Shared GoveranceRegister Today!
- by Ruffles 1 Feb 10, '12What do you think about Shared Goverance in hospital settings? Has anyone attempted to try Shared Goverance at their hosptial? Does it work or is it just a way to keep nurses from forming unions?
- 4,977 Views
- Feb 10, '12 by HouTxOur hospitals use a shared governance model. The various councils are responsible for a number of things - vary somewhat according to the facility. Small facilities may have a multi-purpose council and the larger ones would have one council for each major function (clinical practice, research, staffing, training & development, quality, community outreach, etc.). New council members may have to complete some basic education to get up to speed so they know all the P&P, rules, regulations, etc. for their functional area. Organizational specialists (e.g., HR, Quality, Educators) serve as facilitators.
Nurses are selected by their peers to serve on councils. Some of the councils are required to have representative membership from all levels - RN, LVN, CNA. Potential members have to meet certain criteria for eligibility, but seniority & tenure are usually not considered - so this is very different from union power structures. Council activity is all 'on the clock' and schedules are adjusted to members can participate. There are always some Negative Nelly's in any group - but for the most part, our staff nurses really like shared governance (based on our survey data).
- Feb 10, '12 by pattyslatteryQuote from Ruffles 1What we've found at our hospital, is at the forefront are the overachievers, the Master's program students, those nurses who are really excited about it. They get a few nurses to agree to be on the councils, and there's pretty much the end of it. I would guess that floor nurses have enough to do without adding more work to their week, no matter if it's on the clock. The meetings would be both during their work day and on days off. Our nurses went to a few meetings and fizzled out. Our Master's overachiever became disillusioned as well, telling me that nurses would just come to her with every complaint under the sun, expecting her to fix everything.What do you think about Shared Goverance in hospital settings? Has anyone attempted to try Shared Goverance at their hosptial? Does it work or is it just a way to keep nurses from forming unions?
To me, shared governance seems to be the flavor of the day. The current administrative buzz word. Floor nurses don't have a lot of patience for things like this.
ps Our hospital doesn't have a union. Odd you would say that, and that we would be hearing so much about shared governance.Last edit by pattyslattery on Feb 10, '12 : Reason: Added stuff
- Feb 10, '12 by canigraduateIn the two hospitals I have worked at, it has been a good thing. The nurses have been invested in their workplace and actually attend the meetings. They bring their complaints and ideas for improvement, we try to work out practical solutions, and then we take it to management. So far, there have been several changes made as a result. Some things that have been brought up aren't fixable or actionable, but more often than not, something is done.
It depends on the unit culture, I think. If you have a lot of divas that just want everything to be perfect but don't want to do anything to make it happen, then the committee won't work. If you have just 4 or 5 people on the unit that care enough to liaise between the floor nurses and management, then it can be a good thing.
- Feb 10, '12 by Ruffles 1We have just started Shared Goverance. I have not seen much change. The management has asked for our opinons on how to change some things that are a concern to accreditation. Scores on surveys etc. We are trying to follow best practices for our patients. We are reviewing some of the hospital polices on medications, visiting hours and working on fall precautions. I just wondered if others have actually seen changes in the hospital settings at the bedside. We as nurses have always had control at the bedside. Is Shared Goverance going to make a difference?
- Feb 10, '12 by Esme12It all depends on the /administrations commitment.....you mention preventing a union.....Well, if things have deteriorated to that consideration I wouldn't count on too much management changing things too much. If this is a stop gap measure to appease nurses. It will be very difficult to have it be effective because it requires administrative participation and willingness for change....not just a stop gap measure to appease and quiet an unruly, dissatisfied staff. I wish you luck.
- Feb 10, '12 by DixieRedHeadShared governance is the biggest joke ever perpetrated on a group of people.
Try, just try to get anything done that involves spending of money, increased staffing, or greater freedom for the staff. Management is management where ever you go.
They are not going to spend a dime of their personal bonus to make thing safer for the patient or easier for the staff.
- Feb 10, '12 by CCRNDivaEsme12, I totally agree. That is the current situation where I work. It is "shared governance" in name only, another stop-gap measure to appease nurses. You know, "look we truly value our nurses so while we've cut your pay, resources and staffing, we really want have your input to improve our hospital." In reality, administration has no desire to change and the shared governance committee does not have any power to produce such change. We've had several nurses leave after participating because they tired of sitting on another council that did not want to tackle the real issues affecting nursing and patient care.