Calculate the price
your order:

275 words
Approximate price
$ 0.00

HCMG101 Health Care System Question: Explains your plan for identifying and onboarding your hypothetical quality improvement (QI) subcommittee team members. Obtain your facility’s organization chart and identify the staff that are associated with quality. Examine the various roles of the group. Based on these findings, describe who you would choose to be on the interdisciplinary team and why.    Identify some of the risks associated with working with interdisciplinary teams and how you plan to address them.   Decide what you want the team to review before the meeting.   Describe the methods you would use to get buy-in from the team.   Develop a SMART goal to help you achieve your team’s buy-in.   Develop a brief agenda for meeting your hypothetical team.   Explain how you will assess if this meeting was effective. Answer: Quality improvement in healthcare settings inevitably involves efforts across multiple disciplines and domains within the organisational setting. The sole responsibility to ensure that quality is enhanced is upheld by the quality improvement (QI) team who strive to bring changes in the practice within the setting (Gurses, 2016). The present paper would be based on the process improvement plan outlined previously on the nursing staffing shortage. The paper explains the plan for identification and onboarding the hypothetical quality improvement (QI) subcommittee team members. It would describe the members of the team and the rationale for selecting them, the risks of working in an interdisciplinary team and ways to address them, and what the team needs to review before the meeting, amongst other aspects. The consecutive section of the paper would detail the methods for getting buy-in from the team. SMART goals would be developed for achieving the buy-in. A brief agenda would then be developed for meeting the hypothetical team. Lastly, strategies for assessing the meeting’s effectiveness would be highlighted. The QI team to be entrusted with the improvement process must have members who are efficient enough to do justice to their roles. The professionals who would be included in the QI team are Chief Executive Officer of the healthcare system, one of the two medical directors, senior physicians, nursing leaders specifically nurse managers from different departments, patient representatives, and practice managers. A ‘champion’ is to be selected who would be committed to the ideologies of upholding quality improvement. This role would be given to the medical director who would suffice the aim of imparting right information at all levels for executing the action plan for reducing the shortage of staffing. He would have interest in building capacity for implementing processes and promoting improvement. His role would be to ensure that the QI team has a proper functioning, fulfilling the charter it has within the organisational context. The tea members would be selected as mentioned as they have technical expertise and clinical leadership skills as well as ability to sponsor the project (Graban, 2016). Working in interdisciplinary teams pose a number of challenges for the team members that hinder the path of achieving success in implementing the set plan. Shared errors are common while working in an interdisciplinary team. Such errors are common to be made by some of the team members. This is prevalent irrespective of the fact that there is a direct communication between the individuals who initiate the error. The communication gap is also quite high under certain circumstances. Frequently, there is a lack of transparent communication between members, due to ego clashes. The prime way in which the issues can be resolved is to conduct sessions with the members in which they would be encouraged to exhibit clear communication and not bring in their ego for working in a professional manner, These sessions can be conducted by professionals from the field of interpersonal relationship management who would provide the appropriate guidance  (Nancarrow et al., 2013). The QI team needs to review the present state of staffing shortage and the scope for increasing the staffing within a desirable time frame. The key aspect that needs to be identified is the set of factors that lead to high staff turnover ratio. Stressful conditions, resulting in job dissatisfaction and injury are to be indicated appropriately. The possible scope for resource allocation for hiring and retention of staffs is to be reviewed with great importance. Monetory resource is of more importance in such cases. Consultation can be done with the HR department regarding the human resource allocation with the setting as per the needs of the patient care delivery (Abookire et al., 2016). It is crucial that buy-in is received from the team for its effective functioning. The team is to be made to commit to a positive goal regarding quality improvement, and it has to be involved in the overall planning process. The best strategies that can be applied in this regard are involvement of the members in the scheduling process and conducting a team review of the schedule. In addition, leading questions might be asked that eliminates absence of commitment. It is important that a SMART goal is set up for achieving the team’s buy-in. This is as follows- S- Carry out sessions with the individual team members for understanding their concerns in relation to optimal participation M- Obtain objective data from the participants A-Team members would share their concerns R- Resolutions would be based on the themes emerging from the sessions T- One week Meeting with the QI team must have a proper agenda that upholds the philosophies of quality improvement in a clinical setting. The agenda in the present case would be to discuss the facilitation of key driver models that would act as the road map for achieving the set outcomes. The key drivers would be beneficial for defining the pathway to the transformation with respect to staffing. This would include strategies based on evidence from existing literature on health workforce management (Hoff et al., 2016). After the meeting has been conducted with the QI team, it is essential that a robust assessment is carried out to understand whether the meeting has been fruitful or not. It is important to track the progress of the team by evaluating their actions. The meeting minutes are to be reviewed in due time. Whether data has emerged on the key quality indicators in what needs to be checked in the first place. The step to be taken is to work with the team members to understand the set up of data systems intended to be produced on a regular basis (Weaver et al., 2014). At the end of the discussion, it can be concluded that QI teams are charged with the responsibility of executing improvement efforts. For the team to work effectively, it is imperative that individuals work in collaboration with each other and respect the views and opinions put forward. The team would uphold a identified goal committed towards the process of continuous improvement in relation to staffing. Since team members would likely be from all important domains, proposed improvements would be evident. References Abookire, S. A., Bates, D. W., Slight, S., Chassin, M. R., DuPree, E. S., Pedroja, A. T., … & Hansen-Turton, T. (2016). America’s Healthcare Transformation: Strategies and Innovations. Rutgers University Press. Graban, M. (2016). Lean hospitals: improving quality, patient safety, and employee engagement. CRC press. Gurses, A. P. (2016). Human Factors Engineering for Quality Improvement and Research in Health Care. In Resident’s Handbook of Medical Quality and Safety (pp. 21-28). Springer International Publishing. Hoff, T., Sutcliffe, K. M., & Young, G. J. (2016). The Healthcare Professional Workforce: Understanding Human Capital in a Changing Industry. Oxford University Press. Nancarrow, S. A., Booth, A., Ariss, S., Smith, T., Enderby, P., & Roots, A. (2013). Ten principles of good interdisciplinary team work. Human resources for Health, 11(1), 19. Weaver, S. J., Dy, S. M., & Rosen, M. A. (2014). Team-training in healthcare: a narrative synthesis of the literature. BMJ Qual Saf, 23(5), 359-372.

Basic features

  • Free title page and bibliography
  • Unlimited revisions
  • Plagiarism-free guarantee
  • Money-back guarantee
  • 24/7 support

On-demand options

  • Writer's samples
  • Part-by-part delivery
  • Overnight delivery
  • Copies of used sources
  • Expert Proofreading

Paper format

  • 275 words per page
  • 12pt Arial/Times New Roman
  • Double line spacing
  • Any citation style (APA, MLA, CHicago/Turabian, Havard)

Guaranteed originality

We guarantee 0% plagiarism! Our orders are custom made from scratch. Our team is dedicated to providing you academic papers with zero traces of plagiarism.

Affordable prices

We know how hard it is to pay the bills while being in college, which is why our rates are extremely affordable and within your budget. You will not find any other company that provides the same quality of work for such affordable prices.

Best experts

Our writer are the crème de la crème of the essay writing industry. They are highly qualified in their field of expertise and have extensive experience when it comes to research papers, term essays or any other academic assignment that you may be given!

Calculate the price of your order

You will get a personal manager and a discount.
We'll send you the first draft for approval by at
Total price:

Expert paper writers are just a few clicks away

Place an order in 3 easy steps. Takes less than 5 mins.

error: Content is protected !!
Open chat
How Can We Help You?
Affordable. Nursing. Papers Inc
Our Experts Are Online and Ready To Help You.