Lewin's Change Theory In Health Care

1645 Words4 Pages

Change is necessary in healthcare institutions to remain current with the new technologies and latest evidence. It is part of adaptive mechanisms to ensure that systems and processes are efficient and effective in delivering the desired outcomes. Change encourages progress and innovation. Regardless of frequent adjustments in healthcare, acceptance of such modifications does not come easy to some. Opposing factors and people who are resistant to change are ever present. With such barriers, attempts to implement change can only be partially effective or a total failure without well-thought-out schemes. Therefore, utilization of organizational change models offers foundations for designing strategies to help facilitate the change process.
Lewin’s …show more content…

Leadership presence and style are important dynamics in a change process, as these can be compelling factors in people’s buy-in to change. Unlike Lewin’s change theory, Kotter’s model is clear in its intention at each stage. Each phase explains what needs to be done to encourage the change process. For example, Kotter postulated the relevance of individual buy-in to change while Lewin asserted group motivation is sufficient to accomplish any transformations. Nonetheless, Lewin did not elucidate on how to inspire positive energy towards a change. In addition, his emphasis was on the overall achievement of the change rather than developing small goals to achieve and recognizing them. The change process can be longstanding, and momentum might diminish due to the perception of failure. Therefore, it is vital to keep the drive for change through celebration of and reinforcement of these small wins (Small et al., …show more content…

Creating a sense of urgency that a modification is necessary is the first step. Staff must understand the need for the change and how it individually affects them. Without this, they would not recognize its importance and fail to participate in the process. The urgent issue in the chosen microsystem is its number of falls the past fiscal year (N=21) and this current year (N=9). The goal is to have less than 12 falls, and most should be assisted in nature. Unfortunately, the current trajectory will seem to surpass the desired objective. The forming of a dedicated group of individuals is necessary to diffuse their drive and acceptance to change to other staff who are yet to be won over. Development of a unit-based fall team can be beneficial to perform a monthly fall prevalence. It is crucial for nursing leadership to lead this task force group and communicate the desired vision to the remaining staff. Bringing back the discussion to the staff level is important to engage them in this process, promote transparency, and manage their expectations. It is necessary that expectations are realistic, so individuals do not lose motivation during the change process. A key is to remove obstacles that will hinder any progress and make it static. For example, staffing and scheduling might become an issue. Flexibility in offering overtime and time-off will reassure the staff that

Open Document