Moving On Up: Clinical Ladder Programs, are they really worth it?

Clinical Ladders are used by many institutions to recognize nurses as they progress from a novice level to that of expert. This article offers some pros and cons of participating in a clinical ladder program. Nurses General Nursing Article

  1. What is your opinion of Clinical Ladder Programs?

    • I love it. I am currently an active participant.
    • I do it for the money.
    • I dislike them. I am not an active participant.
    • Not offered at my facility, but I would participate if it was available.
    • I have more important things to do with my time.

31 members have participated

Clinical Ladder programs have been used for years to recognize nurses as they progress through levels of nursing practice starting at novice and culminating in an expert level. These ladders are often based on the five levels presented in Patricia Benner's Novice to Expert Theory. Here is a brief refresher of the five levels of Benner's Theory:

Novice Nurse

A new nurse or a nurse with no experience in the field they are entering. Both the new graduate and the nurse transitioning to a new field of practice (for example- Med-Surg to Oncology) would be considered a Novice. The Novice learns rules and applies those rules universally to all patients.

Advanced Beginner Nurse

The Advanced Beginner Nurse has gained practical experience and has learned how to conditionally apply the rules on a patient by patient basis in future clinical situations.

Competent Nurse

The competent nurse has become more efficient and organized having learned from prior experiences. This nurse is starting to see how their clinical actions impact long-term goals.

Proficient Nurse

The Proficient Nurse views their patient holistically and has learned through significant practice how to distinguish between significant aspects of the clinical picture and those that are not as significant.

Expert Nurse

The Expert Nurse relies on intuition gained from years of experience and can hone in on key aspects of the clinical picture in order to achieve the best outcome for the patient.

If your facility offers a Clinical Ladder Program, then you may wonder if it is worth the time and trouble to complete the requirements. I hope to help you to reach a decision by offering a brief look at a few of the pros and cons to climbing the Clinical Ladder.

PROS

Money

Most people can use more money and a bonus offered by a Clinical Ladder Program is certainly a nice incentive. Some programs offer one time bonuses while others offer an increase in pay.

Recognition

Achieving and maintaining a level on the Clinical Ladder is a way to both recognize your achievements and to distinguish yourself from others at your facility.

Networking

Working your way through the Clinical Ladder process provides the opportunity to interact with those you may not have routine contact with. Examples include those in administration, leadership, education, and peers practicing in different clinical areas within your facility.

Professional Development

If the money, recognition, and networking aspects of the Clinical Ladder are not important to you, then there is always the value of professional development. Participating in the Clinical Ladder program may very well lead to growth in your profession. One example would be a nurse of 20 years that never saw the importance of obtaining National Certification. Participation in the Clinical Ladder program may motivate the nurse to obtain certification to move up the Clinical Ladder.

CONS

Time and Effort

The Clinical Ladder program requires a significant amount of time and effort that may not pay off in the end. A 5% increase in pay offered as an incentive could be accomplished with a lot less headache by simply working a little bit of overtime. If you work 40 hours per week, then that would mean an additional 2 hours per week or one extra 8-hour shift per month. Add the overtime and possible incentives for working that extra shift and you are already ahead of the game.

Politics

Unfortunately, politics still plays a significant role in the nursing profession. Opportunities that allow an individual to advance up the Clinical Ladder may not be offered to nurses in an equitable manner.

Lack of Opportunity

For example, you may be able to acquire points for achievements such as being a preceptor, learning new skills, or cross-training to other areas. However, there may not be money in the budget to cross-train or learn new skills. In addition, if there are no new employees on your unit, then your chances of being a preceptor are pretty much non-existent.

Upfront Expenses

You may be required to pay out of your own pocket to achieve skills such as National Certification. If your organization only offers reimbursement upon successful attainment of the certification, then you will initially pay hundreds of dollars up front and then wait until you pass to get reimbursed.

The Rules Can Change

It can be extremely frustrating to put forth the time, effort, and possibly money into completing the Clinical Ladder Program only to find out later that the requirements have been changed. An example would be volunteering at the local blood drive for 8 hours each month thinking that it would count toward the community involvement requirement. Then right before you turn in your completed packet, the organization addends the requirements so that your participation at the local blood drive is no longer accepted toward that requirement.

It Can Disappear

Organizations are not obligated to continue the program. All of your time and effort are for naught if your organization pulls the plug on the clinical ladder.

What do you think? Are Clinical Ladder programs worth the effort or would you rather spend your time doing something else? Share your thoughts in the comments section and take the poll to let others know your opinion.

Specializes in OB-Gyn/Primary Care/Ambulatory Leadership.
This just looks like another way for the MBA's to quantify and nitpick a process that already happens in responsible hospitals that care about competent patient care and staff development.

Its just another attempt to turn love of the work into a tool of coercion and discrimination.

Wow, what a....interesting way to look at it. Nobody is being coerced into participating in a clinical ladder. Discrimination?

As a nurse who goes above and beyond, and has more invested in their workplace than just punching a time clock, don't you WANT recognition for your efforts?

Specializes in OB-Gyn/Primary Care/Ambulatory Leadership.

I don't think I've seen such a bunch of Debby Downers all in one place than I have in this thread. I'm seriously flummoxed by the attitudes displayed here. Until this thread, I have NEVER heard such resounding criticism for the idea of a clinical ladder program. As a bedside nurse, I've participated in the clinical ladder at 4 different facilities. As a member of management at my current facility, I'm assisting the CNO in trying to bring the clinical ladder program to our hospital.

For those nurses who are fully engaged in the improvement and betterment of their unit and their facility, and are interested in quality improvement and evidence-based practice, do you not WANT to receive recognition for your efforts? I'm trying to understand why providing recognition for a nurse's engagement in her workplace and in improving his/her practice and the unit where s/he works is a BAD thing.

I mean, for the nurses who are already doing those things, this is a means to provide recognition to those nurses. And for those who aren't doing those things - some of them may be encouraged to do so through such a program. And for those who just have no interest, they don't have to participate.

I don't think I've seen such a bunch of Debby Downers all in one place than I have in this thread. I'm seriously flummoxed by the attitudes displayed here.

In the spirit of "having a cup of coffee" -

I sincerely believe this is why there is perpetual misunderstanding between staff and administration. I have never felt more perplexed, insulted and just kind of in a state of disbelief, as if the workplace is some sort of alternate reality over the past several years. There have been multiple, multiple reinventions of wheels. You don't understand why people "don't want recognition," but if you really have no dog in this then you understand that part of the problem is that recognition is not the prevailing goal of CL programs. Recognition itself is a means to something else. Recognition (well, genuine appreciation, which IMO is much better than recognition) is not a new thing - - that's what I tried to describe above. CL programs have an inherent problem because their first motive isn't to genuinely appreciate anyone, but rather to use recognition as a means. We used to perceive plenty of genuine appreciation - why would it suprise you to hear that in some places people don't feel great about supplanting genuine appreciation with a "system of recognition?"

I get the idea that administration is legitimately lacking perspective as far as understanding how various initiatives affect staff. People don't decide to give CLs (or any other initiatives) a sideways glance because the idea came from adminstration, but because of a pattern of manipulation and half-truths and just generally disingenuous treatment.

We have all kind of accepted the fact that we are going to hear negative things from patients, and that when we do we should listen carefully because within those comments we might notice a pattern or recognize some way that we can improve patient satisfaction or patient care, or even patient outcomes. We will learn how patients perceive our actions. What is flummoxing (great word, by the way!) is that administration will not "hear" and seek to understand what the staff is saying in the same way that we want to listen to what patients are saying. It's quite mind-boggling! So, kindly, I say that it doesn't matter if you think people are Debbie Downers - do you know what I mean? There is a perspective here that is not "all in our heads" and not due to "bad attitudes." Admin keeps telling nurses that we're on the team and asking us to speak up and pretending to empower us to change things for the better. But there is always, always a pre-planned problem and a pre-planned solution to go with it, and the moment anyone even asks a question, it's all over. Anger. Affront. Indignation. Name-calling. Labeling. Doubling down on the same old rotten premise. A "cut off one's nose to spite one's face" situation if there ever was one!

I don't care nearly as much about recognition as I do genuine appreciation and being afforded dignity. Thanks for hearing me out.

Specializes in OB-Gyn/Primary Care/Ambulatory Leadership.
But there is always, always a pre-planned problem and a pre-planned solution to go with it, and the moment anyone even asks a question, it's all over.

That may be your reality, but that does not mean that it is a universal truth.

I've seen intellectual curiosity lead nurses - BEDSIDE nurses - to publish, to lead initiatives, to make policy changes. I see CLs as a way for administration to at least acknowledge the hard work these nurses are doing.

I still fail to see a downside to it. You don't want to participate? Great! No one's forcing you to do it. But for those nurses who are already doing all those things, at least this is a means to reap tangible reward for it.

Specializes in Wound care; CMSRN.
Wow, what a....interesting way to look at it. Nobody is being coerced into participating in a clinical ladder. Discrimination?

As a nurse who goes above and beyond, and has more invested in their workplace than just punching a time clock, don't you WANT recognition for your efforts?

Sure I want recognition, cash preferably, but more importantly I want a hand in ensuring and improving patient care and treatment of nurses which to me go hand in hand. Like somebody else said here, nurses aren't peas in a pod.

We may be Debby Downers but a.) the response to your proposal should tell you something that you are clearly either not expecting or are unwilling to hear, or possibly b.) the experience of many of those responding here doesn't support what you're outlining.

Formalized top down systems of evaluation tend to favor the needs of those who build them. I'm betting these are usually a reflection of the bottom line needs of the "business". Do you think that most "for profit" hospitals, or even non profit MBA/bean counter run hospitals, necessarily place a high priority on nurse job satisfaction? I kind of doubt it.

Do I think compensation needs to be performance based? Sure, but development progresses differently for every individual. It's not a cookie cutter process; and yes, I'm extremely suspicious of management motivations.

Specializes in Adult and pediatric emergency and critical care.
I don't think I've seen such a bunch of Debby Downers all in one place than I have in this thread. I'm seriously flummoxed by the attitudes displayed here. Until this thread, I have NEVER heard such resounding criticism for the idea of a clinical ladder program. As a bedside nurse, I've participated in the clinical ladder at 4 different facilities. As a member of management at my current facility, I'm assisting the CNO in trying to bring the clinical ladder program to our hospital.

For those nurses who are fully engaged in the improvement and betterment of their unit and their facility, and are interested in quality improvement and evidence-based practice, do you not WANT to receive recognition for your efforts? I'm trying to understand why providing recognition for a nurse's engagement in her workplace and in improving his/her practice and the unit where s/he works is a BAD thing.

I mean, for the nurses who are already doing those things, this is a means to provide recognition to those nurses. And for those who aren't doing those things - some of them may be encouraged to do so through such a program. And for those who just have no interest, they don't have to participate.

Maybe all of the "Debby Downers" are nurses who have had poor experiences with clinical ladder systems (and honestly administration in general), and apparently this is not a problem limited to a small area. This might be a source of some perspective.

Do you know what I want? I want safe staffing ratios, not sending people home the moment census drops by two patients. I want nurses to be adequately trained and have appropriate resources. I want nursing administration to actually back me up objectively when I have a disagreement with a medical provider. I want administration to actually hire competent staff, not the one with the best looking resume (and this goes for every department). I want to be treated as a person, not a means to an end.

I don't have experience with every system, but I have been affiliated with quite a few and nurses talk to each other. These problems are not isolated to small pockets or a few cranky nurses.

...

I still fail to see a downside to it. You don't want to participate? Great! No one's forcing you to do it. But for those nurses who are already doing all those things, at least this is a means to reap tangible reward for it.

And there is part of the problem. If you don't do A, B, C, D, E, F and G, you get nothing.

I had everything for the first level where I work, except I do not have my BSN yet.

Precept new grads, new hires, students. Yup.

Certifications required, yup.

Correct number of procedures done and documented. Yup.

On and on, I have it all, except again, no BSN. So what do I get? Nothing.

I will be eligible starting January (I graduate in December), but everything I have done so far, well, it does not count.

I have to start from scratch again. But I need to get it all done before March, because it can only be applied for quarterly when you become eligible, or in June, because that is the deadline for the next budget year. Every year it has to be done. So I would have to do it all. Twice. In 6 months.

If I miss one thing in the packet, I don't get the money for the entire year.

It has nothing to do with my actual job performance or patient care. It is a bunch of check boxes and tasks to be done. It is a ladder that every rung you climb up, it gets knocked down every year. Perpetual busy work.

Are there programs out there that work, maybe, but I have not seen one that makes it all worthwhile and actually makes a difference for me.

In the end it all comes down to cost, and what staff wants (staffing ratios, competent and appropriate ancillary staff, correct and functional equipment, etc) all cost money.

Specializes in orthopedic/trauma, Informatics, diabetes.

Well, I am just addressing the tone of your post that nurses that are involved in the clinical ladder process are just doing busy work and can't be great nurses. I work with a lot of great nurses, some are in the ladder program, some not. I just get frustrated with generalizations. I didn't think you were singling me out, but it sounds like you don't have much respect for the nurses that are involved.

I think everyone should do what they want. I like to be involved and I like it when others are involved to make our work environment better, that's all :)

Specializes in orthopedic/trauma, Informatics, diabetes.

We have opportunities 4 times a year to apply to the ladder. I am also finishing my MSN in informatics, so my project is finding ways to filter conditions so we can develop care redesign plans. My focus is using computer language to decrease the time needed to find a certain cohort of patients. The goal is to reduce LOS for specific populations that utilize a substantial multidisciplinary team (surgery, medicine, specialists, OT/PT, pharmacy, endo, etc)

That may be your reality, but that does not mean that it is a universal truth.

I've seen intellectual curiosity lead nurses - BEDSIDE nurses - to publish, to lead initiatives, to make policy changes. I see CLs as a way for administration to at least acknowledge the hard work these nurses are doing.

I still fail to see a downside to it. You don't want to participate? Great! No one's forcing you to do it. But for those nurses who are already doing all those things, at least this is a means to reap tangible reward for it.

klone -

I'm glad they make you feel good. I have my reasons for participating. I guess I'll leave it at that.

Yes, no one's reality is a universal truth with regard to this issue, and yes, no one is literally forcing anyone.

R Wolfe, thank you for this article!

As an RN employed at the same institution, on the same unit, for almost four full decades, I initially loved the clinical ladder concept. Over time, however, the sole encouragement that I received from my colleagues to advance was purely for the monetary gain. Eventually, it became clear that it was more of a competition for nursing units to attain more "trophies" to sport on the nurse manager's mantle. Today, the more "advanced" nurses are delegated unit responsibilities/chores in an atmosphere of extreme professional discontent. It is this dissatisfaction that has caused a very large portion of our staff to leave our unit and bedside nursing.

I have been content to remain at my current CN status. I, for one, do not need pay, recognition, nor awards to legitimize my practice. I have always been involved in my unit, contributed to improvements and give expert care to my patients; and they do notice. I feel a profound loss of the Art of Nursing. Though not considered an "expert" based on the Ladder standards, I am indeed an expert whose skills, wisdom and insights, like those of my retiring and discontented Baby Boomer contemporaries, will soon be extinct. A very simple question to consider is, what type of nurse and nursing care would you want for your child, your parent, your spouse, yourself?

The profession is on a high-speed train of robotics and data collection of ALL types. But data, no matter how "big", moves us further and further away from the individuals entrusted to our care. In fact, we too, as a profession are being pushed further and further away from being viewed by management as individuals [people]. Finances? Balanced budgets have always, always been a concern of medical institutions. No news there! We have become providers of tasks and gatherers of information and specimens, save for those of us who still feel we have a vital role to play. Sadly, the Ladder serves to lead us further and further from our roots.

Specializes in Nursing Professional Development.

My opinion:

They can be done well ... and they can be done badly. Each one has to be judged on its own merits and flaws.

A common flaw is that people are not clear about what they mean. If they are equated with expertise and excellence, then the standards of expertise and excellence must be clearly articulated. Is advancement a recognition of expert patient care? or of being a good employee? A person can be an expert direct patient care-giver, but a terrible employee -- and another employer can be a great employee, but a terrible patient care provider. etc. etc. etc. And sometimes, environmental conditions change and a clinical ladder program should change in response.