NURS 6053 Discussion: Workplace Environment Assessment

ByLeon Kiprotich Leon Updated on

NURS 6053 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 wouldn’t 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.

By Day 6 of Week 7

Respond to at least two of your colleagues on two different days by sharing ideas for how shortcomings discovered in their evaluations and/or their examples of incivility could have been managed more effectively.

NURS 6053 Discussion: Workplace Environment Assessment Sample Solution 1

Module 4 Discussion: Civility at my workplace

My work environment assessment yielded 50%, which indicates a barely healthy work environment. I was not surprised by this result because of the turnout rate I experience at my facility. It is very difficult to retain employees because there is a constant shortage of nurses and nurse aids. The employees at my job lack trust in the administration. As rightly stated by Saleem et al (2022) “Incivility in the workplace is harmful to the performance of employees, and that trust in supervisors’ can help employees to perform well. The trust in the supervisor significantly mediates the incivility-performance relationship”

As a supervisor, I have witnessed a lot of disrespect at my job site from the staff and even from my colleagues. Recently, one of my colleagues was so mad with me just because I was granted annual leave for a month, even though it is my right. She was so mad to the point that she refused to come to work on Christmas day to relieve me from work, even after explaining to her that I really wanted to spend time with my children at least half the day on Christmas.

This situation was addressed by my supervisor after I called her multiple times to see if she can find anyone to come in to relieve me from work. She finally called back and asked me to ask another nurse to supervise the building while I go home. One issue I have with my Nurse Administrator is that she doesn’t respond promptly to calls or emails, especially during non-working hours. Sometimes, it is so exhaustive trying to reach your supervisor to assist in taking an emergency decision and they are not there when you need them, it’s so frustrating.

People talk about each other at my workplace to the point of writing up each other for every little thing. Won & Choi (2022), nurses’ experience of workplace incivility can increase their emotional exhaustion and decrease job satisfaction.

Saleem, F., Malik, M. I., Asif, I., & Qasim, A. (2022). Workplace Incivility and Employee Performance: Does Trust in Supervisors Matter? (A Dual Theory Perspective). Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 12(12), 513. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs12120513Links to an external site.

Won So Young, & Choi Heejung. (2022). Structural Equation Modeling of Nurses’ Experience of Workplace Incivility. Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing Administration, 28(4), 342–351. https://doi.org/10.11111/jkana.2022.28.4.342

Workplace Environment Assessment Example 2

A good workplace environment contributes to successful health quality outcomes and performances. Patient satisfaction, work efficiency, patient safety, and effectiveness of care are some outcomes that rely on the conduciveness of the workplace environment. Interactions among healthcare professionals are a major contributory factor in ensuring these outcomes are effectively achieved. Therefore, workplace civility can be used to assess a health organization to meet quality standards and ensure that nurses achieve professional and ethical standards. 

My organization is a health institution that offers both preventive and curative health services. The organization employs nurses and other healthcare professionals of various cadres and experiences that interact together to facilitate a health system. Using the Clark Healthy Workplace Inventory, I conducted a workplace environment assessment for my health organization. This paper aims to describe the outcomes of this assessment, propose theories and concepts to improve organization outcomes based on this assessment, review current literature, and recommend evidence-based improvement strategies.

Work Environment Assessment

Results of the Work Environment Assessment

The Clark Healthy Workplace Inventory is a tool that contains a 20-question assessment using rated Linkert scale options for assessment of the health of the workplace environment. The higher the scores, the healthier the work environment. The highest possible score is 100, while the least possible score is 20. The overall score of the Clark Healthy Workplace Inventory for my organization was 69. This was rated as a ‘barely healthy’ work environment. The poorly scored items were about communication with employees, employee engagement, employee retention, an opportunity for career and professional advancement, workload distribution, employee health and wellness, and employee mentorship.

Outstanding Outcomes About the Results

Among the highly rated outcomes of this assessment were trust, respect, collegiality, appreciation of achievements, teamwork, collaboration, availability of resources for professional growth, and compensation. Two outcomes that surprised me were employees’ confidence in recommending the organization to family and relatives despite the low ratings in the health of the workplace environment and employees reporting a high level of trust and respect between the formal leadership and teams. These results were surprising because they portray some level of intrapersonal conflict among the employees themselves about their views of the organization.

There have indeed been few conflicts within the organization, and the few that have occurred have been solved amicably and effectively. However, some employees still believe that there are bare healthy civility practices within the organization’s workplace environment. The scores regarding employee wellness and self-care confirmed my preassessment expectations. The organization lacks well-laid-down strategies to manage employee stress. This was also evident in the workload stress scores, low employee satisfaction, and low employee engagement outcomes from this assessment.

Significance of the Assessment Results

These results showed that the organizational workplace environment health regarding civility is still barely healthy. According to Clark (2015), a healthy work environment requires shared organizational goals and vision, civility at the individual, team, and organizational levels, leadership, and civility conversations amongst all stakeholders. The results of the assessment showed that my organizational workplace performed better mainly only in items on organizational goals but dismally on other elements thus, the overall result was a ‘bare health.’ Using these results as the basis of assessment of my workplace health, there is evidence of the need to improve workplace civility and health.

Reviewing the Literature

Relevant Evidence on a Selected Theoretical Framework

Griffin & Clark (2014) presented a review of oppression theory. This theory relates well to the health of the workplace environment. This is based on oppressed group behaviors described by Freire’s work, Pedagogy of the Oppressed, in 1971. In this theory, a group of individuals who feel oppressed tends to feel marginalized and show certain behaviors that portray them as controlled by those they perceive to wield power over them. 

Concerning nursing practice, this theory explains that nurses who experience workplace incivility lack control over their workplace environment, making them vulnerable to oppressed group behaviors (Griffin & Clark, 2014). Oppressed group behaviors include not speaking up and transferring these negative impacts to others. Therefore, the oppression starts a cycle that leads to horizontal and vertical violence and other uncivil behaviors. In attempts to equilibrate the system of power imbalance with an already started oppressed group behaviors, the vulnerable nurses can transfer the uncivil behaviors to colleagues. 

Relation of Oppression Theory to my Work Environment Assessment.

In my Work Environment Assessment, employees expressed mixed outcomes that relate to appressed group behaviors. Ideally and psychological, uncivil behaviors in the workplace would have led to a negative reaction from the employees. However, these employees expressed high confidence in the organization such that they could recommend it to family and friends. In another example, the employees remained neutral in the role and value in the organization despite reporting that there is mutual trust and respect among workers in the workplace. 

This can be remotely interpreted as ‘keeping silent’ to preserve the reputation of a barely healthy institution. Therefore, the oppression theory explains the outcomes of my work environment assessment from a psychological perspective. Employees likely reported poor employee satisfaction and engagement in the environment as a result of the lack of confidence in communication at all levels of the organization. Lack of communication or ineffective communication can lead to poor engagement of employees, thus explaining the outcome of oppressed group behaviors.

Applying Oppression Theory to Improve Organizational Health and Team Outcomes

Workplace incivility in nursing practice and learning has negative impacts on the victims and the patients as well. Protecting vulnerable individuals and empowering the victims can ensure that the organization delivers health efficiently and in an effective environment. The oppression theory explains uncivil workplace behaviors in a socio-ecosystem but identifies the source and the victims of these behaviors. For example, using the critical consciousness by Paul Freire to address oppression, key interventions aim at implementing actions against and awareness of these behaviors and their consequences. 

The organization can identify those at risk of experiencing uncivil behaviors and take action against the perpetrators. Using this theory enables the implementers of interventions to understand the socio-ecosystem with different levels where appropriate interventions can be applied. For example, awareness interventions are best applied at the victims’ and vulnerable populations’ level, while punitive actions can best be applied to the perpetrators.

Evidence-Based Strategies to Create High-Performance Interprofessional Teams

Key shortcomings from my workplace environment assessment were poor employee satisfaction, lack of transparent, direct, and respectful communication, and poor employee engagement. Clark (2019) presented an article on a technique combining various interventions and a conceptual model to address workplace incivility among vulnerable groups, especially learners and junior practitioners. Cognitive rehearsal, according to Clark (2019), is a strategy that will address these shortcomings in the workplace by empowering vulnerable employees, such as junior nurses and nurse students, to address incivility and handle it in nonviolent ways. 

This strategy will require that junior nurses be attached to mentors or seniors who are skilled facilitators (Clark, 2019). The role of these facilitators will be to provide guidance to their juniors through debriefing, preparatory learning, and evidence-based scripting. This will enhance communication between junior nurses and other professionals, improve their satisfaction with nursing practice, and engage them in solving extralimital problems.

Another strategy focuses on enhancing Workplace Relational Civility through a contemporary prevention approach that aims at enhancing relational decency, culture, and readiness in the workplace (Di Fabio & Duradoni, 2019). In this strategy, the nurse managers can take up the active leading role in identifying risk factors and enhancing building on the individual strengths of employees (Atashzadeh Shoorideh et al., 2021). 

Workplace relational civility that starts from the top managers can trickle down to the employees vulnerable to workplace incivility. Therefore, civility aspects such as respect, courtesy, and taking cognizance of others’ rights can be established in the socio-ecosystem described in the oppression theory. This can break the when of uncivil behaviors and enhance positive interactions and relations that will promote employee engagement, communication, and job satisfaction.   

To ensure that these strategies are effective in enhancing workplace civility, additional strategies can be employed by the organization. Firstly, the organization can embark on promoting awareness of workplace incivility. According to Jemal (2018), oppression is like a virus in an organization. Awareness is the best antidote for its outcomes, such as horizontal and vertical violence. Critical awareness, as described by Paul Freire, can mitigate oppression through transformative consciousness. Transformative conciseness uses awareness among the oppressed as one of its domain interventions. Therefore, awareness among vulnerable nurses can enhance the achievement of the aforementioned strategies.

Another strategy to bolster successful civility practices in addressing inequalities and social injustices in the workplace through anticipating behavioral responses. This can enhance behavioral response. Enhancing awareness of behavioral responses to uncivil behaviors among all employees at the workplace can enhance transformative awareness. This related strategy can improve critical awareness among potential perpetrators in the socio-ecosystem by enhancing self-blame and self-reflection.

Conclusion

My workplace environment assessment showed that my organization is barely healthy in terms of workplace civility. Key shortcomings were employee engagement, communication, and job satisfaction. To explain the relationship between uncivil behaviors in the workplace and organizational health, the oppression theory concepts were applied. In this theory, workplace incivility was a nonending outcome of an inferiority complex among vulnerable nurses. Therefore, this theory came in handy in explaining potential positions in the socio-ecosystem where interventions can be targeted. 

The role of nursing leadership in risk identification and preventive strategy implementation through behavioral response awareness was evident in the current evidence. Promoting awareness of incivility and potential outcomes among employees and ensuring social justice in the workplace were identified as potential strategies to bolster successful practices. Key strategies to address communication, engagement, and satisfaction as part of workplace civility interventions were workplace relational civility and cognitive rehearsal for junior employees.

NURS 6053 Discussion: Workplace Environment Assessment References

Atashzadeh Shoorideh, F., Moosavi, S., & Balouchi, A. (2021). Incivility toward nurses: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Medical Ethics and History of Medicine, 14, 15. https://doi.org/10.18502/jmehm.v14i15.7670

Clark, C. M. (2015). Conversations to inspire and promote a more civil workplace: Let’s end the silence that surrounds incivility. American Nurse Today, 10(11), 18–23. https://www.myamericannurse.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/ant11-CE-Civility-1023.pdf

Clark, C. M. (2019). Combining cognitive rehearsal, simulation, and evidence-based scripting to address incivility. Nurse Educator, 44(2), 64–68. https://doi.org/10.1097/NNE.0000000000000563

Di Fabio, A., & Duradoni, M. (2019). Fighting incivility in the workplace for women and all workers: The challenge of primary prevention. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1805. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01805

Griffin, M., & Clark, C. M. (2014). Revisiting cognitive rehearsal as an intervention against incivility and lateral violence in nursing: 10 years later. Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 45(12), 535–542; quiz 543–544. https://doi.org/10.3928/00220124-20141122-02

Jemal, A. (2018). Transformative Consciousness of Health Inequities: Oppression is a Virus and Critical Consciousness is the Antidote. Journal of Human Rights and Social Work, 3(4), 202–215. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41134-018-0061-8

LEARNING RESOURCES

Required Readings

  • Broome, M., & Marshall, E. S. (2021). Transformational leadership in nursing: From expert clinician to influential leader (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Springer.
  • Chapter 5, “Collaborative Leadership Contexts: It Is All About Working Together (pp. 155–178)
  • Chapter 8, “Creating and Shaping the Organizational Environment and Culture to Support Practice Excellence” (pp. 237–272)
  • Chapter 7, “Building Cohesive and Effective Teams” (pp. 212–231)

Select at least ONE of the following:

NURS 6053 Discussion: Workplace Environment Assessment Sample Solution 2 Ashley Torres

Manage Discussion Entry

According to Lowe (2020), the average working individual usually spends more time at work than any other activity. This is particularly so for healthcare workers who take longer shifts at work. Due to this, the workplace is a key setting for enhancing the health and well-being of individuals. The workplace is essential in supporting workers’ health and well-being; therefore, enterprises are responsible for providing a safe and hazard-free working environment (Cooper et al., 2020).

Maintaining a safe environment can help enterprises reduce employee absenteeism due to injuries and other stressors at work and reduce insurance costs due to fewer work-related injuries and ailments. Overall, a safe, healthy workplace fosters employee satisfaction, productivity, and retention. My workplace had a score of 84 on the Clark Healthy Workplace Inventory. This means the working environment is moderately healthy. My workplace scored high points in the areas of teamwork, employee training, and opportunities for employee advancement. However, the workplace scored lower points on employee compensation and diversity.

Although the workplace is not very diverse, and I think employees should be paid more for their work, I think there is a high degree of civility.  Incivility cases are not common. For example, arguments between workers or between patients and workers are rare. Employees treat their colleagues and patients cordially and respectfully.  Employees work in inter-professional teams, which promotes collaboration; this has been essential in promoting civility as different professionals have to coordinate their efforts to reach a common goal, which is to enhance the health outcomes of patients (Efendi et al., 2019).

One of the rare occasions I witnessed was when an experienced nurse verbally abused a nurse undergoing her preceptorship program.  The nurse who had been on the day shift was requested to extend her shift to help out with victims of a grisly road accident. The experienced nurse claimed that the younger nurse on preceptorship was lazy and needed to get more active to help out with the situation. Thankfully, the nurse manager was nearby and intervened before the situation got out of hand.

Although the experienced nurse was stressed out after extending her shift, she was wrong in verbally abusing the new nurse who was learning how to do her duties. The nurse manager engaged the perpetrator of the abuse and had her immediately apologize to the new nurse. In addition, she was requested to take a mandatory 2-hour online refresher lesson on how to handle incivility at the workplace. This lesson is available for all nurses on the organization’s website to remind us how to handle themselves in case of disputes and other types of incivility at work.

Reference

Cooper, A. L., Brown, J. A., Rees, C. S., & Leslie, G. D. (2020). Nurse resilience: A concept analysis. International Journal of Mental Health Nursing, 29(4), 553–575. https://doi.org/10.1111/inm.12721

Efendi, F., Kurniati, A., Bushy, A., & Gunawan, J. (2019). Concept analysis of nurse retention. Nursing &Amp; Health Sciences, 21(4), 422–427. https://doi.org/10.1111/nhs.12629

Lowe, G. (2020). Creating healthy organizations. In Creating Healthy Organizations. University of Toronto Press.

Week 7 Discussion Workplace Environment and Safety Sample Approach

A healthy nurse workplace refers to a safe, satisfying and empowering environment. Building and consistently keeping a healthy work environment is critical for patients’ safety, nurse satisfaction, workforce retention, and care quality, all of which are critical to the financial survival of healthcare organizations. The six key factors that enable employers to foster a sustainable healthy workplace culture are – true collaboration, skilled communication, effective decision-making, meaningful recognition, appropriate staffing, and authentic leadership.

 True collaboration is a synergistic relationship formed when two or more entities work together to achieve something far better than the sum of their separate powers and efforts. Regarding authentic leadership, the leader models and encourages others to emulate a good work environment (Broome & Marshall, 2021). Skilled communication is an open, engaging, and productive conversation among nurses that enhances team collaboration, a faster adaptation of new nurses, and fosters civility (Clark, 2019). Meaningful recognition acknowledges personnel behavior and skill influencing the patient’s nursing care.

Recognition, promotion, and incentives increase nurses’ loyalty to the job. A workplace health assessment is a process of obtaining information on the variables that support or hinder employee health at a specific company or hospital and finding potential possibilities to improve or address those problems. According to the Clark Healthy Workplace Inventory tool, personnel are not only motivated by a healthy work environment but also have a high degree of civility (Clark et al., 2011). The paper reflects on an assessment of my workplace based on Clark’s tool, a snapshot of my work environment, and encounters with incivility cases.

Workplace Civility Measurement

The Clark Healthy Workplace Inventory revealed that my workplace is moderately healthy after documenting a score of 80/100. Top-rated features in the assessment were transparency, team collaboration, skilled communication, wellness, and effective leadership. The attributes fall mainly under personal motivation factors and are critical for a healthy environment. Low-rated attributes were meaningful recognition and effective decision-making making. The low scores centered on traits with organizational responsibility. The scores could pose an issue with the organization’s structure and practices for employee welfare. The workplace is civil, as evidenced by high scores on “discernible level of trust,” “transparent and respectful communication,” and “fair and respectful treatment of employees.”

Workplace Incivility Case Scenario

Workplace incivility refers to low-intensity social behavior typically regarded as unacceptable in the workplace and can be used to harm, belittle, or undermine another person or group (Clark, 2015). An example of a case witnessed during my attachment is a fresh graduate nurse in his late thirties who shifted from a successful job in the corporate world to nursing. Years of professional expertise, valuable parental insights, and a calm attitude disposition were all assets brought to the table by this nurse. This nurse was enthusiastic about understanding the unit’s norms, highly motivated, and quick to develop tactile skills.

However, he made enemies with one of the most outspoken departmental nurses who had a position in day-to-day operations. The nurse snubbed his questions and concerns. Furthermore, he was unfairly assigned responsibilities and given fewer days off despite being a family man. Being fully aware of his rights, the nurse raised awareness to a more superior leader. The work schedules were enough to measure the incivility besides the colleagues witnessing it. The Nursing Director dug into the matter and formed an interim investigative committee. Finally, the two nurses were summoned, had a conflict mediation process, and were allocated to different departments. Later the hospital developed automated shift scheduling to curb such issues.

Conclusion

Incivility in the nursing workplace causes physical and emotional anguish to victims and affects the quality of patient care. Interventions to improve the situation include raising awareness about workplace incivility, training on effective communication methods to combat workplace incivility, and drills to practice the newly learned communication techniques. Facilities and organizations should establish acceptable and unacceptable behavior rules and procedures for reporting and dealing with occurrences of incivility.

References

Broome, M., & Marshall, E. S. (2021). Transformational leadership in nursing: From expert clinician to influential leader (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Springer.

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. (2019). Combining cognitive rehearsal, simulation, and evidence-based scripting to address incivility. Nurse Educator, 44(2), 64–68. https://doi.org/10.1097/nne.0000000000000563

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.

MODULE 4 ASSIGNMENT – 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.

LEARNING RESOURCES

Required Readings

  • Broome, M., & Marshall, E. S. (2021). Transformational leadership in nursing: From expert clinician to influential leader (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Springer.
  • Chapter 5, “Collaborative Leadership Contexts: It Is All About Working Together (pp. 155–178)
  • Chapter 8, “Creating and Shaping the Organizational Environment and Culture to Support Practice Excellence” (pp. 237–272)
  • Chapter 7, “Building Cohesive and Effective Teams” (pp. 212–231)

Select at least ONE of the following:

Required Media

NURS 6053 Module04 Week09 Assignment Rubric

NURS_6053_Module04_Week09_Assignment_Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome 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.
45 to >40.0 pts
Excellent
The responses accurately and thoroughly describe the results of the Work Environment Assessment completed on a workplace. … The responses thoroughly and clearly identify two surprising things about the results and thoroughly describe 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 to >35.0 pts
Good
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 to >31.0 pts
Fair
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.
31 to >0 pts
Poor
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.
45 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome 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.
15 to >13.0 pts
Excellent
The responses accurately and thoroughly describe the theory or concept presented in the article selected. … The responses accurately and completely explain how the theory or concept presented in the article relates to the results of the Work Environment Assessment. … The responses accurately and thoroughly explain 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.
13 to >11.0 pts
Good
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 to >10.0 pts
Fair
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.
10 to >0 pts
Poor
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.
15 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome 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.
20 to >17.0 pts
Excellent
Using the literature, the responses clearly and thoroughly recommend at least two strategies that can be implemented to address any shortcomings revealed in the Work Environment Assessment. … The responses clearly and thoroughly recommend at least two strategies that can be implemented to bolster successful practices revealed in the Work Environment Assessment.
17 to >15.0 pts
Good
Using the literature, 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.
15 to >13.0 pts
Fair
Using the literature, 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.
13 to >0 pts
Poor
Using the literature, 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.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Resource Synthesis
5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent
Using proper in-text citations, the response fully integrates at least 2 outside resources and 2 or 3 course-specific resources.
4 to >3.0 pts
Good
Using proper in-text citations, the response fully integrates at least 2 outside resources and 1 course-specific resource.
3 to >2.0 pts
Fair
Using proper in-text citations, the response minimally integrates outside and course-specific resources.
2 to >0 pts
Poor
The response does not integrate outside and course-specific resources or no in-text citations are used.
5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome 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 to >4.0 pts
Excellent
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. … A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion are provided, which delineates all required criteria.
4 to >3.0 pts
Good
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. …Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are stated but are brief and not descriptive.
3 to >2.0 pts
Fair
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.
2 to >0 pts
Poor
Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity less than 60% of the time. … No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion is provided.
5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Written Expression and Formatting—English Writing Standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation.
5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent
Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors.
4 to >3.0 pts
Good
Contains a few (one or two) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.
3 to >2.0 pts
Fair
Contains several (three or four) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.
2 to >0 pts
Poor
Contains many (five or more) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding.
5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome 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.
5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent
Uses correct APA format with no errors.
4 to >3.0 pts
Good
Contains a few (one or two) APA format errors.
3 to >2.0 pts
Fair
Contains several (three or four) APA format errors.
2 to >0 pts
Poor
Contains many (five or more) APA format errors.
5 pts
Total Points: 100

Also Read: An Introduction to Clinical Inquiry HW