Discussion: Workplace Environment Assessment
Discussion: Workplace Environment Assessment
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 wouldnt 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.
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.
Rubric:
Excellent Good Fair Poor
Main Posting 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.
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.
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.
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 10 (10%) 10 (10%)
Posts main post by day 3.
0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)
Does not post by day 3.
First Response 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.
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.
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.
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 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.
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.
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.
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 5 (5%) 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.
0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.
Total Points: 100
ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE !!
Solution
Workplace Environment Assessment
A healthy work environment is necessary in a healthcare organizations if high quality care standards and optimal delivery of services is to be maintained. Workplace environment and civility is assessed based on parameters such as effective communication, collaboration, decision-making, leadership, meaningful recognition, and appropriate staffing (Clark, 2015). Using Clarks Healthy Workplace Inventory, my workplace place scored low depicting an unhealthy work environment.
The organization lacked teamwork, had poor communication, and staffing issues with turnover among employees. Some of the employees had toxic personalities and the management did not hold employees accountable for their bad behavior. Employees complained of being overworked, underappreciated and experiencing frequent burnout leading to high turnover. The workplace is not civil as there were instances of communication breakdown and lack of collaboration among the healthcare professionals (Duggan et al., 2015)
The incivility can be attributed to laissez faire leadership style, exhaustion and work pressure making some employees to be irritable, toxic and respond to their colleagues in an uncivil manner. The type of leadership has an impact of the workplace health and civility (Marquis & Huston, 2017). Incivility also emanated from management failures and lack of organizational policies that address employees welfare. Superiority complex was observed among physicians and nurse managers towards nurses making them feel undermined and underappreciated.
An instance in which I witnessed incivility at work is when a physician referred to a nurse as thick-headed in front of a patient for failing to report that a patient needed to seek a second opinion before undergoing a recommended medical procedure. The nurse felt belittled, rejected and undermined affecting their productivity and motivation.
The incident was reported to the unit nurse manager who reported to the director, medical services. The physician was called out for his behavior and apologized to the nurse who felt a bit better. From the incident, I realized how incivility can affect the psychological state of a worker and their productivity.
References
Clark, C.M. (2015). Conversations to inspire and promote a more civil workplace. American Nurse Today, 10(11), 18-23.
Duggan, K., Aisaka, K., Tabak, R. G., Smith, C., Erwin, P., & Brownson, R. C. (2015). Implementing administrative evidence based practices: lessons from the field in six local health departments across the United States. BMC health services research, 15(1), 1-9.
Marquis, B. L., & Huston, C. J. (2017). Organizational planning. Leadership roles and management functions in nursing: Theory and application (9th ed. (pp. 160-185). Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins.
