Interdisciplinary Plan Proposal

at
Categories
Tags

 

Create a 2-4 page plan proposal for an interprofessional team to collaborate and work toward driving improvements in the organizational issue you identified in the second assessment. The health care industry is always striving to improve patient outcomes and attain organizational goals. Nurses can play a critical role in achieving these goals; one way to encourage nurse participation in larger organizational efforts is to create a shared vision and team goals (Mulvale et al., 2016). Participation in interdisciplinary teams can also offer nurses opportunities to share their expertise and leadership skills, fostering a sense of ownership and collegiality. You are encouraged to complete the Budgeting for Nurses activity before you develop the plan proposal. The activity consists of seven questions that will allow you the opportunity to check your knowledge of budgeting basics and as well as the value of financial resource management. The information gained from completing this formative will promote success with the Interdisciplinary Plan Proposal. Completing this activity also demonstrates your engagement in the course, requires just a few minutes of your time, and is not graded. Demonstration of Proficiency o Competency 1: Explain strategies for managing human and financial resources to promote organizational health. ? Explain organizational resources, including a financial budget, needed for the plan to be a success and the impacts on those resources if nothing is done, related to the improvements sought by the plan. o Competency 2: Explain how interdisciplinary collaboration can be used to achieve desired patient and systems outcomes. ? Describe an objective and predictions for an evidence-based interdisciplinary plan to achieve a specific objective related to improving patient or organizational outcomes. ? Explain the collaboration needed by an interdisciplinary team to improve the likelihood of achieving the plan’s objective. Include best practices of interdisciplinary collaboration from the literature. o Competency 4: Explain how change management theories and leadership strategies can enable interdisciplinary teams to achieve specific organizational goals. ? Explain a change theory and a leadership strategy, supported by relevant evidence, that are most likely to help an interdisciplinary team succeed in collaborating and implementing, or creating buy-in for, the project plan. o Competency 5: Apply professional, scholarly, evidence-based communication strategies to impact patient, interdisciplinary team, and systems outcomes. ? Organize content so ideas flow logically with smooth transitions; contains few errors in grammar/punctuation, word choice, and spelling. ? Apply APA formatting to in-text citations and references, exhibiting nearly flawless adherence to APA format. Reference Mulvale, G., Embrett, M., & Shaghayegh, D. R. (2016). ‘Gearing up’ to improve interprofessional collaboration in primary care: A systematic review and conceptual framework. BMC Family Practice, 17. Professional Context This assessment will allow you to describe a plan proposal that includes an analysis of best practices of interprofessional collaboration, change theory, leadership strategies, and organizational resources with a f​‌‍‍‍‌‍‍‌‍‌‌‍‍‍‌‍‌‌‌‍​inancial budget that can be used to solve the problem identified through the interview you conducted in the prior assessment. Scenario Having reviewed the information gleaned from your professional interview and identified the issue, you will determine and present an objective for an interdisciplinary intervention to address the issue. Note: You will not be expected to implement the plan during this course. However, the plan should be evidence-based and realistic within the context of the issue and your interviewee’s organization. Instructions For this assessment, use the context of the organization where you conducted your interview to develop a viable plan for an interdisciplinary team to address the issue you identified. Define a specific patient or organizational outcome or objective based on the information gathered in your interview. The goal of this assessment is to clearly lay out the improvement objective for your planned interdisciplinary intervention of the issue you identified. Additionally, be sure to further build on the leadership, change, and collaboration research you completed in the previous assessment. Look for specific, real-world ways in which those strategies and best practices could be applied to encourage buy-in for the plan or facilitate the implementation of the plan for the best possible outcome. Using the TEMPLATE will help you stay organized and concise. As you complete each section of the template, make sure you apply APA format to in-text citations for the evidence and best practices that inform your plan, as well as the reference list at the end. Additionally, be sure that your plan addresses the following, which corresponds to the grading criteria in the scoring guide. Please study the scoring guide carefully so you understand what is needed for a distinguished score. o Describe an objective and predictions for an evidence-based interdisciplinary plan to achieve a specific goal related to improving patient or organizational outcomes. o Explain a change theory and a leadership strategy, supported by relevant evidence, that is most likely to help an interdisciplinary team succeed in collaborating and implementing, or creating buy-in for, the project plan. o Explain the collaboration needed by an interdisciplinary team to improve the likelihood of achieving the plan’s objective. Include best practices of interdisciplinary collaboration from the literature. o Explain organizational resources, including a financial budget, needed for the plan to succeed and the impacts on those resources if the improvements described in the plan are not made. o Communicate the interdisciplinary plan, with writing that is clear, logically organized, and professional, with correct grammar and spelling, using current APA style. Additional Requirements o Length of submission: Use the provided template. Remember that part of this assessment is to make the plan easy to understand and use, so it is critical that you are clear and concise. Most submissions will be 2 to 4 pages in length. Be sure to include a reference page at the end of the plan. o Number of references: Cite a minimum of 3 sources of scholarly or professional evidence that support your central ideas. Resources should be no more than 5 years old. o APA formatting: Make sure that in-text citations and reference list follow current APA st​‌‍‍‍‌‍‍‌‍‌‌‍‍‍‌‍‌‌‌‍​yle. •

Sample Solution

lost their right. This is further supported by “non-combatant immunity” (Frowe (2011), Page 151), which leads to the question of combatant qualification mentioned later in the essay. This is corroborated by the bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, ending the Second World War, where millions were intently killed, just to secure the aim of war. However, sometimes civilians are accidentally killed through wars to achieve their goal of peace and security. This is supported by Vittola, who implies proportionality again to justify action: ‘care must be taken where evil doesn’t outweigh the possible benefits (Begby et al (2006b), Page 325).’ This is further supported by Frowe who explains it is lawful to unintentionally kill, whenever the combatant has full knowledge of his actions and seeks to complete his aim, but it would come at a cost. However, this does not hide the fact the unintended still killed innocent people, showing immorality in their actions. Thus, it depends again on proportionality as Thomson argues (Frowe (2011), Page 141).
This leads to question of what qualifies to be a combatant, and whether it is lawful to kill each other as combatants. Combatants are people who are involved directly or indirectly with the war and it is lawful to kill ‘to shelter the innocent from harm…punish evildoers (Begby et al (2006b), Page 290).However, as mentioned above civilian cannot be harmed, showing combatants as the only legitimate targets, another condition of jus in bello, as ‘we may not use the sword against those who have not harmed us (Begby et al (2006b), Page 314).’ In addition, Frowe suggested combatants must be identified as combatants, to avoid the presence of guerrilla warfare which can end up in a higher death count, for example, the Vietnam War. Moreover, he argued they must be part of the army, bear arms and apply to the rules of jus in bello. (Frowe (2011), Page 101-3). This suggests Frowe seeks a fair, just war between two participants avoiding non-combatant deaths, but wouldn’t this lead to higher death rate for combatants, as both sides have relatively equal chance to win since both use similar tactics? Nevertheless, arguably Frowe will argue that combatant can lawfully kill each other, showing this is just, which is also supported by Vittola, who states: ‘it is lawful to draw the sword and use it against malefactors (Begby et al (2006b), Page 309).’
In addition, Vittola expresses the extent of military tactics used, but never reaches a conclusion whether it’s lawful or not to proceed these actions, as he constantly found a middle ground, where it can be lawful to do such things but never always (Begby et al (2006b), Page 326-31). This is supported by Frowe, who measures the legitimate tactics according to proportionality and military necessity. It depends on the magnitude of how much damage done to one another, in order to judge the actions after a war. For example, one cannot simply nuke the terrorist groups throughout the middle-east, because it is not only proportional, it will damage the whole population, an unintended consequence. More importantly, the soldiers must have the right intention in what they are going to achieve, sacrificing the costs to their actions. For example: if soldiers want to execute all prisoners of war, they must do it for the right intention and for a just cause, proportional to the harm done to them. This is supported by Vittola: ‘not always lawful to execute all combatants…we must take account… scale of the injury inflicted by the enemy.’ This is further supported by Frowe approach, which is a lot more moral than Vittola’s view but implies the same agendas: ‘can’t be punished simply for fighting.’ This means one cannot simply punish another because they have been a combatant. They must be treated as humanely as possible. However, the situation is escalated if killing them can lead to peace and security, within the interests of all parties.
Overall, jus in bello suggests in wars, harm can only be used against combatants, never against the innocent. But in the end, the aim is to establish peace and security within the commonwealth. As Vittola’s conclusion: ‘the pursuit of justice for which he fights and the defence of his homeland’ is what nations should be fighting for in wars (Begby et al (2006b), Page 332). Thus, although today’s world has developed, we can see not much different from the modernist accounts on warfare and the traditionists, giving another section of the theory of the just war. Nevertheless, we can still conclude that there cannot be one definitive theory of the just war theory because of its normativity.

This question has been answered.

Get Answer
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, Welcome to Compliant Papers.
Hi, how can I help?