Synopsis
Synopsis
Both pre and post facilitation were particularly essential as through them, four salient points that informed my current understanding regarding toxic organizations emerged. The four salient points represents the manner in which a nurse in a toxic environment ought to think. The first salient point was noticing. This point was largely facilitated by application of the seven levels of corporate culture and ways of knowing on the two narratives. Foremost, based on the survival consciousness, it is worthwhile to assert that the toxic organization is characterized by an autocratic, uncaring and fear driven culture (Chinn& Kramer, 2011). This essentially evident in both narratives where an aspect of dysfunctional behavior has been depicted. In the first narrative, dysfunctional behavior has been depicted in form of vicious gossip and arrogance in the workplace. In the second narrative, dysfunctional behavior has also been depicted in form of intimidation arising out of other people’s attitudes and behaviors.Inferring from this, the assertion that dysfunctional behavior is characterized by such things as gossip, arrogance and intimidation.
Toxic organizations require more than a leader who is able to apply different ways of knowing. On the basis of ethical knowing, the nurse in the narrative does not show rational leadership qualities and attributes. As opposed to ethical way of knowing, the nurses do not choose, justify nor judge actions based on the other nurse’s duty, rights and obligations. On the basis of emancipator way of knowing, rather than serving to notice and examine injustices to correct and make changes in their organizations, the nurses are rather encouraging it. Inferring from ways of knowing, toxic organization leadership does not employ the art of ways of knowing (Chinn& Kramer, 2011).
The second salient point was interpreting. On the basis of the seven levels of corporate culture, the events of the two narratives can be rated in the first level, which is survival consciousness. The dysfunctional behavior depicted by nurses evidences an autocratic, uncaring and fear driven culture. The nurses gossip, are arrogant and intimidate fellow employees and these are typical characteristics of uncaring and fear driven cultures usually evident in toxic organizations (Hauck, Winsett & Kuric, 2012).
This kind of a leadership is indeed detrimental to the patients care, unit and the organization in general. Foremost, an autocratic leadership exercises unwarranted orders and commands and often coarse the employees. As a result, the morale of the employees to do work reduces such that they become reluctant to perform their duties (RNAO, 2007). This leads to low quality of work. Therefore, autocratic leadership leads to low quality care to patients. When patients’ care deteriorates, it means that an organization is performing below par. This also means that efficiency and effectiveness are going down and as a result, the organization performs below the required standards-neither goals nor objectives are attained.
The fourth salient point is responding. To manage and restore order in a toxic organization, it requires a transformational leader who will be able to build strategies to minimize and eventually alleviate the dysfunctionalbehaviors among the employees and avoid extremes (Hauck, Winsett & Kuric, 2012).
The last salient point was reflecting. After following the three points towards transforming a toxic organization, the organization should be at level four, which is transformational consciousness. In level four of the seven levels of corporate culture, an organization is characterized by self-discovery, mission, vision, and awareness of values.In addition to this, the organization is beginning to pay focus on both diversity and equality. Indeed, following these steps leads to a situation where the dysfunctional behaviors are minimized as the toxic organization approaches towards achieving transformation nature of an organization.
While these points have been essential in facilitating the uncovering of dysfunctional behavior and towards minimizing them, research shows that there are possible other inclusions that should be incorporated to ensure that the process of transformation is efficient and delivers the most essential and effective results. On healthy work environment best practice guidelines,RNAO (2007) advocates that for a healthy work environment for nurses, it is necessary that a comprehensive conceptual model, which guides the development, implementation, as well as, evaluation of a systematic approach to facilitate a work environment fornurses. According to the model, the functioning of a nurse is not only mediated but also influenced by interactions between individual nurses and the nursing environment. Therefore, interventions to promote an exemplary health work environment ought to focus at multiple levels and components of the system. Inferring from this research, transforming a toxic organization requires a comprehensive conceptual model to deliver the best and effective outcomes (Chinn & Kramer, 2011).
Arriving at strategies
The process of transforming a toxic organization is a gradual process. Indeed, the short-term goal of such a change should be mitigation of dysfunctional behavior, which will eventually result to the mid-term goal that is, elimination of dysfunctional behavior. Among the most essential initial steps of mitigating the behavior is acknowledging and applying the principles of minimizing dysfunctional behavior (Chinn & Kramer, 2011). Usually, there are ten principles, which are particularly vital to attaining a healthy work environment. While the principles mainly tend to focus on corporate level, it can be used on an individual employee to correct his or her behavior. These principles include:
Knowing thyself
Walking the talk
After identifying with the toxic organization, the leader should put words into actions. This helps deliver an environment where the employees have greater confidence, respect and trust for their organization. In addition to this, acting on words triggers innovative behaviors among employees thus setting a platform for minimizing dysfunctional behaviors (Chinn& Kramer, 2011).
Will to listen
Rather than dismissing employees, a leader must not only be ready but willing to listen, as well, despite the fact that the organization is a toxic one. Consequently, a safer and more trustable environment is set.
Valuing the truth of the whole
A good leader ought to be open-minded to all perspectives, point of view and suggestions from all employees without favoritism or judgments.
Empowering the employees
The employees ought to be allowed to participate in every perspective of the company including the decision making process and this gives them an equal opportunity to voice their feelings.
Building relationships on respect
According to Hauck, Winsett and Kuric (2012), respect for the workers of an organization is more of an expectation and it prevents any form of a behavior likely to disrupt the organization and present unsafe feelings to others.
Acting as an agent of transformation
The leader ought to encourage the workers to develop an aspect of self-reliance and also take charge not only on their jobs but in their careers (Chinn& Kramer, 2011). This principle advocates that the leaders should help the workers overcome work related issues and in turn, this prevents negative effects.
Screening job candidates for dysfunction
This principle states that job candidates ought to be carefully screened to depict stances of dysfunctional behavior and negative impacts before they are selected.
Expecting accountability
Through responsibility in their jobs, the employee usually becomes accountable and this contributes to the alleviation of dysfunctional behavior.
Rewarding value-adding behaviors
Rather than focusing on return on investment, the leader should concentrate on cost effectiveness, as well as, creating new rules, which lay the foundation for value based reward, in addition to, recognition program.
The third essential strategy concerns selecting the Level of Corporate Culture which the leader intends to take the organization to. Usually, there are seven levels of corporate culture. A transformational leader tends to focus on higher levels of corporate culture (Chinn & Kramer, 2011).
Transformation in yourself as leader
Based on literatures on nursing leaders, it is worthwhile to contend that I have a great potential to lead. In addition to this, based on my attribute, I can say that my style of leadership is transformational leadership. According to Leiper (2005), nurses and institutions must not entertain any physical or verbal aggression in their nursing institutions. Leiper (2005) further agrees that the nursing leaders should not only develop but also follow procedures in order to alleviate dysfunctional behavior in the organizations. RNAO (2007) indicates that in each and every role, nurses ought to demonstrate professional standards. This is an aspect of professionalism. In professionalism, nurses usually put their values and attributes pertaining to professionalism into action when providing care and collaborating with clients. Toxic organizations need to be installed with professionalism in order to minimize or even alleviate dysfunctional behavior. Preparing and leading a facilitation process was of particular essentiality as it depicted my transformational leadership attributes (RNAO, 2007). I was able to identify the pertinent characteristics of toxic organization application strategies necessary to eliminate dysfunctional behavior thus taking the organization to a higher level of corporate culture (Heather, 2006). In this, the toxic organization is transformed and is now capable of delivering the core outcomes.
Challenge Mix
While the facilitation took place, a significant range of challenges existed. One of the core challenges was time limit. The time for meeting as a group was very minimal. This issue was brought about by the fact that we all live distantly apart. Indeed, it took every member at least thirty minutes to reach to the place of meeting. We saw this as a challenge in meeting our objectives. Therefore, we had to come up with the most appropriate way to meet. We resorted to virtual meetings where Skype and Facebook was the main meeting media. This was indeed a worthwhile decision as our facilitation work took place effectively.
Another strategy is cultivating a culture of strong time management. If facilitating in a group, the group members can decide to abide to time requirements irrespective of the distance on is required to cover before arriving at the meeting place. Indeed, this is the best strategy as it will ensure commitment and create a sense of obligation on the part of team members.
References
Chinn, P. L. & Kramer, M. K. (2011).Integrated theory and knowledge development in nursing. St. Louis, MO: Mosby/Elsevier
Hauck, S., Winsett, R. P. &Kuric, J. (2012).Leadership facilitation strategies to establish evidence-based practicein an acute care hospital.Journal of Advanced Nursing 4(3), 1-10.
Heather, K. S. L.(2006). The Impact of Nursing Work Environments on Patient Safety Outcomes.The Journal Of Nursing Administration, 36(5), 259-267.
Leiper, J. (2005). Nurse Against Nurse: How to Stop Horizontal Violence. Nursing, 35(3), 45.
RNAO.(2007).Healthy Work Environments Best Practice Guidelines. Retrieved from http://rnao.ca/
