LDR 615 Change Initiative Creative Vision Essay

Change Initiative: Creating a Vision.

Some ideas for change initiative:
1. During shift report from 645-7:15-no new patient report or transfer a new patient from the Emergency room due to patient safety.
2. Ratio: 4 patients to 1 nurse on the medical-surgical floor to improve patient satisfaction.

Change Initiative: Creating Vision SAMPLE

Organizational Description

The organization is University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB). The UTMB, which is located in Galveston, Texas, was founded in the year 1891using the original name of University of Texas Medical Department (UTMB Health, 2020). Originally, the institution was established as one hospital and one school. However, the institution has consistently developed and it currently consists of six hospitals, a broad network of community-based and campus clinics, which provide specialized and primary medical care, and four schools. Besides, the institution hosts an allied Shriners Burns Hospital and many modern

LDR 615 Change Initiative Creative Vision Essay

facilities (UTMB Health, 2020). The objective of UTMB is to advance understanding and treatment of diseases and injuries through innovative research, both at the bedside and laboratory sections. The institution ensures the provision of skilled and patient-oriented health care and also participates in shaping the future of health science through research, education, and clinical care (UTMB Health, 2020). Overall, the UTMB’s mission is “to improve health for the people of Texas and around the world by offering innovative education and training, pursuing cutting-edge research and providing the highest quality patient care.” The stakeholders of UTMB include medical students, health networks, staff, healthcare providers, patients, local community, health system, and financiers. Essentially, every stakeholder is crucial to the success of the organization’s vision and is responsible for the implementation of mission to realize both long-term and short-term goals.

Forces Driving Organizational Change

The healthcare industry is currently facing a period of change, which is driven by both internal and external forces. According to Borkowski (2016), the internal forces include administrative processes, financial resources, human resources, physical resources, profitability issues, physician decision making, and physician and hospital supply. On the other hand, some of the external driving forces include healthcare complexity, technological advancement, demographics, economic issues, healthcare reforms, decentralization of care, dissatisfied consumers, increased focus on wellness, and regulatory issues.

Essentially, these driving forces originate from the current ever-increasing dynamics of health system that are fundamentally different from the ones in past decades (Borkowski, 2016). The current healthcare dynamics encompass a new set of controlling influences such as the consumer purchasing power, the managed care and related practices, scramble for market share, insurance risk assumption, and emerging roles for care providers, patients and employers. Owing to the dynamic nature of the healthcare industry, these powerful influences are expected to continue growing. Therefore, it imperative for the healthcare organizations to think ahead of these forces to survive the dire consequences associated with them.

These forces also have direct effect on the viability of the organization. The organization, as part of the healthcare system, depend on various interdependent internal and external factors to influence its routine functioning, strategic plans, and future plans for success. These driving forces affect its viability by either helping or hindering the organization from realizing success. As such, the organization should be ready for change so as to adapt to these forces.

LDR 615 Change Initiative Creative Vision Essay

Assessment Description

Evaluate the present causes driving change in your field or industry in a written paper of 1,250-1,500 words. Assess your organization and evaluate how well it is responding to the forces as a leader, or as someone exploring the role of a leader, and identify where change is needed. Create a vision to motivate this shift. Include the following in your list:

Describe your , include the organization’s mission, and identify the various stakeholders.
Identify the external and internal forces that drive organizational change in your field or industry. Explain the origin or reason for these internal or external driving forces. Explain how these forces directly affect the viability of your organization.
Choose one of the driving forces. Describe the specific issues this driving force creates, or will potentially create, for your organization or department.
Propose the steps needed for your organization or department to respond to this driving force.
Predict how employees at various levels in the organization will respond to your proposed change initiative.
Develop a vision for change. Describe how this vision correlates with the organization’s mission, and how you will present this vision to internal stakeholders.
Predict how you think your vision will assist internal stakeholders in supporting the change initiative. Identify potential considerations posed by stakeholders, and discuss how you will respond.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.

Organizational development (OD) is a field of study that addresses change and how it affects organizations and the individuals within those organizations (Norton, 2017). OD has numerous connotations within contemporary organizations. Norton (2017) believes change is inevitable and mastering change is the fundamental to the success of any organization. Useful organizational development can support organizations and their employees to adapt with change. Strategies can be implemented to announce foresee changes. These strategies can be the following but are not limited to: change in organization’s culture, change in values, team-building efforts, training and scholarship programs. Organizational development can be essential in addressing austere working environments as well. A great example pertaining to organizational development in my company were the collaboration of military personnel and contractors training on the Air PAX terminal. In Erbil, Iraq; contractors were operating the Global Air Transportation Execution System (GATES) to keep track of personnel and equipment entering and exiting the Middle East. When the American military forces arrived; they realized that Department of Defense (DOD) contractors were incorrectly inputting data that was costing the federal government billions of dollars. The lead for the military and contractors gathered to discuss what can be done to correct the unfortunate, costly mishap. A general wrote a memo, implementing that their will be one on one training for six months with monthly follow ups. After the six months were completed; contractors were asked to run the whole aerial port without any assistance from the military. We succeeded the mission with only a few minor errors which were easily corrected and did not cost the federal government extra funds. It was also agreed that when new contractors arrived, they will be trained the same way. Their level of expertise does not exempt anyone from training. Contractors will also sign a contract agreeing to those terms or they will be terminated.

Reference

Norton, M. S. (2017). Dealing with change: The effects of organizational development on

contemporary practices. Rowman& Littlefield.

Response

Keshia, you have done an excellent work on the organizational development (OD). You have captured and terrifically detailed crucial points on the OD including how it can support the organization and given a good example. This is indication of a good grasp of the course content. I agree with you. Essentially, after using the OD to support the organization to adapt to changes, the organization can benefit in various ways including increasing vertical and horizontal communication by ensuring effective communication, feedback, and interactions within the organization that is crucial in aligning the staff with the values, goals, and objectives of the organization (Brown & Harvey, 2021). The other benefit is continuous development. OD establishes a stable improvement pattern where strategies are formulated, appraised, executed, and assessed for quality (Korpiun, 2020). In turn, this builds a friendly environment that is accommodative to change. Other benefit is employee growth by focusing on effective communication, which motivates the workforce to effect needed changes (Achterbergh & Vriens, 2019).

References

Achterbergh, J., & Vriens, D. (2019). Organizational development: Designing episodic interventions. Routledge.

Brown, D. R., & Harvey, D. (2021). An experiential approach to organization development. Pearson Education.

Korpiun, M. (2020). Relational organizational development. Transactional Analysis Journal, 50(3), 207-220. https://doi.org/10.1080/03621537.2020.1771030

Resources

Leading Change Through Vision

Read “Leading Change Through Vision,” by Huyer, from Leadership Excellence Essentials (2014).

The Heart of Change: Real-Life Stories of How People Change Their Organizations

Read Chapters/Steps 2 and 3 in The Heart of Change: Real-Life Stories of How People Change Their Organizations.

What Everyone Gets Wrong About Change Management

Read “What Everyone Gets Wrong About Change Management,” by Anand & Barsoux, from Harvard Business Review (2017).

…

Change Initiative: Creating Vision – Rubric

Presentation of Organization

Criteria Description

Presentation of Organization (Mission, Stakeholders, Driving Forces in the Industry or Field, Viability of Organization, etc.)

5. Excellent

20 points

A description of the organization is provided, including all major details necessary to understanding the mission of the organization and insight into the various organizational stakeholders. Evaluation of organizational viability and driving forces contains strong support and provides clear insight into organizational viability.

4. Good

17.4 points

A description of the organization is provided, including most major details necessary to understanding the mission of the organization and its stakeholders. Evaluation of organizational viability and driving forces provides insight into organizational viability, but evaluation lacks sufficient support and some minor details are missing.

3. Satisfactory

15.8 points

A general description of the organization is provided; some details necessary to understanding the mission of the organization, and its stakeholders are missing. Evaluation of organizational viability and driving forces is incomplete or lacks of support.

2. Less than Satisfactory

14.8 points

An incomplete description of the organization is presented; significant details regarding the mission and stakeholders have been omitted. Evaluation of organizational viability and driving forces is missing or incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

No organizational description is presented.

Analysis of the Effect of Specific Driving Force on Organization or Department

Criteria Description

Analysis of the Effect of Specific Driving Force on Organization or Department

5. Excellent

30 points

Analysis of specific driving force is logically presented, including all relevant details and strong supporting evidence. Specific organizational or departmental issues resulting from the driving force are clearly discussed. Analysis provides unique insight into the effects of the driving force on the viability of the organization or department.

4. Good

26.1 points

Analysis of specific driving force is presented, including major details and general supporting evidence. Specific organizational or departmental issues resulting from the driving force are discussed.

3. Satisfactory

23.7 points

Analysis of specific driving force is presented, but it lacks details and supporting evidence. Specific organizational or departmental issues resulting from the driving force are generally discussed.

2. Less than Satisfactory

22.2 points

Analysis of specific driving force is presented, but it is incomplete. Specific organizational or departmental issues resulting from the driving force are not discussed.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Analysis of specific driving force and the effect of this force on the organization or department is not presented.

Proposal of Steps for Responding to Change

Criteria Description

Proposal of Steps for Responding to Change

5. Excellent

30 points

Detailed steps are proposed for responding to change through a clear and logical sequence. A well-developed prediction of stakeholder response to change is presented, with with strong evidence to support claims.

4. Good

26.1 points

Steps are proposed for responding to change through logical sequence. A prediction of stakeholder response to change is presented, with general evidence to support claims.

3. Satisfactory

23.7 points

Some steps are proposed responding to change, but they lack a logical sequence and major detail. A general prediction of stakeholder response to change is presented, but the prediction lacks major detail and evidence to support claims.

2. Less than Satisfactory

22.2 points

A general recommendation for responding to change is referenced, but it lacks specific steps. No prediction of stakeholder response to change is presented, or prediction is vague and lacks supportive evidence.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

No steps are proposed to respond to change.

Development of Vision for Change

Criteria Description

Development of Vision for Change

5. Excellent

40 points

A detailed vision is presented with strong supporting rationale. Vision correlates directly with the mission of the organization. Detailed steps for presenting the vision to all internal stakeholders are presented. Presentation of vision facilitates stakeholder involvement. Overall, vision is strongly conducive to supporting a change initiative.

4. Good

34.8 points

A vision is presented with rationale. Vision correlates with the mission of the organization. Steps for presenting the vison to stakeholders are presented. Overall, vision contains elements conducive to supporting a change initiative.

3. Satisfactory

31.6 points

A vision is presented with some supporting rationale. Vision loosely correlates with the mission of the organization. Steps for presenting the vision to stakeholders are generally presented.

2. Less than Satisfactory

29.6 points

A vision is presented, but it lacks rationale. Vision does not correlate with the mission of the organization, or the mission is not stated. Steps for presenting the vision to stakeholders are incomplete or missing.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

No vision is presented.

Evaluation of Stakeholder Response and Considerations to Change and Vision

Criteria Description

Evaluation of Stakeholder Response and Considerations to Change and Vision

5. Excellent

20 points

A detailed evaluation of stakeholder response to change is presented. Stakeholder considerations to change and proposed vison are clearly identified and discussed in detail; a clear and well-supported plan for responding to these considerations is proposed.

4. Good

17.4 points

A stakeholder evaluation of response to change is presented. Stakeholder considerations to change and proposed vison are discussed; a general plan for responding to these considerations is proposed.

3. Satisfactory

15.8 points

A stakeholder evaluation of response to change is generally presented. Stakeholder considerations to change and proposed vison are generally discussed; no clear plan for responding to these considerations is proposed.

2. Less than Satisfactory

14.8 points

A partial stakeholder evaluation of response to change is presented, but it is incomplete.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

No stakeholder evaluation is presented.

Thesis Development and Purpose

Criteria Description

Thesis Development and Purpose

5. Excellent

14 points

Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.

4. Good

12.18 points

Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.

3. Satisfactory

11.06 points

Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.

2. Less than Satisfactory

10.36 points

Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.

Argument Logic and Construction

Criteria Description

Argument Logic and Construction

5. Excellent

16 points

Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.

4. Good

13.92 points

Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.

3. Satisfactory

12.64 points

Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.

2. Less than Satisfactory

11.84 points

Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation,

Criteria Description

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation,

5. Excellent

10 points

Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

4. Good

8.7 points

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.

3. Satisfactory

7.9 points

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.

2. Less than Satisfactory

7.4 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.

Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

Criteria Description

Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

5. Excellent

10 points

All format elements are correct.

4. Good

8.7 points

Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.

3. Satisfactory

7.9 points

Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.

2. Less than Satisfactory

7.4 points

Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.

Documentation of Sources

Criteria Description

Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style

5. Excellent

10 points

Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.

4. Good

8.7 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.

3. Satisfactory

7.9 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.

2. Less than Satisfactory

7.4 points

Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Sources are not documented.