NR 506 Week 3 Discussion:

NURS 8302 WEEK 7 Discussion Strategies for Building Effective Teams INSTRUCTIONS PLUR RUBRIC

NURS 8302 WEEK 7 Discussion Strategies for Building Effective Teams INSTRUCTIONS PLUR RUBRIC

Sample Answer for NURS 8302 WEEK 7 Discussion Strategies for Building Effective Teams INSTRUCTIONS PLUR RUBRIC Included After Question

You have been assigned to work on a team to support a new quality improvement initiative at your nursing practice. The initiative is designed to support and improve patient care, and the team is tasked with leading the initiative. The team is comprised of the best and the brightest the nursing practice has to offer, selecting only the leaders of each department. However, after the first team meeting, you discover the team dynamics might lead to more argument than action.

Photo Credit: Getty Images/iStockphoto

If this concern manifests this early in the planning process of a quality improvement initiative, is this team the most effective for this task? What strategy might work best to ensure that the right team is composed for the task ahead?

Working in teams provides an important benefit to addressing a problem. A team can provide nuanced ideas and strategies that might be missed by working individually. Teams help to lessen the load on an individual, as well as provide different perspectives to spark ideas. However, working in teams is not without its challenges.

A mix of personalities, experiences, and styles can make or break a team, so what are the best ways to build an effective team? What strategies can be utilized to minimize any adverse effects of working in teams?

For this Discussion, consider what makes an effective team. What strategies might you use to build an effective team? Who might need to be included in a team? Consider the use of teams for quality improvement, and analyze what would make an effective team for a quality improvement initiative.

To Prepare:

  • Review the Learning Resources for this week, and consider the potential impact and role of teams in quality improvement.
  • Reflect on potential strategies for building effective teams in promoting quality improvement initiatives for nursing practice and/or healthcare organizations.
  • Consider the type of stakeholders that might comprise these teams and potential challenges for “earning a seat at the table” of such a quality improvement team.

By Day 3 of Week 7

Post a brief explanation of a strategy you might recommend for building effective teams to support a quality improvement initiative in your healthcare organization or nursing practice. Be specific. Briefly describe the stakeholders you would recommend to make up this quality improvement team, and explain why. Be sure to define the roles of the members making up the quality improvement team. Then, explain any potential challenges or considerations you should keep in mind that may affect who might “earn a seat at the table” to comprise this team. Be specific and provide examples.

By Day 6 of Week 7

Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses and respond to at least two of your colleagues on two different days by expanding upon your colleague’s post or offering an alternative strategy recommendation and/or alternative stakeholders to take part in the quality improvement team described by your colleague.

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: NURS 8302 WEEK 7 Discussion Strategies for Building Effective Teams INSTRUCTIONS PLUR RUBRIC

Note: For this Discussion, you are required to complete your initial post before you will be able to view and respond to your colleagues’ postings. Begin by clicking on the “Post to Discussion Question” link and then select “Create Thread” to complete your initial post. Remember, once you click on Submit, you cannot delete or edit your own posts, and you cannot post anonymously. Please check your post carefully before clicking on Submit!

Submission and Grading Information

Grading Criteria

To access your rubric:

Week 7 Discussion Rubric

 

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

 

To Participate in this Discussion:

Week 7 Discussion

A Sample Answer For the Assignment: NURS 8302 WEEK 7 Discussion Strategies for Building Effective Teams INSTRUCTIONS PLUR RUBRIC

Title: NURS 8302 WEEK 7 Discussion Strategies for Building Effective Teams INSTRUCTIONS PLUR RUBRIC

Quality improvement (QI) is any systematic process that seeks to improve patient safety or clinical effectiveness in healthcare.  The QI team meets regularly to review performance data, identify areas needing improvement, and carry out and monitor improvement efforts using a variety of QI approaches and tools, consisting of the Model for Improvement (MFI), Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles, workflow mapping, assessments, audit and feedback, benchmarking, and best practices research.

Knox and Brach (2015) state that the QI team members should include clinical leadership or an individual with the authority to test and implement a change and to problem-solve issues that arise in the process.  There should be numerous technical expertise, like experts in the QI process and experts in health information technology.  Day-day leadership should be in the team as the lead for the QI team, ensuring the completion of team tasks.  Project sponsorship has the executive authority and serves as the link to the QI team and organization’s senior management.  The QI team should have a clearly identified “practice champion” who is committed to the cause and ensures that the team functions effectively and fulfills its goals for the organization (Knox & Brach, 2015).  Other potential members of the QI team: physicians, nursing staff, as they probably will be the ones implementing the change after it has been approved; medical directors, pharmacy, case managers, directors of clinical services, and patients, as they will be the greatest critics for what is about to be implemented, etc.

A project manager might still find herself dealing with conflict even as ground rules are stated clearly.  Not all conflicts are bad, but it is essential to learn to deal with disputes professionally (Sipes, 2020).  Not all team members can get along, but everyone should act professionally and cordially with each other.  As a charge nurse, I do not always like everyone I work with, but since I still have to work with him/her, I act cordially unless he/she is acting completely rude.  I just ignore it and move along.  I still do not understand why people feel the need to be rude, but I try not to think about it too much.  I was told once by a wise old person that sometimes, people are just rude.  We should only worry about things we can change, and we cannot change how other people behave.

References:

Knox, L., & Brach, C. (2015). Module 20. Creating quality improvement teams and QI plansLinks to an external site.Links to an external site.. In, Primary care practice facilitation curriculumLinks to an external site.Links to an external site.. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. https://www.ahrq.gov/sites/default/files/wysiwyg/ncepcr/tools/PCMH/pcpf-module-20-creating-qi-teams.pdf

Nash, D. B., Joshi, M. S., Ransom, E. R., & Ransom, S. B. (Eds.). (2019). The healthcare quality book: Vision, strategy, and tools (4th ed.). Health Administration Press.

Sipes, C. (2020). Project management for the advanced practice nurse (2nd ed.). Springer Publishing Company.

A Sample Answer 2 For the Assignment: NURS 8302 WEEK 7 Discussion Strategies for Building Effective Teams INSTRUCTIONS PLUR RUBRIC

Title: NURS 8302 WEEK 7 Discussion Strategies for Building Effective Teams INSTRUCTIONS PLUR RUBRIC

Strategies for effective team building in healthcare are such an important topic, especially when it comes to providing quality care to patients. Effective team-building strategies include fostering open communication, promoting trust and collaboration, and recognizing individual strengths and contributions. In addition, encouraging team members to share ideas and perspectives, providing opportunities for professional development, and fostering a positive work environment are also important. You listed excellent stakeholders in your post. To add to your post, including the quality initiative manager is also essential because they play a vital role in overseeing and coordinating the entire quality improvement process (Babiker, 2019).

Reference

Babiker, A. (2019). Health Care Professional development: Working as a Team to Improve Patient Care. Sudanese Journal of Pediatrics, 14(2), 9–16. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4949805/Links to an external site.

A Sample Answer 3 For the Assignment: NURS 8302 WEEK 7 Discussion Strategies for Building Effective Teams INSTRUCTIONS PLUR RUBRIC

Title: NURS 8302 WEEK 7 Discussion Strategies for Building Effective Teams INSTRUCTIONS PLUR RUBRIC

Your insights into Quality Improvement (QI) strategies in healthcare are comprehensive and align well with established principles. The emphasis on systematic processes, regular performance reviews, and the utilization of various QI approaches and tools showcases a robust approach to enhancing patient safety and clinical effectiveness.

The composition of the QI team, as outlined by Knox and Brach (2015), is crucial for success. The inclusion of clinical leadership, technical experts, day-to-day leadership, project sponsorship, and a practice champion ensures a diverse skill set and authority within the team. This multifaceted team structure allows for effective problem-solving and implementation of changes.

Your acknowledgment of the potential for conflicts within the team is also insightful. Conflict resolution is a critical skill in project management. Your perspective on maintaining professionalism and cordiality, even in the face of interpersonal conflicts, is commendable. Focusing on aspects that can be changed and ignoring unnecessary rudeness aligns with a constructive approach to team dynamics.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the success of Quality Improvement (QI) initiatives in healthcare hinges on the meticulous application of systematic processes and a comprehensive team structure. The incorporation of various QI approaches and tools, coupled with a diverse team composition as suggested by Knox and Brach (2015), establishes a robust framework for addressing performance issues and implementing positive changes. The acknowledgment of potential conflicts within the team and the emphasis on maintaining professionalism and cordiality, even in challenging situations, reflect a nuanced understanding of effective project management. As demonstrated through the lens of a charge nurse’s perspective, the ability to focus on actionable aspects and navigate interpersonal dynamics contributes significantly to the overall success of QI endeavors. Through such strategic and people-oriented approaches, healthcare organizations can continually enhance patient safety and clinical effectiveness, fostering a culture of continuous improvement.

References 

Knox, L., & Brach, C. (2015). Module 20. Creating quality improvement teams and QI plans. In, Primary care practice facilitation curriculum. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. https://www.ahrq.gov/sites/default/files/wysiwyg/ncepcr/tools/PCMH/pcpf-module-20-creating-qi-teams.pdf

NURS 8302 WEEK 7 Discussion Strategies for Building Effective Teams INSTRUCTIONS PLUR RUBRIC
NURS 8302 WEEK 7 Discussion Strategies for Building Effective Teams INSTRUCTIONS PLUR RUBRIC

Rubric Detail

Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.

Content

Name: NURS_8302_Week7_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.

 Points Range: 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.

 Points Range: 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.

 Points Range: 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.

 Points Range: 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

 Points Range: 6 (6%) – 6 (6%)

Written clearly and concisely.

Contains no grammatical or spelling errors.

Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

 Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Written concisely.

May contain one to two grammatical or spelling errors.

Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

 Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Written somewhat concisely.

May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

Contains some APA formatting errors.

 Points Range: 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

 Points Range: 9 (9%) – 10 (10%)

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.

Posts main Discussion by due date.

 Points Range: 8 (8%) – 8 (8%)

Meets requirements for full participation.

Posts main Discussion by due date.

 Points Range: 7 (7%) – 7 (7%)

Posts main Discussion by due date.

 Points Range: 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.

 Points Range: 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.

 Points Range: 8 (8%) – 8 (8%)

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

 Points Range: 7 (7%) – 7 (7%)

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

 Points Range: 0 (0%) – 6 (6%)

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
First Response:
Writing 		Points Range: 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.

 Points Range: 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.

 Points Range: 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.

 Points Range: 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 		Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.

Posts by due date.

 Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Meets requirements for full participation.

Posts by due date.

 Points Range: 3 (3%) – 3 (3%)

Posts by due date.

 Points Range: 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. 		Points Range: 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.

 Points Range: 8 (8%) – 8 (8%)

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

 Points Range: 7 (7%) – 7 (7%)

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

 Points Range: 0 (0%) – 6 (6%)

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Second Response:
Writing 		Points Range: 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.

 Points Range: 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.

 Points Range: 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.

 Points Range: 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 		Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.

Posts by due date.

 Points Range: 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Meets requirements for full participation.

Posts by due date.

 Points Range: 3 (3%) – 3 (3%)

Posts by due date.

 Points Range: 0 (0%) – 2 (2%)

Does not meet requirements for full participation.

Does not post by due date.
Total Points: 100

Name: NURS_8302_Week7_Discussion_Rubric

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: NURS 8302 WEEK 7 Discussion Strategies for Building Effective Teams INSTRUCTIONS PLUR RUBRIC

NURS 8302 WEEK 7 Discussion Strategies for Building Effective Teams INSTRUCTIONS PLUR RUBRIC Grading Rubric Guidelines

Performance Category 10 9 8 4 0
Scholarliness

Demonstrates achievement of scholarly inquiry for professional and academic decisions.
  • Provides relevant evidence of scholarly inquiry clearly stating how the evidence informed or changed professional or academic decisions
  • Evaluates literature resources to develop a comprehensive analysis or synthesis.
  • Uses valid, relevant, and reliable outside sources to contribute to the threaded discussion
  • Provides relevant evidence of scholarly inquiry but does not clearly state how the evidence informed or changed professional or academic decisions.
  • Evaluates information from source(s) to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis.
  • Uses some valid, relevant, reliable outside sources to contribute to the threaded discussion.
  • Discusses using scholarly inquiry but does not state how scholarly inquiry informed or changed professional or academic decisions.
  • Information is taken from source(s) with some interpretation/evaluation, but not enough to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis.
  • Little valid, relevant, or reliable outside sources are used to contribute to the threaded discussion.
  • Demonstrates little or no understanding of the topic.
  • Discusses using scholarly inquiry but does not state how scholarly inquiry informed or changed professional or academic decisions.
  • Information is taken from source(s) without any interpretation/evaluation.
  • The posting uses information that is not valid, relevant, or reliable
  • No evidence of the use of scholarly inquiry to inform or change professional or academic decisions.
  • Information is not valid, relevant, or reliable
Performance Category  10 9 8 4 0
Application of Course Knowledge –

Demonstrate the ability to analyze, synthesize, and/or apply principles and concepts learned in the course lesson and outside readings and relate them to real-life professional situations
  • Posts make direct reference to concepts discussed in the lesson or drawn from relevant outside sources;
  • Applies concepts to personal experience in the professional setting and or relevant application to real life.
  • Posts make direct reference to concepts discussed in the lesson or drawn from relevant outside sources.
  • Applies concepts to personal experience in their professional setting and or relevant application to real life
  • Interactions with classmates are relevant to the discussion topic but do not make direct reference to lesson content
  • Posts are generally on topic but do not build knowledge by incorporating concepts and principles from the lesson.
  • Does not attempt to apply lesson concepts to personal experience in their professional setting and or relevant application to real life
  • Does not demonstrate a solid understanding of the principles and concepts presented in the lesson
  • Posts do not adequately address the question posed either by the discussion prompt or the instructor’s launch post.
  • Posts are superficial and do not reflect an understanding of the lesson content
  • Does not attempt to apply lesson concepts to personal experience in their professional setting and or relevant application to real life
  • Posts are not related to the topics provided by the discussion prompt or by the instructor; attempts by the instructor to redirect the student are ignored
  • No discussion of lesson concepts to personal experience in the professional setting and or relevant application to real life
Performance Category  5 4 3 2 0
Interactive Dialogue

Replies to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week, and posts a minimum of two times in each graded thread, on separate days.

(5 points possible per graded thread)
  • Exceeds minimum post requirements
  • Replies to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week, and posts three or more times in each graded thread, over three separate days.
  • Replies to a post posed by faculty and to a peer
  • Summarizes what was learned from the lesson, readings, and other student posts for the week.
  • Replies to each graded thread topic posted by the course instructor, by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT, of each week, and posts a minimum of two times in each graded thread, on separate days
  • Replies to a question posed by a peer

Summarizes what was learned from the lesson, readings, and other student posts for the week.
  • Meets expectations of 2 posts on 2 different days.
  • The main post is not made by the Wednesday deadline
  • Does not reply to a question posed by a peer or faculty
  • Has only one post for the week
  • Discussion posts contain few, if any, new ideas or applications; often are a rehashing or summary of other students’ comments
  • Does not post to the thread
  • No connections are made to the topic
  Minus 1 Point Minus 2 Point Minus 3 Point Minus 4 Point Minus 5 Point
Grammar, Syntax, APA

Note: if there are only a few errors in these criteria, please note this for the student in as an area for improvement. If the student does not make the needed corrections in upcoming weeks, then points should be deducted.

Points deducted for improper grammar, syntax and APA style of writing.

The source of information is the APA Manual 6th Edition
  • 2-3 errors in APA format.
  • Written responses have 2-3 grammatical, spelling, and punctuation errors.
  • Writing style is generally clear, focused, and facilitates communication.
  • 4-5 errors in APA format.
  • Writing responses have 4-5 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors.
  • Writing style is somewhat focused.
  • 6-7 errors in APA format.
  • Writing responses have 6-7 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors.
  • Writing style is slightly focused making discussion difficult to understand.
  • 8-10 errors in APA format.
  • Writing responses have 8-10 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors.
  • Writing style is not focused, making discussion difficult to understand.
  • Post contains greater than 10 errors in APA format.
  • Written responses have more than 10 grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors.
  • Writing style does not facilitate communication.
  • The student continues to make repeated mistakes in any of the above areas after written correction by the instructor
0 points lost       -5 points lost
Total Participation Requirements

per discussion thread

 The student answers the threaded discussion question or topic on one day and posts a second response on another day. The student does not meet the minimum requirement of two postings on two different days
Early Participation Requirement

per discussion thread

 The student must provide a substantive answer to the graded discussion question(s) or topic(s), posted by the course instructor (not a response to a peer), by Wednesday, 11:59 p.m. MT of each week. The student does not meet the requirement of a substantive response to the stated question or topic by Wednesday at 11:59 pm MT.

Also Read: NURS 8302 WEEK 6 Discussion Quality Improvement Initiative INSTRUCTIONS PLUS RUBRIC