Other Titles

Impacting the Work Environment: From Bedside to Academia

Abstract

Session presented on Saturday, March 18, 2017: ABSTRACT: Impact of Meaningful Recognition on Nurses' Work Environment in ICU: A Comparative of Nurse Leaders' and Staff Nurses' Perception. Purpose: Meaningful Recognition (MR) for job performance, one of the six essential standards of a Healthy Work Environment (HWE), is central to nurses' satisfaction and retention, patient satisfaction and outcomes, and organizational outcomes (AACN, 2005). However, little evidence exists to guide clinical practices related to MR strategies that are most valued by clinical nurses. As a result, nurse managers and other leaders often provide recognition based on assumptions, traditions, and previous experiences, which may or may not be meaningful to their nursing staff members. The purpose of this project was to explore the perception of MR among staff nurses and nurse leaders, compare these perceptions, and identify innovative methods for recognizing nurse's contributions in ways that are valued by the individual, and make recommendations for implementing these methods to the Organizations' Nursing Practice Council. Design: This DNP project used mixed method approach to explore the perception of MR among a convenience sample of nurse leaders and staff nurses working in the Intensive Care Units (ICU) of a large academic medical center, utilizing a mixed method approach. Twenty six nurses participated in seven focus group interview (FGI) sessions that were grouped by position, to obtain a cross sectional perspective. Ninety-five nurses participated in the Healthy Work Environment (HWE) survey and Recognition surveys administered via Qualtrics software. Results: Thematic analysis of the focus group discussion yielded eight themes: what is MR; when to give MR, ways to give MR, who should give MR, who should receive MR, benefits of MR and barriers in providing MR. A lack of awareness about the concept of MR and unavailability of best practices to provide MR were the major reasons cited by staff nurses and nurse leaders for not providing MR. In addition, limited resources, institutional policies and the size and diversity of the nursing workforce were also barriers to providing MR to nurses. Survey results indicated that critical care staff nurses' perception of the current work environment and MR was 'good' based on the AACN's scoring guidelines for HWE survey. The results of the Recognition survey was similar to the focus group discussion theme 'ways to give MR', which confirmed that salary commensurate to performance scheduling flexibility, opportunities for growth, private verbal feedback and written and public recognition were the most meaningful methods of recognition. Conclusion: The standard of MR should be given equal priority along with other five HWE standards. Nursing leadership needs to focus on developing strategies to provide MR in a consistent and systematic manner, so that every nurse will reap the benefits of MR. The art and science of providing MR should be added to leadership development programs and included as an essential competency for nurse leaders. Learning Objectives: The learner will be able to identify the eight themes related to MR; when to give MR, ways to give MR, who should give MR, who should receive MR, benefits of MR and barriers in providing MR. The learner will be able to identify innovative methods for recognizing nurse's contributions in ways that are valued by the individual.

Author Details

Usha Koshy Cherian, RN, CCRN, NEA-BC

Sigma Membership

Beta Nu

Type

Presentation

Format Type

Text-based Document

Study Design/Type

N/A

Research Approach

N/A

Keywords:

Critical Care Nursing, Meaningful Recognition, Healthy Work Environment

Conference Name

Creating Healthy Work Environments 2017

Conference Host

Sigma Theta Tau International

Conference Location

Indianapolis, Indiana, USA

Conference Year

2017

Rights Holder

All rights reserved by the author(s) and/or publisher(s) listed in this item record unless relinquished in whole or part by a rights notation or a Creative Commons License present in this item record.

All permission requests should be directed accordingly and not to the Sigma Repository.

All submitting authors or publishers have affirmed that when using material in their work where they do not own copyright, they have obtained permission of the copyright holder prior to submission and the rights holder has been acknowledged as necessary.

Review Type

Abstract Review Only: Reviewed by Event Host

Acquisition

Proxy-submission

Additional Files

download (355 kB)

Share

COinS
 

Impact of Meaningful Recognition on Nurses' Environment: Comparative Exploration of Leaders' and Staff Nurses' Perception

Indianapolis, Indiana, USA

Session presented on Saturday, March 18, 2017: ABSTRACT: Impact of Meaningful Recognition on Nurses' Work Environment in ICU: A Comparative of Nurse Leaders' and Staff Nurses' Perception. Purpose: Meaningful Recognition (MR) for job performance, one of the six essential standards of a Healthy Work Environment (HWE), is central to nurses' satisfaction and retention, patient satisfaction and outcomes, and organizational outcomes (AACN, 2005). However, little evidence exists to guide clinical practices related to MR strategies that are most valued by clinical nurses. As a result, nurse managers and other leaders often provide recognition based on assumptions, traditions, and previous experiences, which may or may not be meaningful to their nursing staff members. The purpose of this project was to explore the perception of MR among staff nurses and nurse leaders, compare these perceptions, and identify innovative methods for recognizing nurse's contributions in ways that are valued by the individual, and make recommendations for implementing these methods to the Organizations' Nursing Practice Council. Design: This DNP project used mixed method approach to explore the perception of MR among a convenience sample of nurse leaders and staff nurses working in the Intensive Care Units (ICU) of a large academic medical center, utilizing a mixed method approach. Twenty six nurses participated in seven focus group interview (FGI) sessions that were grouped by position, to obtain a cross sectional perspective. Ninety-five nurses participated in the Healthy Work Environment (HWE) survey and Recognition surveys administered via Qualtrics software. Results: Thematic analysis of the focus group discussion yielded eight themes: what is MR; when to give MR, ways to give MR, who should give MR, who should receive MR, benefits of MR and barriers in providing MR. A lack of awareness about the concept of MR and unavailability of best practices to provide MR were the major reasons cited by staff nurses and nurse leaders for not providing MR. In addition, limited resources, institutional policies and the size and diversity of the nursing workforce were also barriers to providing MR to nurses. Survey results indicated that critical care staff nurses' perception of the current work environment and MR was 'good' based on the AACN's scoring guidelines for HWE survey. The results of the Recognition survey was similar to the focus group discussion theme 'ways to give MR', which confirmed that salary commensurate to performance scheduling flexibility, opportunities for growth, private verbal feedback and written and public recognition were the most meaningful methods of recognition. Conclusion: The standard of MR should be given equal priority along with other five HWE standards. Nursing leadership needs to focus on developing strategies to provide MR in a consistent and systematic manner, so that every nurse will reap the benefits of MR. The art and science of providing MR should be added to leadership development programs and included as an essential competency for nurse leaders. Learning Objectives: The learner will be able to identify the eight themes related to MR; when to give MR, ways to give MR, who should give MR, who should receive MR, benefits of MR and barriers in providing MR. The learner will be able to identify innovative methods for recognizing nurse's contributions in ways that are valued by the individual.