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:

  • 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.

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: NURS 6053 Discussion: Workplace Environment Assessment

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

Hi Torie,

Thank you for your discussion post. I am sorry for the way the nurse brought a personal or family matter to work to the extent of threatening you. That is unprofessional and uncivil behavior. Having a healthy work environment has many benefits, ranging from greater job satisfaction to increased productivity among staff members and reduced employee turnover rate. A healthy work environment enables nurses to deliver high-quality patient care (American Association of Critical-Care Nurses, 2020). A healthy work environment includes better nurse staffing and retention, reduced workplace violence, reduced morale, and physical distress.

A healthy work environment can be created and sustained through honest and open communication among staff members and management. Expected behaviors must be communicated to everyone, and the consequences of uncivilized behaviors must also be communicated to the rest of the team members. According to Griffin and Clark (2014), incivility has no place in organizational development, for it is harmful to the work environment. Incivility at the workplace must be addressed to prevent reoccurrence.

Staff members should be encouraged to utilize the Clark Healthy Workplace Inventory to conduct workplace assessments. Clark Healthy Workplace Inventory is used to conduct a workplace assessment and determine how healthy a workplace is (Clark, 2015). The results of this assessment should be communicated to the management level for immediate intervention

 

References

American Association of Critical-Care Nurses (2020). Healthy work environments.

https://www.aacn.org/nursing-excellence/healthy-work-environments

Clark, C.M. (2015). Conversations to inspire and promote a more civil workplace. American

            Nurse Today, 10(11): 18-23.

https://www.myamericannurse.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/ant11-CE-Civility-1023.pdf

Griffin, M., & Clark, C. M. (2014). Revisiting cognitive rehearsal as an intervention against

incivility and lateral violence in nursing: 10 years later. Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 45(12), 535–542. doi:10.3928/00220124-20141122-02

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.