NURS 821O DQ leadership and management

The location of this medical service framework is in Georgia. The framework involves a total of six healing centers spread across Georgia, including more than one hundred areas for care provision. However, the anchor health care facility is located in Atlanta. The anchor health facility, which has a bed capacity of 488 was established over 100 years ago, and is serving as a private and non-revenue focused organization. Currently, the facility is among the top acute-care community health care settings and is rated among the best five facilities with outstanding patient outcomes. Besides, the facility has over 1,000 physicians that offer different care in areas such as cancer, transplant, women services, cardiac, nervous system science, and orthopedic.

I agree that leadership and management both are critical position for a success. In addition to you post leadership is an essential driving force for achieving the vision and mission of any organization. Leaders set a direction for us; they help us see what lies ahead; they help us visualize what we might achieve; they encourage us and inspire us. Without leadership a group of human beings quickly degenerates into argument and conflict because we see things in different ways and lean toward different solutions. (Liphadzi, Aigbavboa, & Thwala, 2017). Management has to do with leading a project from its inception to execution. This includes planning, execution and managing the people, resources and scope of the project. Management within an organization should have the discipline to create clear and attainable objectives; moreover, leadership skills of project managers affect project performance. Management is often included as a factor of production, along with machines, materials, and money (Liphadzi, Aigbavboa, & Thwala, 2017).

The first setting is the physicians group. The physicians group is renowned as the pioneer of the multi-site practice in America acknowledged as patient-centered medical home. As such, the Health Care Incentives Improvement Institute recognized this facility as the first accountable care organization (ACO) in Georgia. The other health care facility is a 189 bed capacity community hospital which is credited by Health grades as one of the finest 50 hospitals in America. Cumulatively, the other hospitals constitute a 215 bed capacity community hospital, a 136 bed capacity community hospital, a 97 bed capacity hospital, and a 52-bed capacity community hospital. Taken together, there are more than 2620 physicians across these hospitals. Moreover, the physicians’ group has more than 170 physicians across Georgia (Piedmont Healthcare website, 2016). The organization is keen on innovation and has developed a telehealth technology which has been extensively used to reach remote areas. This project considerably relied on the perspective of Y. Brook who is the Director of Inpatient Coding for the above organization. Given the crucial position Brook is holding in the organization, the project expect to gain significant insights about the progress the organization has made regarding the clinical documentation and coding of the patient record. The 3M 360 CAC utilizing natural language processing for CDIS and coding software was implemented for a period of six months with the official launching in May 2015. The implementation involved training on aspect of enhancing clinical documentation to realize the requirements of ICD-10-CM/PCS.

Your Discussion postings should be written in standard edited English and follow APA guidelines as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. Be sure to support your work with specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources and additional scholarly sources as appropriate. Initial postings must be 250–350 words (not including references).

Submission and Grading Information

Grading Criteria

To access your rubric:

Week 10 Discussion Rubric

Post by Day 3 and Respond by Day 6

To participate in this Discussion:

Week 10 Discussion

Discussion – Week 10

The Committee on the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Initiative on the Future of Nursing, at the Institute of Medicine (2011) notes

that “the nursing profession is the largest segment of the nation’s health care workforce.” Nursing’s three million–plus members are known for their ability to react quickly and efficiently on the front lines of patient care. This agility is lost, however, when the nursing profession fails to evolve with the field of information technology. Have you witnessed any unintentional barriers that have excluded nurses from quickly adopting and accepting informatics systems?

Those nurses who apply strategies developed by change management experts can help expedite the adoption process by positively addressing staff concerns and implementation challenges. In this Discussion, you explore change leadership strategies through a role playing activity.

Reference:
Committee on the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Initiative on the Future of Nursing, at the Institute of Medicine. (2011). The future of nursing: Leading change, advancing health [Consensus report]. Retrieved from the Institute of Medicine of the National Academies website: http://www.iom.edu/Reports/2010/The-Future-of-Nursing-Leading-Change-Advancing-Health.aspx

To prepare:

Review the Learning Resources, focusing on the findings of the TIGER Leadership Collaborative.
Consider the TIGER Nursing Informatics Competencies model from a leadership standpoint.
Engage in the following role play: Your practice setting has appointed you to lead the implementation of a new information technology initiative. As you plan for this undertaking, you consider the various challenges that this implementation may bring to your practice.

https://nursingassignmentgurus.com/nurs-821o-dq-information-systems-and-changing-organizational-culture/

- Select an information technology initiative that your practice could benefit from (i.e., a new information system, point-of-care service, robotics machinery, mobile devices, etc.).
- What change management strategies might you utilize to facilitate a quick and successful implementation?
- What potential barriers might the initiative bring to the practice? What leadership strategies could shift the culture toward a smooth transition?

By Day 3 post a cohesive response that addresses the following:

Briefly identify your practice setting and the information technology initiative you selected. Provide a rationale for your selection.
Evaluate the potential barriers to implementing your hypothetical initiative.
Identify the change management strategies that you would use to facilitate a successful implementation. Identify key resources that you would need to promptly overcome potential barriers.
Appraise the leadership strategies that you would employ to establish a culture that supports the new information technology initiative. Reference the TIGER Informatics Competencies where appropriate.

Read a selection of your colleagues’ postings.

By Day 6 respond to at least two of your colleagues in one or more of the following ways:

Ask a probing question, substantiated with additional background information, evidence, or research.
Share an insight from having read your colleagues’ postings, synthesizing the information to provide new perspectives.
Offer and support an alternative perspective using readings from the classroom or from your own research in the Walden Library.
Validate an idea with your own experience and additional research.
Make a suggestion based on additional evidence drawn from readings or after synthesizing multiple postings.
Expand on your colleagues’ postings by providing additional insights or contrasting perspectives based on readings and evidence.

Return to this Discussion in a few days to read the responses to your initial posting. Note what you learned and/or any insights you gained as a result of the comments made by your colleagues. NURS 821O DQ leadership and management

Be sure to support your work with specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources and any additional sources.

Click on the Reply button below to post your response.

Rubric Detail

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

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: NURS 821O DQ leadership and management

The TIGER initiative was developed to bring together nursing stakeholders to brainstorm on issues that matter in the profession. TIGER addresses actions such as medication delivery of healthcare and H.I.T. (TIGER, 2011). According to TIGER initiatives, nursing stakeholders who commit to implementing improvement plans should stick to the plans to develop them as agreed.

I.T. initiative

To implement a successful information system, some steps need to be followed. The initial step would be creating a solid team to work on the project. Through forming, storming, norming, and performing, and a dynamic team can be created. The multidisciplinary team members (including I.T.) will initially get to know one another, familiarizing themselves with the project’s goal. Interprofessional collaboration practice models can be used to assist in building high-performing teams (Chaney, 2021). An effective team is one that also displays effective communication. One has clear objectives, and every member has a clear understanding of the said objectives (Kim et al., 2019). Input from end-users is very important as they can provide pointers to a successful system.

In the computer patient records system (C.P.R.S.) I noticed that there is no availability in recording continuous bladder irrigation (C.B.I.) input and output.

Change management for successful implementation

To be successful in this project, I would have to act as a mediator between end-users, management, and I.T. developers. Internal mediation is then carried out with organization leaders and nurse managers. Computer literacy is essential; therefore, a few employees will be trained as superusers to help educate fellow staff members on using the systems and troubleshooting issues should they arise. The superusers will, in turn, provide feedback and will be the change agents for implementation. Members of the help desk will be trained as well in case their services are needed. In addition, external contractors can be hired to act as backup services to the system; therefore, there should always be someone available to help.

Potential barriers

Not every employee accepts change; to ease this, it is important to include and keep stakeholder members well informed on the progress of the implementation. Effective communication is vital, let everyone be heard and ideas acted on. Security is important in H.I.T. All barriers to breaches should be set in place. The superusers would continue to track the progress of the system. Keep communication transparent. Costs and estimates are some factors that I would need to investigate since funding is equally important. Any proposed changes should be rectified promptly. I.T. also informed me that C.P.R.S. has no more space to accommodate a flow sheet, so I must rethink and currently am in the process.

References

Chaney, A. (2021). Building your team and talent. Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners, 33 (10), 761-762. doi: 10.1097/JXX.0000000000000649.

Kim, L. Y., Giannitrapani, K. F., Huynh, A. K., Ganz, D. A., Hamilton, A. B., Yano, E. M., Rubenstein, L. V., & Stockdale, S. E. (2019). What makes team communication effective: a qualitative analysis of interprofessional primary care team members’ perspectives. In Journal of Interprofessional Care (Vol. 33, Issue 6, pp. 836–838). https://doi-org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1080/13561820.2019.1577809

T.I.G.E.R. Information Technology Guiding Education Reform. (2011). Informatics Competencies collaborative team. Retrieved from https://web.archive.org/web/20150910131244/http://www.thetigerinitiative.org/docs/tigerreport_informaticscompetencies.pdf

Umstead, C. N., Unertl, K. M., Lorenzi, N. M., & Novak, L. L. (2021). Enabling adoption and use of new health information technology during implementation: Roles and strategies for internal and external support personnel. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 28(7), 1543–1547. https://doi-org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1093/jamia/ocab044

Content

Name: NURS_8210_Week10_Discussion_Rubric

	Excellent	Good	Fair	Poor
RESPONSIVENESS TO DISCUSSION QUESTION Discussion post minimum requirements: *The original posting must be completed by Wednesday, Day 3, at 11:59pm MST. Two response postings to two different peer original posts, on two different days, are required by Saturday, Day 6, at 11:59pm MST. Faculty member inquiries require responses, which are not included in the minimum number of posts. Your Discussion Board postings should be written in standard edited English and follow APA style for format and grammar as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. Be sure to support the postings with specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources as well as resources available through the Walden University online databases. Refer to the Essential Guide to APA Style for Walden Students to ensure your in-text citations and reference list are correct.	Points Range: 8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%) Discussion postings and responses exceed the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; – Go beyond what is required in some meaningful way (e.g., the post contributes a new dimension, unearths something unanticipated); -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. – Demonstrate significant ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources as well as additional resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings; -Exceed the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.	Points Range: 7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%) Discussion postings and responses meet the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: -Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence.re -Demonstrate ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings -Meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.	Points Range: 6 (20%) – 6 (20%) Discussion postings and responses are minimally responsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or -May (lack) lack in depth, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence; and/or -Do not adequately demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or has posted by the due date at least in part. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.	Points Range: 0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%) Discussion postings and responses are unresponsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or – Lack in substance, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or does not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.
CONTENT KNOWLEDGE	Points Range: 8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%) Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate in-depth understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; – are well supported by pertinent research/evidence from a variety of and multiple peer- reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; -Demonstrate significant mastery and thoughtful/accurate application of content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.	Points Range: 7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%) Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate understanding and application of the concepts and issues presented in the course, presented with some understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; -are supported by research/evidence from peer-reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; and · demonstrate some mastery and application of content, applicable skills, or strategies presented in the course.	Points Range: 6 (20%) – 6 (20%) Discussion postings and responses: – demonstrate minimal understanding of concepts and issues presented in the course, and, although generally accurate, display some omissions and/or errors; –lack support by research/evidence and/or the research/evidence is inappropriate or marginal in quality; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic – demonstrate minimal content, skills or strategies presented in the course. ——-Contain numerous errors when using the skills or strategies presented in the course	Points Range: 0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%) Discussion postings and responses demonstrate: -A lack of understanding of the concepts and issues presented in the course; and/or are inaccurate, contain many omissions and/or errors; and/or are not supported by research/evidence; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic -Many critical errors when discussing content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.
CONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION	Points Range: 8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%) Discussion postings and responses significantly contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: -providing Rich and relevant examples; discerning and thought-provoking ideas; and stimulating thoughts and probes; – -demonstrating original thinking, new perspectives, and extensive synthesis of ideas supported by the literature.	Points Range: 7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%) Discussion postings and responses contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by -providing relevant examples; thought-provoking ideas – Demonstrating synthesis of ideas supported by the literature	Points Range: 6 (20%) – 6 (20%) Discussion postings and responses minimally contribute to the quality of discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: – providing few and/or irrelevant examples; and/or – providing few if any thought- provoking ideas; and/or -. Information that is restated from the literature with no/little demonstration of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas.	Points Range: 0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%) Discussion postings and responses do not contribute to the quality of interaction/discussion and thinking and learning as they do not: -Provide examples (or examples are irrelevant); and/or -Include interesting thoughts or ideas; and/or – Demonstrate of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas
QUALITY OF WRITING	Points Range: 6 (20%) – 6 (20%) Discussion postings and responses exceed doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is clear, concise, and appropriate to doctoral level writing; · Make few if any errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Use original language and refrain from directly quoting original source materials; -provide correct APA · Are positive, courteous, and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints.	Points Range: 5 (16.67%) – 5 (16.67%) Discussion postings and responses meet doctoral -level writing expectations. They: ·Use grammar and syntax that is clear and appropriate to doctoral level writing; ; · Make a few errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · paraphrase but refrain from directly quoting original source materials; Provide correct APA format · Are courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints;.	Points Range: 4 (13.33%) – 4 (13.33%) Discussion postings and responses are minimally below doctoral-level writing expectations. They: · Make more than occasional errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Directly quote from original source materials and/or paraphrase rather than use original language; lack correct APA format; and/or · Are less than courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.	Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (10%) Discussion postings and responses are well below doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is that is unclear · Make many errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; and –use incorrect APA format · Are discourteous and disrespectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.
Total Points: 30

Excellent

Good

Fair

Poor

RESPONSIVENESS TO DISCUSSION QUESTION

Discussion post minimum requirements:

*The original posting must be completed by Wednesday, Day 3, at 11:59pm MST. Two response postings to two different peer original posts, on two different days, are required by Saturday, Day 6, at 11:59pm MST. Faculty member inquiries require responses, which are not included in the minimum number of posts. Your Discussion Board postings should be written in standard edited English and follow APA style for format and grammar as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. Be sure to support the postings with specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources as well as resources available through the Walden University online databases. Refer to the Essential Guide to APA Style for Walden Students to ensure your in-text citations and reference list are correct.

Points Range: 8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)

Discussion postings and responses exceed the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; – Go beyond what is required in some meaningful way (e.g., the post contributes a new dimension, unearths something unanticipated); -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. – Demonstrate significant ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources as well as additional resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings; -Exceed the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

Points Range: 7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%)

Discussion postings and responses meet the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: -Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence.re -Demonstrate ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings -Meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

Points Range: 6 (20%) – 6 (20%)

Discussion postings and responses are minimally responsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or -May (lack) lack in depth, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence; and/or -Do not adequately demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or has posted by the due date at least in part. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses are unresponsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or – Lack in substance, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or does not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.

CONTENT KNOWLEDGE

Points Range: 8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)

Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate in-depth understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; – are well supported by pertinent research/evidence from a variety of and multiple peer- reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; -Demonstrate significant mastery and thoughtful/accurate application of content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.

Points Range: 7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%)

Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate understanding and application of the concepts and issues presented in the course, presented with some understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; -are supported by research/evidence from peer-reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; and · demonstrate some mastery and application of content, applicable skills, or strategies presented in the course.

Points Range: 6 (20%) – 6 (20%)

Discussion postings and responses: – demonstrate minimal understanding of concepts and issues presented in the course, and, although generally accurate, display some omissions and/or errors; –lack support by research/evidence and/or the research/evidence is inappropriate or marginal in quality; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic – demonstrate minimal content, skills or strategies presented in the course. ——-Contain numerous errors when using the skills or strategies presented in the course

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses demonstrate: -A lack of understanding of the concepts and issues presented in the course; and/or are inaccurate, contain many omissions and/or errors; and/or are not supported by research/evidence; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic -Many critical errors when discussing content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.

CONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION

Points Range: 8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)

Discussion postings and responses significantly contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: -providing Rich and relevant examples; discerning and thought-provoking ideas; and stimulating thoughts and probes; – -demonstrating original thinking, new perspectives, and extensive synthesis of ideas supported by the literature.

Points Range: 7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%)

Discussion postings and responses contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by -providing relevant examples; thought-provoking ideas – Demonstrating synthesis of ideas supported by the literature

Points Range: 6 (20%) – 6 (20%)

Discussion postings and responses minimally contribute to the quality of discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: – providing few and/or irrelevant examples; and/or – providing few if any thought- provoking ideas; and/or -. Information that is restated from the literature with no/little demonstration of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses do not contribute to the quality of interaction/discussion and thinking and learning as they do not: -Provide examples (or examples are irrelevant); and/or -Include interesting thoughts or ideas; and/or – Demonstrate of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas

QUALITY OF WRITING

Points Range: 6 (20%) – 6 (20%)

Discussion postings and responses exceed doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is clear, concise, and appropriate to doctoral level writing; · Make few if any errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Use original language and refrain from directly quoting original source materials; -provide correct APA · Are positive, courteous, and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

Points Range: 5 (16.67%) – 5 (16.67%)

Discussion postings and responses meet doctoral -level writing expectations. They: ·Use grammar and syntax that is clear and appropriate to doctoral level writing; ; · Make a few errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · paraphrase but refrain from directly quoting original source materials; Provide correct APA format · Are courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints;.

Points Range: 4 (13.33%) – 4 (13.33%)

Discussion postings and responses are minimally below doctoral-level writing expectations. They: · Make more than occasional errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Directly quote from original source materials and/or paraphrase rather than use original language; lack correct APA format; and/or · Are less than courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (10%)

Discussion postings and responses are well below doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is that is unclear · Make many errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; and –use incorrect APA format · Are discourteous and disrespectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

Total Points: 30