Assignment week 9: Workplace Environment Assessment

Assignment week 9: Workplace Environment Assessment

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)

*Template completed in the Week 7 discussion should not be submitted with this assignment.

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.

By Day 7 of Week 9

Submit your Workplace Environment Assessment Assignment.

Submission and Grading Information

To submit your completed Assignment for review and grading, do the following:

• Please save your Assignment using the naming convention “WK9Assgn+last name+first initial.(extension)” as the name.
• Click the Week 9 Assignment Rubric to review the Grading Criteria for the Assignment.
• Click the Week 9 Assignment link. You will also be able to “View Rubric” for grading criteria from this area.
• Next, from the Attach File area, click on the Browse My Computer button. Find the document you saved as “WK9Assgn+last name+first initial.(extension)” and click Open.
• If applicable: From the Plagiarism Tools area, click the checkbox for I agree to submit my paper(s) to the Global Reference Database.
• Click on the Submit button to complete your submission.

 

 

 

Name: NURS_6053_Module04_Week09_Assignment_Rubric

• RUBRIC
• List View

Show Descriptions

Part 1: Work Environment Assessment

*Template, completed in the week 7 discussion, should not be submitted with this assignment

· 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 that you believed prior to conducting the assessment that was confirmed.

· Explain what the results of the assessment suggests about the health and civility of your workplace.—

Excellent 41 (41%) – 45 (45%)

Good 36 (36%) – 40 (40%)

Fair 32 (32%) – 35 (35%)

Poor 0 (0%) – 31 (31%)

Part 2: Reviewing the Literature

· Briefly describe the theory or concept presented in the article you selected.

· Explain how the theory or concept presented in the article relates to the results of your Work Environment Assessment.

· Explain how your organization could apply the theory highlighted in your selected article to improve organizational health and/or stronger work teams. Be specific and provide examples.—

Excellent 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)

Good 12 (12%) – 13 (13%)

Fair 11 (11%) – 11 (11%)

Poor 0 (0%) – 10 (10%)

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.

· Recommend at least two strategies that can be implemented to bolster successful practices revealed in your Work Environment Assessment.—

Excellent 18 (18%) – 20 (20%)

Good 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)

Fair 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)

Poor 0 (0%) – 13 (13%)

Resource Synthesis—

Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Good 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Fair 3 (3%) – 3 (3%)

Poor 0 (0%) – 2 (2%)

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.—

Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Good 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Fair 3 (3%) – 3 (3%)

Poor 0 (0%) – 2 (2%)

Written Expression and Formatting—English Writing Standards:

Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation.—

Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Good 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Fair 3 (3%) – 3 (3%)

Poor 0 (0%) – 2 (2%)

Written Expression and Formatting:

The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, running head, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.—

Excellent 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Good 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Fair 3 (3%) – 3 (3%)

Poor 0 (0%) – 2 (2%)