Last Updated on February 16, 2023 by Admin
NURS 6053 Week 9 Assignment – Workplace Environment
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.
Rubric Detail
| Excellent | Good | Fair | Poor | |||
| Part 1: Work Environment Assessment
· Complete the Work Environment Assessment Template. |
45 (45%) – 50 (50%)
An accurate, detailed, and completed Work Environment Assessment Template is provided. The responses accurately and thoroughly describe in detail the results of the Work Environment Assessment completed on a workplace. The responses accurately and clearly identify two surprising things about the results and thoroughly describe in detail at least one idea that was believed prior to conducting the assessment that was confirmed. The responses accurately and thoroughly explain in detail what the results of the assessment suggests about the health and civility of a workplace. |
40 (40%) – 44 (44%)
An accurate and completed Work Environment Assessment Template is provided. The responses accurately describe the results of the Work Environment Assessment completed on a workplace. The responses accurately identify two surprising things about the results and describe at least one idea that was believed prior to conducting the assessment that was confirmed. The responses accurately explain what the results of the assessment suggests about the health and civility of a workplace. |
35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
A completed Work Environment Assessment Template that is vague or inaccurate is provided. The responses describe the results of the Work Environment Assessment completed on a workplace that is vague or inaccurate. The responses identify two surprising things about the results and describe at least one idea that was believed prior to conducting the assessment that was confirmed that is vague or inaccurate. The responses explain what the results of the assessment suggests about the health and civility of a workplace that is vague or inaccurate. |
0 (0%) – 34 (34%)
A vague and inaccurate Work Environment Assessment Template is provided, or is missing. The responses describe the results of the Work Environment Assessment completed on a workplace that is vague and inaccurate, or is missing. The responses identify two surprising things about the results and describe at least one idea that was believed prior to conducting the assessment that was confirmed that is vague and inaccurate, or is missing. The responses explain what the results of the assessment suggest about the health and civility of a workplace that is vague and inaccurate, or is missing. |
||
| Part 2: Reviewing the Literature
· Briefly describe the theory or concept presented in the article you selected. |
14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
The responses accurately and thoroughly describe the theory or concept presented in the article selected. The responses accurately and completely explain in detail how the theory or concept presented in the article relates to the results of the Work Environment Assessment. The responses accurately and thoroughly explain in detail how an organization could apply the theory highlighted in the selected article to improve organizational health and/or stronger work teams. Specific and detailed examples are provided which fully support the responses. |
12 (12%) – 13 (13%)
The responses accurately describe the theory or concept presented in the article selected. The responses accurately explain how the theory or concept presented in the article relates to the results of the Work Environment Assessment. The responses accurately explain how an organization could apply the theory highlighted in the selected article to improve organizational health and/or stronger work teams. Specific examples are provided which may support the responses. |
11 (11%) – 11 (11%)
The responses describe the theory or concept presented in the article selected that is vague or inaccurate. The responses explain how the theory or concept presented in the article relates to the results of the Work Environment Assessment that is vague or inaccurate. The responses explain how an organization could apply the theory highlighted in the selected article to improve organizational health and/or create stronger work teams that is vague or inaccurate. Vague or inaccurate examples are provided which may support the responses. |
0 (0%) – 10 (10%)
The responses describe the theory or concept presented in the article selected that is vague and inaccurate, or is missing. The responses explain how the theory or concept presented in the article relates to the results of the Work Environment Assessment that is vague and inaccurate, or is missing. The responses explain how an organization could apply the theory highlighted in the selected article to improve organizational health and/or create stronger work teams that is vague and inaccurate, or is missing. Specific examples are not provided to support the responses. |
||
| Part 3: Evidence-Based Strategies to Create High-Performance Interprofessional Teams
· Recommend at least two strategies, supported in the literature, that can be implemented to address any shortcomings revealed in your Work Environment Assessment. |
18 (18%) – 20 (20%)
The responses clearly and thoroughly recommend in detail at least two strategies that can be implemented to address any shortcomings revealed in the Work Environment Assessment. The responses clearly and thoroughly recommend in detail at least two strategies that can be implemented to bolster successful practices revealed in the Work Environment Assessment. |
16 (16%) – 19 (19%)
The responses accurately recommend at least two strategies that can be implemented to address any shortcomings revealed in the Work Environment Assessment. The responses accurately recommend at least two strategies that can be implemented to bolster successful practices revealed in the Work Environment Assessment. |
14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
The responses recommend at least two strategies that can be implemented to address any shortcomings revealed in the Work Environment Assessment that is vague or inaccurate, or only recommends one strategy. The responses recommend at least two strategies that can be implemented to bolster successful practices revealed in the Work Environment Assessment that is vague or inaccurate, or only recommends one strategy. |
0 (0%) – 13 (13%)
The responses recommend at least two strategies that can be implemented to address any shortcomings revealed in the Work Environment Assessment that is vague and inaccurate, only recommends one strategy, or is missing. The responses recommend at least two strategies that can be implemented to bolster successful practices revealed in the Work Environment Assessment that is vague and inaccurate, only recommends one strategy, or is missing. |
||
| Written Expression and Formatting – Paragraph Development and Organization:
Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction is provided which delineates all required criteria. |
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion is provided which delineates all required criteria. |
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is stated, yet is brief and not descriptive. |
3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%–79% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off topic. |
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion was provided. |
||
| Written Expression and Formatting – English writing standards:
Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation |
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. |
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Contains a few (1 or 2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. |
3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)
Contains several (3 or 4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. |
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding. |
||
| Written Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list. | 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Uses correct APA format with no errors. |
4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Contains a few (1 or 2) APA format errors. |
3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%)
Contains several (3 or 4) APA format errors. |
0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors. |
||
| Total Points: 100 | ||||||
Name: NURS_6053_Module04_Week09_Assignment_Rubric
Expert Answer and Explanation
Part 1: Work Environment Assessment
A score of 80 to 89 indicates that a particular workplace is moderately health (Clark, 2015). Thus, I can say that my work environment is moderately healthy because the assessment produced a score of 87. Some of the elements that were ranked high in the assessment include “shared mission, vision, and values” among the staff, communication, employee satisfaction, employee self-care and wellness, and collaboration and teamwork among the workers.
On the other hand, the results showed that the organization does not have a mechanism to retain the bright and the best workers. Also, conflict resolution in the organization was among the elements poorly ranked. Lastly, mentoring programs are also lowly ranked in the assessment. The majority of the items got 4 scores (somewhat true), and this means that the firm has not yet attained a 100% healthy working environment.
From the assessment, two things surprised me about my organization. First, before undertaking the inventory assessment, I was of the opinion that the firm I work for is one of the best organizations and provides health working environment. I did not know that a healthy workplace is determined based on several elements.
However, after engaging the inventory, I realized that my organization was not that healthy in terms of the workplace environment. The management needs to put more efforts so that the firm can reach the desired outcomes as designed by Clark’s inventory. The second thing that surprised me is that I had overlooked several key elements that are considered vital in creating a healthy workplace environment. Initially, I did not know that workload was key to a healthy environment.
However, the inventory showed me that in a healthy workplace, workers have a favorable and fair workload based on their credentials and qualifications. Lastly, I had also overlooked the element of free speech and expression of ideas.
The results of the inventory indicate that my work environment is moderately healthy. The assessment showed that the firm promotes a shared vision and mission based on collegiality, respect, and trust. This is evident through the firm’s mission, vision, and value statements. The firm has, on many occasions, urged its staff members to always work towards achieving the firm’s vision and mission.
The assessment identified the organization’s effort to ensure that its employees are safe and well. For instance, the firm has ensured that all its workers are insured. Also, the results show that civility can be experienced mutual respect if one another within the firm. However, it also indicated that the firm should increase its efforts to improve the health of its workplace. For instance, the management should improve its conflict resolution strategies.
Part 2: Reviewing the Literature
The article selected for this part was published by Clark in 2015. Clark developed a theory that open communication and conversations within a working environment is among the strategies that can be used to create a healthy environment. The article mentions that many nurses in the healthcare setting often fail to communicate with rude colleagues at the moment when proper communication is required.
The author asserts that lack of amicable and proper communication between workers in the organization can reduce the quality of healthcare services or intervention, especially if it involves senior and junior nurses. To make his theory a success, Clark recommends that DESC model should be used to guide all conversations that occur in a workplace setting.
The model, according to the article, can promote civil and candid conversations within organizational settings. The model is more focused on identifying and describing the ongoing situation, explaining both parties’ concerns, and highlighting the solutions and consequences for each of them.
The article argues that proper conversations are key to a healthy working environment. Proper conversations are among the elements of quality communication between people in the workplace. Candid and civil conversation between employees can be possible when there are policies that guide how they can communicate.
The results have shown that candid conversation can be achieved in an environment where communication at all levels is done in a respectful, direct, and transparent manner. Another relation between the theory and the results is that both are championing for professionalism in workplace settings. Unprofessional communication is seen when people are not listening to each other’s assertions and shutting each other when communicating (Eliasson et al., 2017).
Both the article and the assessment results report that professionalism within a workplace environment can be achieved through civil and candid conversations.
The article champions for open communication and candid conversation within working environments. The institution can include this concept in a move to improve communication between the staff and the management. The workers can be urged to often speak their minds freely without fear or favor. For instance, when they feel that their superiors have made the wrong decisions, they can challenge them professionally by providing evidence to show that the senior worker was not right.
Open communication and candid conversations can improve professionalism and allow freedom of speech and expression of ideas (Murè et al., 2017). Apart from the concept, the organization can use the DESC model to solve any conflicts arising in the organization. Through the model, people in conflict can identify causes of the conflict, strategies to solve it, and their consequences.
Part 3: Evidence-Based Strategies to Create High-Performance Interprofessional Teams
The first strategy that has been supported in the literature is the DESC. The model can be used to improve communication within the facility and as well as solve impending conflicts. The assessment showed that the organization had poor methods of solving conflicts between workers and workers and the management. The DESC mode will help the management create conflict resolution policies.
The second strategy is developing open communication that will allow freedom of speech and expression of ideas. The organization will benefit a lot when it allows its workers to communicate freely. However, Eliasson et al. (2017) mention that open communication should be guided to proper policies. For instance, the firm should avail channel that can be followed by workers when they have any issue to raise.
Though the organization has a healthy workplace, the management should improve the environment so that it can be 100% healthy. The first strategy that can be used to do so is continuously encouraging organization culture evaluation. This strategy can help the institution identify whether its workers are collectively working towards achieving its mission and vision.
Evaluation of organizational culture will also help the management pinpoint the issues that hinder a healthy working environment and solve them (Clark et al., 2011). The second strategy is improving strategies that can be used in retaining the best and quality workers. For instance, the organization can retain the best staff by increasing their contract.
References
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
Clark, C. M., Olender, L., Cardoni, C., & Kenski, D. (2011). Fostering civility in nursing education and practice: Nurse leader perspectives. Journal of Nursing Administration, 41(7/8), 324–330. DOI:10.1097/NNA.0b013e31822509c4
Eliasson, K., Palm, P., Nyman, T., & Forsman, M. (2017). Inter-and intra-observer reliability of risk assessment of repetitive work without an explicit method. Applied ergonomics, 62, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2017.02.004
Murè, S., Comberti, L., & Demichela, M. (2017). How harsh work environments affect the occupational accident phenomenology? Risk assessment and decision making optimisation. Safety science, 95, 159-170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2017.01.004
Alternative Expert Answer and Explanation
Young graduates and interns are the primary victims of uncivil work environments as they have greater likelihood of encountering bullying and workplace mobbing by other experienced nurses. It is also easy for employees to be bullies in verbal and other forms without their innate knowledge (Stalter et al., 2020). Conducting a workplace environment assessment helps to identify some of the elements of incivility and correct them using evidence-based techniques.
Workplace Environment Assessment
The review of the work environment assessment template and the results of the assessment of my workplace shows that the workplace is moderately civil, with a score of 81% in the civility rating scale (Clark, 2015). The best scored areas include cooperation and teamwork, while the least scored areas are company culture, and the ability of the company to embrace new practices. During the completion of the assessment, more employees were excited to be involved, and were positive that the assessment would be a pathway to a more civil workplace.
There are several things that surprised me about the results of the assessment, and one of them is the fact that the organization has a high score in the category of employee wellness. This statistic was surprising to me as it is common to find employee complaints during informal conversation at lunch breaks and in the social media platforms of the company (Stalter et al., 2020).
I expected a lower score as this was a survey that could help the employees to release or express all their negative feelings about some of the aspects of the organization or the management. Similarly, it was surprising for me to find that the organization had good performance in the career growth opportunities scores. My informal assessment before the survey showed me that the organization barely had the platforms that would allow people to grow their careers in the best way.
I was certain about the scores of collaboration even before the assessment as most of the nurse leaders and department managers always emphasize on the need for collaboration to achieve the best practice results. In one of the recent organizational end of year picnic, the department managers conducted several activities that would help us to appreciate the value of teamwork and collaboration in the workplace. Also, it is common to find people in the workplace having a collaborative spirit when completing the daily activities.
Reviewing the Literature
In her article Conversations to Inspire and Promote a more Civil Workplace, Cynthia Clark, RN, PhD, ANEF, FAAN, discusses the concept of health and civility and perceives it as one of the key drivers of organizational growth. This concept of health and civility relates to my workplace in that some of the issues identified as the causes of incivility are directly responsible for the low scores of civility in some of the areas of the organization.
Clark (2015) explains that one of the primary causes of poor communication in the healthcare organizations is the fact that it is a demanding environment, and it prompts healthcare givers to fail to act inconsiderably in some of the instances. Clark (2015) also cites the American Nurses Association, ANA, code of ethics as a scale through which nurses can articulate civil and safe workplaces.
The aspect of the failure of my organization to embrace new practices and cultures is also highlighted in the article as one of the reasons why organizations can experience incivility, and I believe it is a primary contributor to the lower scores of the organization in the assessment.
Clark, Sattler, & Barbosa-Leiker, (2016) explain some of the characteristics of the employees who are victims of bullying in the workplace. Most of these victims often lack the power to control their environment because of the settings in which they are mostly answerable to the physicians.
A clear element of this oppression could be seen in the signs of communication, where some parties could be seen simply ‘living to tolerate’ the others, while the other parties strive to show dominance of power. If there are physicians who show such attitudes towards nurses, the best ways should be to ask them to be more answerable in a formal way.
Among the ways in which my organization could apply the concept highlighted in the article to improve the health of the organization and create stronger work teams is to create even stronger work teams. While it is clear that the organization scores well in the teamwork and collaboration sections of the assessment, the theory/concept proposed suggests even other areas of improvement through which the organization can show better performance (Stalter et al., 2020).
For example, the article proposes several frameworks for handling challenging conversations, which could help in the management of some of the elements of the organization that do not support the teamwork spirit.
Evidence-Based Strategies to Create High-Performance Inter-professional Teams
Cognitive rehearsal is one of the evidence-based interventions that could help to create high performance inter professional teams. Under this technique, workers are asked to understand the different elements of the workplace that may lead to incivility and lateral violence, and to identify some of the techniques of successfully avoiding the challenges (Razzi & Bianchi, 2019).
The technique also suggests that people should solve their differences within the shortest time possible, as keeping them unsolved only makes the situation worse (Griffin & Clark, 2014). For example, if an employee is offended verbally or psychologically by other employees, they should consider reporting the case before they give it too much thoughts, which could be mentally torturing. Cognitive rehearsal also promotes the use of improved communication as a way of confronting bullying and workplace mobbing.
Another technique of enhancing high performance among inter-professional teams is understanding the individual differences of workers. It is common to find some of the elements of incivility being as a direct result of inadequacies of some of the employees (Clark et al., 2011).
For example, in a situation where graduate interns are not able to carry out some of the nursing duties appropriately, they could encounter the bullying feeling when some nurses are correcting them. In such a case, bridging the knowledge gap could be an effective technique of preventing workplace bullying.
Nurses should acknowledge the presence of cases of incivility, and adopt different organizational techniques of assessing for its presence and mitigating its effects. One of the main reasons as to why young nurses suffer from uncivil work environments is the false perception that everyone they meet is likely to treat them calmly (Razzi & Bianchi, 2019).
The shortcomings of failure to have a company culture that embraces civility and diversity in my workplace could be addressed using such assessments. The managers would be obliged to adopt more firm cultures that promote diversity in the process of working to improve on their scores.
The introduction of a proper reporting system of incivility could also help in improving my workplace scores of incivility. While it is common to find cases of incivility in any nursing environment, it is likely that some of the bullies are the people to whom the reporting should be made (Clark, Sattler, & Barbosa-Leiker, 2018). A neutral reporting system, where there are independent auditors of the issues at hand, could help to promote higher levels of incivility even from the senior workers.
Conclusion
Among the best professional strategies that can be used in bolstering the best practices in the workplace and improve the work environment assessment results is the presence of a good reporting system and understanding the individual differences among workers. The use of cognitive rehearsal is also an evidence-based approach of solving the cases of incivility that are encountered in the workplace.
Cognitive rehearsal builds on improving the knowledge of the workers regarding workplace incivility and reducing the reporting time as one of the techniques of reducing the chances of bullying. My workplace assessment results shows that my workplace is moderately civil, but needs improvement in the areas of embracing new practices and the company culture. The concept of health and civility is one of the key drivers of organizational growth, where lack of it thereof leads to significant backlogs in employee relations in the organization. Reducing ignorance among the nurse interns could serve as a primary way of reducing the incivility scores in most of the nursing units.
References
Clark, C. M. (2015). Conversations to inspire and promote a more civil workplace. American Nurse Today, 10(11), 18-23. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Cynthia_Clark3/publication/302941121_Conversations_to_inspire_and_promote_a_more_civil_workplace_Let’s_end_the_silence_that_surrounds_incivility/links/580b928008ae2cb3a5da6c5e/Conversations-to-inspire-and-promote-a-more-civil-workplace-Lets-end-the-silence-that-surrounds-incivility.pdf
Clark, C. M., Sattler, V. P., & Barbosa-Leiker, C. (2016). Development and testing of the healthy work environment inventory: a reliable tool for assessing work environment health and satisfaction. Journal of Nursing Education, 55(10), 555-562. https://doi.org/10.3928/01484834-20160914-03
Clark, C. M., Olender, L., Cardoni, C., & Kenski, D. (2011). Fostering civility in nursing education and practice: Nurse leader perspectives. JONA: The Journal of Nursing Administration, 41(7/8), 324-330. Doi: 10.1097/NNA.0b013e31822509c4
Clark, C. M., Sattler, V. P., & Barbosa-Leiker, C. (2018). Development and psychometric testing of the Workplace Civility Index: A reliable tool for measuring civility in the workplace. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 49(9), 400-406. https://doi.org/10.3928/00220124-20180813-05
Griffin, M., & Clark, C. M. (2014). Revisiting cognitive rehearsal as an intervention against incivility and lateral violence in nursing: 10 years later. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 45(12), 535-542. https://doi.org/10.3928/00220124-20141122-02
Razzi, C. C., & Bianchi, A. L. (2019, October). Incivility in nursing: Implementing a quality improvement program utilizing cognitive rehearsal training. In Nursing forum (Vol. 54, No. 4, pp. 526-536). https://doi.org/10.1111/nuf.12366
Stalter, A. M., Phillips, J. M., Goldschmidt, K. A., Brodhead, J., Ruggiero, J. S., Scardaville, D. L., … & Merriam, D. (2020, November). Promoting civility in nursing practice using systems thinking: Evidence‐based teaching strategies for nurse educators. In Nursing forum (Vol. 55, No. 4, pp. 754-762). https://doi.org/10.1111/nuf.12493
Use Coupon Code: NEW30 to Get 30% OFF Your First Order
nurs 6053 week 9 assignment
nurs 6053 week 3 assignment
nurs 6053 week 7 discussion
nurs 6053 week 11 assignment
nurs 6053 week 2 assignment