Noteworthy Assignments
Paper for HCML 460; Reflections on Your Style as a Leader
Knowledge is power. I truly believe that this concept is applicable to each one of us, to grow in understanding and self-improvement. This can be done when find out what your strengths and weaknesses are; you can move forward and improve. Understanding various personal and conflict styles helps you understand how and why you do certain things based off your personality. It also may help you understand the things that you should not be doing. In addition to this, studying conflict and personal styles gives you the knowledge to understand others better as well. It helps with understanding other people’s viewpoints/opinions when presented, with helping to understand the reasoning behind their thinking, and how to better communicate with others.
After reviewing my personal styles and conflict styles through the inventories, the conclusion came to be that my style is recognized as the amiable. Also known as a feeler, this is someone who’s characterized by being supportive, respectful, willing, and dependable. From the Lead Personal Style packet, my dominate choice matched up almost exactly with the results of the feeler. The results were controlled, considerate, wanting to please, neighborly, and loyal (Velchuk, 2018) .My longest column was for column C, with eleven matches. For choice D I had six matches and had seven matches with B. I did predict that this would be the conclusion. But what surprised me was the information of how this match tends to be perceived as by others; pliable, dependent, and at times even awkward (Velchuk, 2018). In addition to this, it results in a need for personal security and acceptance. A few of those things I had noticed but not all of them. It opened my eyes to be more aware of how my attitude and personality might influence those around me.
When your eyes are open to this, it can benefit you through conflict as well. For my conflict handling profile, my result was that I am cooperative. If someone has a cooperating conflict profile, they say their opinion but also ask for other’s opinion as well. They collaborate in seeking additional information to benefit conversations and welcome differences. But with all of this can come fatigue and time loss. It might take a while to resolve a conflict because everyone must be included. That happens when the conversation is unplanned or there are hang ups over little issues.
I have personally experienced all these strengths, weaknesses, and characteristics in my current management position. Because I want to benefit others, I do grow to be overwhelmed at times. In complete honesty, it sometimes comes from a position of trying to please others. I want to be a great leader and liked by my team. But that is not always possible. Something that I would’ve done differently in those situations is to implement what I learned from this exercise. Because of the various types of employees, you need to try to work well and manage all of them. Therefore, what I will do is try to recognize the employees by their own type and approach them in that way.
Reference
Vchulek, D. (2018, September 13). HCML 460 Leadership in Healthcare Styles Matter. [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOF6Bhwsagc&feature=youtu.be
____________________________________________________________________
Research Paper for PHIL 365; Patient Confidentiality
An issue that I would like to write about is a conflict regarding a medical provider, not following hospital protocol. Jenna Peterson, a 20-year-old female, scheduled an appointment with her family practitioner. The visit was in regard to an interest in birth control pills. During the appointment, Dr. Grant, the family practitioner, discussed multiple birth contraceptives and after an examination, she prescribed Jenna six months’ worth of birth control pills. When Jenna was leaving, she requested the front office to not bill her mother’s insurance but rather bill Jenna and she would pay for the medical bill herself. She did not want her mother knowing the reason behind the visit. A few weeks later, Jenna’s mother came in for routine visit. When she came into the office, she asked the front desk employee about a recent unknown claim that her insurance received, around 2 weeks ago. Mrs. Peterson did not have an appointment or any medical services at that time, so she assumed that there was a mistake. At that time, Dr. Grant saw Mrs. Peterson, and greeted her. The doctor made some small talk and mentioned how beautiful Jenna had become! Mrs. Peterson was surprised and asked the doctor when she’s seen Jenna. Dr Grant said a few weeks ago and that when she realized she said too much. The mother kept questioning the doctor, who of course, did not expose any more information. But, it was too late. Jenna’s mother now knew what the insurance claim was for and ended up questioning Jenna, only to find out about the birth control pills. Both Jenna and her mother were angered by what Dr. Grant had done and Mrs. Peterson and her family all decided to stop visiting Dr. Grant and her practice. Jenna’s right to privacy was compromised. After leaving, Jenna also filed a formal HIPAA Privacy Violation Compliant against the practice and Doctor.
According to the Principle of Autonomy, patients have a right to choose their medical services and paths. The principle of autonomy states that every person is and should be in control of their own thoughts and they have the right to make their own choices, based on those own thoughts and actions (Munson and Lague, 2016). Applying the case of Jenna Peterson to the principle of autonomy, the doctor and the firm did not fulfill Jenna’s desire of keeping the autonomous decision the appointment, private. Jenna specifically asked that her personal information regarding the contraceptive pills should not be known by her mother. The firm sent a notice of a claim to her mother’s insurance and Dr. Grant also spoke about Jenna’s appointment to Mrs. Peterson which violated patient confidentiality.
Patient confidentiality is a very important concept to understand in healthcare. In the article “Navigating ethics of physician-patient confidentiality: a communication privacy management analysis,”, the Ashley Duggan, Mark J Dicorcia, and Sandra Petronio (2012) talk about the ethics behind physician-patient confidentiality. Physicians sometimes may communicate information that the patients give up in an incorrect manner. Therefore, a model was proposed to improve confidentiality between physicians and their patients. In patients and their information, there must be a balance of autonomy. There needs to be an understanding that some medical information must be shared for the benefit of their health. In order to even gain this information, the patients need to grant access which means that they take others into their confidence. In these encounters there are two privacy boundaries; own personal privacy boundaries and judgements about situations where personal disclosures were made by the patients. Physicians are the co-owners and guardians over this information and need to make decisions concerning the treatment plan, to what to share, and who else to tell about the patients’ confidential medical information. In addition to this, there are two concepts called privacy ownership and privacy control. Privacy ownership refers to the belief that private information belongs to the person it’s from and they own the right to control access to it. Privacy control is a system that regulates access to privacy boundaries regarding information considered personal. Because of this heavy burden, a confidentiality pledge advocates the way physicians and patients discuss this information. It is based off of a five-point model that asks who, what, where, when and how. Negotiating these five areas communicates an understanding of rights of ownership, which allows control over the information in the right scenarios, on the patient’s behalf.
Those five areas are crucial when a patient’s information is involved. I believe that those questions are required to be asked in patient and physician communication. An honest talk with those points would make it very clear what the patient wants specifically, regarding their information being shared. Jenna actually attempted to communicate that to the doctor and also the practice. The ‘who’ in this case would be not to tell Mrs. Peterson. ‘What’ would be that Jenna is wanting to and actually received the birth control pills. The ‘where’ would be at a doctor’s visit. Dr. Grant had been the family practitioner for Mrs. Peterson and her whole family for years so regular visits are a given. ‘When’ would be any conversation or appointment that the Peterson family has in that practice. And the ‘how’ would be through the insurance and just small talk. In this case, all of those five area lines were crossed.
This thought may cause some debate, in terms of whether or not this a valid and applicable principle for this case and therefore, it creates a compelling argument. The first key factor to consider is to Premise One. According to the Principle of Autonomy, if, when Jenna Peterson’s doctor did not keep patient’s information confidential it went against what the patient wanted, then it was morally wrong for the doctor to not keep private information confidential. The second factor would be Premise Two. When Jenna Peterson’s doctor did not keep private information confidential, it went against the patient’s autonomy. In conclusion, it was morally wrong for the doctor to not keep patient’s information confidential. This would be in the form of Module Tollens. As mentioned before, physicians are the co-owners and guardians over the personal and health information that the patients provide. In this case, Dr. Grant was the co-owner of the desire from Jenna, for birth-control. This information was meant to be kept private, as any other piece of information a patient provides to their family practitioner. Being a guardian, means being a protector. Dr Grant was the first to invalidate this statement. In addition to this, Dr. Grant’s practice terminated the right of being a guardian of patient information. They sent the claim to the incorrect patient. Although the claim was sent to a family member’s insurance, it still was a large mistake. Jenna’s hope, thought process, and understanding of privacy was violated because of an incident that occurred, exactly in the way that she requested that it not.
From a different perspective, Premise 2 is quite controversial. Did the information that was leaked actually cause more harm than good, according to the Principle of Nonmaleficence? Paternalism may come to play to this because Jenna is only 20 years old. According to Rochester Medical Center, the rational part of a person’s brain does not fully develop until the age of 25. The decision for birth control may seem irrational because Jenna’s brain still has 5 years to develop fully. That could actually be the reason why Jenna wanted this appointment to be a secret; because it might not have been the best decision. Also, although she is 20, there are many people over this legal adult age that do not choose the right decisions. Maturity levels vary greatly from person to person and the people who know the individual best may be better able to determine things for everyday activities. In this case, it should and would be Jenna’s mother.
This thought can be contradicted though. By observing her age, she is legally able to consent to medical treatment. According to “State Law”, in most states, 18 years of age is the age of majority which means that they are able to consent in the medical sphere. 18 years is the ‘adult’ age where it is pursued that one is able to make their own decisions. People at the age of 18 are able to vote and even file a lawsuit. Therefore, Jenna is legally able to make her autonomous decision of receiving birth control. From a different perspective, she is actually making a mature decision because she is practicing a form of safe sex. Jenna didn’t want to have a child as a surprise, which might have made her life more difficult because she was in school. In addition to this, you can also relate her to being mature, is that she is a 20-year-old college student, that is mostly away at college.
The issue between Jenna and the doctor could have been avoided. In the article “Patient-Physician Communication” by Wendy Levinson and Philip Pizzo (2011), the topic discussed is communication between patients and their physicians. Over the years, patients noted that their physicians are too busy to listen and also to care directly about them. The Institute of Medicine then popularized the term “patient centered care” which was the secret of the care of the patient. After this term, progress of this type of communication elevated. It was learned that effective communication with patients take time. That would be listening to understanding the patient instead of listening to respond. Another solution that could have happened was if Dr. Grant and the practice would have just listened closely to Jenna’s decision, this would not have happened. Jenna voiced her concern about her mother finding out to the doctor and specially enlisted instructions for the front desk to bill herself, and not Mrs. Peterson. They disregarded this wish. Dr. Grant could have easily just made a note to herself to not mention Jenna around Mrs. Peterson. With entire families going to one doctor, like in this case, especially for many years, precautions need to be taken.
Bibliography
Case Reveals How Easily Patient Confidentiality Can Be Breached. (n.d.). Retrieved January 31, 2019, from https://www.psicinsurance.com/
Levinson, W., & Pizzo, P. (2011). “Patient-Physician Communication.” JAMA, 305(17), 1802-1803. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2011.556.
Munson, Ronald and Ian Lague. Intervention and Reflection: Basic Issues in Medical Ethics, Loose leaf version, 10th Edition (Wadsworth). 2016
Petronio, S., Dicorcia, M. J., & Duggan, A. (2012). “Navigating ethics of physician-patient confidentiality: a communication privacy management analysis.” The Permanente Journal, 16(4), 41-5. https://doi.org/10.7812/TPP/12-042
State Legal Ages Laws. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://statelaws.findlaw.com/family-laws/legal-ages.html
Understanding the Teen Brain . (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/encyclopedia/content.aspx?ContentTypeID=1&ContentID=3051
Assignment for HCML 340; Human Resources Case Study
Employee engagement is a critical area of focus for organizational development. The definition of employee engagement is a measure of both the negative and positive attachments to an employee’s job, within the emotional sphere (Fried and Fottler, 2015). This measure is what enables and pushes the employee to want to learn and perform well at work. An example of this would be if an employee performs above and beyond their job description. This shows a high-level engagement. On the contrary, an employee that shows low engagement would be one performing below or at the acceptable standard which in this case, would those from the case study. The new director of pharmacy services noticed the employee engagement scores in the pharmacy department have been low for the past two years. This could be from a variety of reasons. For example, the job variety, task significance, autonomy, organizational support, rewards and recognition, and career development (Fried and Fottler, 2015). Therefore, she wanted to figure out a way to best improve staff engagement and morale.
Despite the low levels of engagement, there are always ways to improve them. It could be done with a plan through phases. Fried and Fottler (2015) organize a performance improvement consulting process in 7 phases. This process would best fit the director because the director doesn’t know the root cause of the low engagement scores. Therefore, the first improvement consulting phase would be entry. This would mean meeting with the director and discussing the issues and the desired results of the meeting. The second phase would be to create a contract between the director and me. This contract would enlist the desired results of the counseling, the roles and responsibilities, data collection methods, confidentiality, and also resource needs. The third phase would be data collection and diagnosis. This would essentially mean thinking and using tools and methods to collect the necessary employee engagement information. In this case, to measure employee engagement, I would use surveys that the employees would take monthly and quarterly to exemplify their emotional attachment to the job. In addition to this, there could be quarterly interviews for employees, where the employees could express their thoughts and opinions in regard to their job positions. The employees would tell me and the director, as well as management, why they aren’t as engaged or even satisfied from their work. Through this, it would show the root cause of the low employee engagement. Like I mentioned before, it could be because of their specific job task, the task significance, or even significance and recognition in themselves as an employee. The fourth phase is feedback and intervention. This phase would be feedback from all of the phases before, especially the third phase. The data discovered would be able to create an intervention to fix that newly established root cause diagnosis. The fifth step would be implementation. Based off the findings and the newly created plan that is perfectly aligned with the honest feedback from the employees, the new plan is refined. By refined I mean a clearer picture of the intervention options in the scope of what the issues are are, to who they pertain to, when the plan is implemented, and also how. Only then, the plan is implemented. The next step is evaluation. Because the plan was implemented, it needs to be measured to see if there is any difference in the employee’s engagement. This would allow me as the consultant and also the director to see the effectiveness of the implemented plan. The last phase of the seven-step process would be a contract renegotiation or exit. This step is focused on clarifying if I met the director’s needs based off the evaluation. If the plan worked, then there would be a closure to this process. If not, a renegotiation of contract must take place to further attempt to raise the employee engagement scores (Fried and Fottler, 2015).
Building rapport and credibility with the director would be extremely important. It is highly beneficial that the client trusts the consultant that they hire because the life of a company could be at stake. The way that I would reach this point with the director would be to try my best to fulfill her wishes with the employees. There needs to be specific goals when creating the contract for the coaching consultation. In this case, it would be to find out the root problems of engagement, to fix them, and raise the engagement level scores. As mentioned before, I would use the seven phases. Another way to build credibility is to ensure that when the data is being collected from all of the employees, that confidentiality is maintained. This is important in every organization. Through this, trust is built and developed. Also, if the employees felt as if their information was kept confidential, they will be more inclined to share the issues and problems they may be experiencing at work, which would lead to more clarifying data collection results. Lastly, I would show her a history of client success through statistics and/or graphs. That way she would feel at ease getting into a contract with me.
I believe that the easiest part of the coaching and consulting contract would be the reason behind need the coaching itself. At this stage, the director or client would know that they need help to some degree. Through observation, the client could see what the current stage is which would provide clearer answers of which changes they would want. The hardest issue might be the measurement of progress. I know personally, when employees are given a work survey, it might not be the most accurate. This could be from the employee’s part because they might not answer truthfully. But, it can also be from the surveyor’s part because the questions might not fit all of the categories and areas necessary.
To measure progress, quarterly surveys with the same questions can be given to the struggling department. The answers can be charted into graphs or percentages and then compared. If the employee engagement scores become higher, then the plan that the director and I would have made is working. If not, some changes would have to be made. In addition to this, the director and any managers could have observational reviews of the employees and they would chart their thoughts down. Those can be compared in the same quarterly report.
To close this meeting, I would review everything the director and I went over. I would highlight what I saw to be the need for coaching, the data collection methods we would take, possible intervention options, and also the timeframe of how long this would take. The suggested time frame would four quarters, which would be one year. Rome wasn’t built in a night and neither was any company. Lastly, I would leave the director all my contact information in case of any questions.
References
Fried, B. J., & Fottler, M. D. (2015). Human Resources in Healthcare: Managing for Success (4th ed.). Association of University Programs in Health Administration.
Follow My Blog
Get new content delivered directly to your inbox.
Victoria's Blog 