessly, or you may feel it has many issues. You may experience or even observe things that give you pause. Yet, much as you wouldn’t try to determine the health of a patient through mere observation, you should not attempt to gauge the health of your work environment based on observation and opinion. Often, there are issues you perceive as problems that others do not; similarly, issues may run much deeper than leadership recognizes.

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:

By Day 3 of Week 7

Post a brief description of the results of your Work Environment Assessment. Based on the results, how civil is your workplace? Explain why your workplace is or is not civil. Then, describe a situation where you have experienced incivility in the workplace. How was this addressed? Be specific and provide examples.

By Day 6 of Week 7

Respond to at least two of your colleagues on two different days by sharing ideas for how shortcomings discovered in their evaluations and/or their examples of incivility could have been managed more effectively.

Submission and Grading Information

Grading Criteria

To access your rubric:

Week 7 Discussion Rubric

 

Post by Day 3 and Respond by Day 6 of Week 7

To participate in this Discussion:

 

Week 7 Discussion

RE: Discussion – Week 7

Reply #2

Hello

I enjoyed reading your post, it’s unfortunate that you have encountered incivility in the workplace. Unfortunately, this is not uncommon but nonetheless, disappointing and upsetting as well. Incivility in the workplace can be low in severity, but it occurs frequently. Over the last ten years, research regarding workplace incivility has estimated prevalence rates to be between 75 and 100 percent, implying that virtually every employee has encountered some degree of incivility from colleagues, managers, or customers, clients. Incivility has an unusually high level of occurrence, which is concerning because research has repeatedly shown that incivility’s effects can compound over time. As a result, incivility has been linked to a slew of negative consequences for both employees and organizations. Coworker incivility has been related to higher levels of employee burnout, feelings of pressure, and reduced psychological well-being in terms of personal outcomes. Employee departure, reduced happiness, and decreased output have all been linked to incivility in the workplace (Sliter, 2019). Clearly, the physician who spoke to you in such a demeaning matter in the presence of a patient was completely unprofessional, and frankly, rude. I could imagine that you felt immediately embarrassed for both you and the physician. The way in which you handled the situation was correct, polite and frank. Perhaps a different approach for management of the situation could have been for your director to have arranged a meeting in a professional setting to where, you, the director and the physician could have met to discuss the situation. Therefore, the physician would have been required to address his inappropriate behavior towards you. The quality of the healthcare practice setting in which treatment is given affects both safety and the quality of care patients receive. Under this community, the largest groups of people are doctors and nurses. The partnership between these two groups is a significant determinant of the practice environment’s efficiency. Doctors’ abuse (verbal or physical) and threatening or insensitive attitudes against nurses has a detrimental effect on the healthcare practice atmosphere, impacting nurse retention as well as patient outcomes as well. It is critical that healthcare institutions not only have a method in place to detect threatening or disruptive actions, as well as a mechanism for corrective action against perpetrators, but also a way to track the effect of any remediation measures on nurse-physician relationships over time (Siedlecki & Hixson, 2015). Again, Dale, I enjoyed your post and found your content relatable.

References

Siedlecki, S., Hixson, E., (2015, August 31). Relationships Between Nurses and Physicians Matter. The Online Journal of Issues in Nursing (20) 3.

doi: 10.3912/OJIN.Vol20No03PPT03

Sliter, M. (2019, May 17). What is workplace incivility, why should we care, and what should we do? Retrieved April 17, 2021, from https://www.hrzone.com/perform/people/what-is-workplace-incivility-why-should-we-care-and-what-should-we-do

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 Free Android Games and apps.