Change Champions: Leading Practice Change in Healthcare

NURSING AND HEALTHCARE

# Change Champions: Leading Practice Change in Healthcare

Change champions and opinion leaders play crucial roles in implementing practice changes in healthcare settings. Understanding their differences and the human resources necessary to support proposed practice changes is essential for effective leadership and successful outcomes.

## Change Champions vs. Opinion Leaders

### Change Champions:
Change champions are individuals within an organization who actively support, promote, and drive change. They are often frontline workers or managers who have a deep understanding of the change process and the benefits it brings to the organization. Change champions are characterized by their enthusiasm, commitment, and ability to influence others to embrace change.

**Example:** In a healthcare setting, a nurse championing the implementation of an electronic health record (EHR) system may organize training sessions, provide one-on-one support to colleagues, and continually advocate for the system’s benefits.

### Opinion Leaders:
Opinion leaders, on the other hand, are respected individuals within an organization whose opinions and behaviors are influential. They may not necessarily be directly involved in the change process but can sway others’ attitudes and acceptance of the change through their reputation and credibility.

**Example:** A senior physician who endorses a new clinical practice guideline can influence other physicians to adopt the guideline, even if they are not directly involved in the implementation process.

## Human Resources for Supporting Practice Change

To support a proposed practice change effectively, various human resources are necessary. These include:

1. **Leadership Support:**
Leadership support is critical for any change initiative. Leaders must provide the vision, resources, and authority needed to implement change. Their endorsement can motivate staff and ensure that the change aligns with organizational goals.

2. **Dedicated Change Team:**
A dedicated change team, including project managers, clinical experts, and IT professionals, is essential for planning, executing, and monitoring the change process. This team can address logistical issues, provide technical support, and ensure that the change is implemented smoothly.

3. **Training and Development:**
Comprehensive training programs are necessary to equip staff with the skills and knowledge required to adopt the change. Ongoing development opportunities can help maintain competency and address any challenges that arise during the implementation process.

4. **Communication Channels:**
Effective communication channels must be established to keep all stakeholders informed about the change process, progress, and any updates. Transparent communication helps build trust and ensures that everyone is on the same page.

5. **Feedback Mechanisms:**
Mechanisms for collecting and addressing feedback from staff are crucial for continuous improvement. This feedback can provide insights into challenges faced during implementation and help refine the process.

## Leadership Skills and Strategies to Produce More Change Champions

Leadership skills and strategies are pivotal in producing more change champions within an organization. Some key strategies include:

1. **Empowerment:**
Leaders can empower staff by providing opportunities for professional development, encouraging innovation, and recognizing contributions. Empowered staff are more likely to take ownership of change initiatives and act as champions.

2. **Mentorship:**
Establishing mentorship programs where experienced change champions mentor newer staff can help build a culture of continuous improvement and support. Mentors can provide guidance, share best practices, and help mentees navigate challenges.

3. **Incentives and Recognition:**
Offering incentives and recognizing individuals who actively support and drive change can motivate others to become change champions. Recognition can be in the form of awards, public acknowledgment, or career advancement opportunities.

4. **Inclusive Decision-Making:**
Involving staff in the decision-making process regarding changes that affect their work can increase buy-in and commitment. Inclusive decision-making ensures that staff feel valued and that their input is considered.

By fostering an environment that supports change and values the contributions of all staff members, leaders can cultivate a team of change champions who are committed to driving continuous improvement in healthcare practice.

## References

– Cullen, L., & Hanrahan, K. (2018). Evidence-based practice and the bottom line: An issue of cost. Healthcare Financial Management Association. https://www.hfma.org/topics/article/58754.html
– Cullen, L., Hanrahan, K., Farrington, M., Anderson, R., Dimmer, E., Miner, R., Suchan, T., & Rod, E. (2020). Evidence-based practice change champion program improves quality care. JONA: The Journal of Nursing Administration, 50(3), 128–134. https://doi.org/10.1097/NNA.0000000000000856
– Dopp, A. R., Narcisse, M.-R., Mundey, P., Silovsky, J. F., Smith, A. B., Mandell, D., Funderburk, B. W., Powell, B. J., Schmidt, S., Edwards, D., Luke, D., & Mendel, P. (2020). A scoping review of strategies for financing the implementation of evidence-based practices in behavioral health systems: State of the literature and future directions. Implementation Research and Practice. https://doi.org/10.1177/2633489520939980
– Luciano, M. M., Aloia, T. A., & Brett, J. F. (2019). 4 ways to make evidence-based practice the norm in health care. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2019/08/4-ways-to-make-evidence-based-practice-the-norm-in-health-care

 

DISCUSSION

CHANGE CHAMPIONS

A person in a white coat holding a tablet Description automatically generated

Change does not occur in a vacuum. Change must be made through leaders who initiate, support, and lead the change. Think of your identified or potential practice problem. Who are the leaders tasked with implementing this change? You should be a part of this list of leaders, but who else is championing the change? Who else is supporting the change and leading the way?

Change can be hard, but change is also inevitable. Thus, change champions understand the purpose and necessity of change and offer this insight and support to the organization. How might your leadership skills and strategies produce more change champions? For this Discussion, you will contrast change champions and opinion leaders. You will consider the necessity of change for your practice problem, and explore the human impact and resources needed to support your proposed practice change.

RESOURCES

 

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity. Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

WEEKLY RESOURCES

LEARNING RESOURCES

Required Readings

· Hickey, J. V., & Giardino, E. R. (Eds.). (2021).  Evaluation of quality in health care for DNPs (3rd ed.). Springer Publishing.

· Chapter 6, “Evaluation of Organizations and Systems” (pp. 147–166)

· Cullen, L., & Hanrahan, K. (2018, January 8).  Evidence-based practice and the bottom line: An issue of costLinks to an external site. .  Healthcare Financial Management Association.  https://www.hfma.org/topics/article/58754.html

· Cullen, L., Hanrahan, K., Farrington, M., Anderson, R., Dimmer, E., Miner, R., Suchan, T., & Rod, E. (2020).  Evidence-based practice change champion program improves quality careLinks to an external site. .  JONA: The Journal of Nursing Administration,  50(3), 128–134. https://doi.org/10.1097/NNA.0000000000000856

· Dopp, A. R., Narcisse, M.-R., Mundey, P., Silovsky, J. F., Smith, A. B., Mandell, D., Funderburk, B. W., Powell, B. J., Schmidt, S., Edwards, D., Luke, D., & Mendel, P. (2020).  A scoping review of strategies for financing the implementation of evidence-based practices in behavioral health systems: State of the literature and future directionsLinks to an external site. .  Implementation Research and Practice. https://doi.org/10.1177/2633489520939980

· Luciano, M. M., Aloia, T. A., & Brett, J. F. (2019).  4 ways to make evidence-based practice the norm in health careLinks to an external site. .  Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2019/08/4-ways-to-make-evidence-based-practice-the-norm-in-health-care

 

TO PREPARE

· Review the Learning Resources addressing change champions and opinion leaders.

· Reflect on the human resources that may be necessary to support your proposed practice change.

· Consider the impact of leadership styles in making this change.

Post a description of the differences between change champions and opinion leaders. Be specific and provide examples. Then, describe the human resources that may be necessary to support your proposed practice changes and explain why.

Assignment Rubric

Rubric

NURS_8502_Week9_Discussion_Rubric

NURS_8502_Week9_Discussion_Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRESPONSIVENESS TO DISCUSSION QUESTION (20 possible points) Discussion post minimum requirements: The original posting must be completed by Day 3 at 10:59 pm CT. Two response postings to two different peer original posts, on two different days, are required by Day 6 at 10:59 pm CT. Faculty member inquiries require responses, which are not included in the peer posts. Your Discussion Board postings should be written in Standard Academic English and follow APA 7 style for format and grammar as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. Be sure to support the postings with specific citations from this week’s learning resources as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.)
20 to >19.0 pts

Excellent

• Discussion postings and responses are responsive to and exceed the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • The student responds to the question/s being asked or the prompt/s provided. Goes beyond what is required in some meaningful way (e.g., the post contributes a new dimension, unearths something unanticipated) • Demonstrates that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Exceeds the minimum requirements for discussion posts.

 19 to >15.0 pts

Good

• Discussion postings and responses are responsive to and meet the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • The student responds to the question/s being asked or the prompt/s provided. • Demonstrates that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Meets the minimum requirements for discussion posts.

 15 to >12.0 pts

Fair

• Discussion postings and responses are somewhat responsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • The student may not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question/s or prompt/s. • Minimally demonstrates that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Does not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts; has not posted by the due date at least in part.

 12 to >0 pts

Poor

• Discussion postings and responses are unresponsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. • Does not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question/s or prompt/s. • Does not demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered a variety of learning resources, as well as resources available through the Walden University library and other credible online resources (guidelines, expert opinions etc.) • Does not meet the requirements for discussion posts; has not posted by the due date and did not discuss late post timing with faculty.

 

 20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCONTENT REFLECTION and MASTERY: Initial Post (30 possible points)
30 to >29.0 pts

Excellent

Initial Discussion posting: • Post demonstrates mastery and thoughtful/accurate application of content and/or strategies presented in the course. • Posts are substantive and reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. • Initial post is supported by 3 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings.

 29 to >23.0 pts

Good

Initial Discussion posting: • Posts demonstrate some mastery and application of content, applicable skills, or strategies presented in the course. • Posts are substantive and reflective, with analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. • Initial post is supported by 3 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings.

 23 to >18.0 pts

Fair

Initial Discussion posting: • Post may lack in depth, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence. • Posts demonstrate minimal understanding of concepts and issues presented in the course, and, although generally accurate, display some omissions and/or errors. • There is a lack of support from relevant scholarly research/evidence.

 18 to >0 pts

Poor

Initial Discussion posting: • Post lacks in substance, reflection, analysis, or synthesis. • Posts do not generalize, extend thinking or evaluate concepts and issues within the topic or context of the discussion. • Relevant examples and scholarly resources are not provided.

 

 30 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION: First Response (20 possible points)
20 to >19.0 pts

Excellent

Discussion response: • Significantly contributes to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning. • Provides rich and relevant examples and thought-provoking ideas that demonstrates new perspectives, and synthesis of ideas supported by the literature. • Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted. • First response is supported by 2 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. • Responds to questions posed by faculty.

 19 to >15.0 pts

Good

Discussion response: • Contributes to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Provides relevant examples and/or thought-provoking ideas • Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted. • First response is supported by 2 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. • Responds to questions posed by faculty.

 15 to >12.0 pts

Fair

Discussion response: • Minimally contributes to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Provides few examples to support thoughts. • Information provided lacks evidence of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas. • There is a lack of support from relevant scholarly research/evidence. • No response to questions posed by faculty.

 12 to >0 pts

Poor

Discussion response: • Does not contribute to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Lacks relevant examples or ideas. • There is a lack of support from relevant scholarly research/evidence. • No response to questions posed by faculty.

 

 20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION: Second Response (20 possible points)
20 to >19.0 pts

Excellent

Discussion response: • Significantly contributes to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning. • Provides relevant examples and thought-provoking ideas that demonstrates new perspectives, and extensive synthesis of ideas supported by the literature. • Second response is supported by 2 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. • Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted. • Responds to questions posed by faculty.

 19 to >15.0 pts

Good

Discussion response: • Contributes to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Provides relevant examples and/or thought-provoking ideas • Second response is supported by 2 or more relevant examples and research/evidence from a variety of scholarly sources including course and outside readings. • Scholarly sources are correctly cited and formatted. • Responds to questions posed by faculty.

 15 to >12.0 pts

Fair

Discussion response: • Minimally contributes to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Provides few examples to support thoughts. • Information provided lacks evidence of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas. • Minimal scholarly sources provided to support post. • Does not respond to questions posed by faculty.

 12 to >0 pts

Poor

Discussion response: • Does not contribute to the quality of the interaction/discussion and learning. • Lacks relevant examples or ideas. • No sources provided. • Does not respond to questions posed by faculty.

 

 20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeQUALITY OF WRITING (10 possible points)
10 to >9.0 pts

Excellent

Discussion postings and responses exceed doctoral level writing expectations: • Use Standard Academic English that is clear, concise, and appropriate to doctoral level writing. • Make few if any errors in spelling, grammar, that does not affect clear communication. • Uses correct APA 7 format as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. • Are positive, courteous, and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

 9 to >8.0 pts

Good

Discussion postings and responses meet doctoral level writing expectations: • Use Standard Academic English that is clear and appropriate to doctoral level writing • Makes a few errors in spelling, grammar, that does not affect clear communication. • Uses correct APA 7 format as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. • Are courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

 8 to >6.0 pts

Fair

Discussion postings and responses are somewhat below doctoral level writing expectations: • Posts contains multiple spelling, grammar, and/or punctuation deviations from Standard Academic English that affect clear communication. • Numerous errors in APA 7 format • May be less than courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

 6 to >0 pts

Poor

Discussion postings and responses are well below doctoral level writing expectations: • Posts contains multiple spelling, grammar, and/or punctuation deviations from Standard Academic English that affect clear communication. • Uses incorrect APA 7 format • Are discourteous and disrespectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.

 

 10 pts
Total Points: 100

 

image1.jpeg

"Place your order now for a similar assignment and have exceptional work written by our team of experts, guaranteeing you "A" results."

Order Solution Now