| Course | NR 670 Advanced Nursing Leadership Concluding Graduate Experience |
|---|---|
| Week | 1 |
| Paper type | Discussion post with two replies |
| Length | About 520 words |
| Format | Discussion post with APA 7 citations |
| School | Chamberlain University |
| Program | MSN, Nurse Executive |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for NR 670 Week 1
Week 1 Discussion: Initial Post
A Tuesday Staffing Huddle, Two Charge Nurses Who Disagreed About a Float and a Leadership Claim One Size Smaller Than the Occasion
Initial Post
The occasion. Tuesday 8 September 2026, 06:50, the staffing huddle on the 36-bed medical unit of a community hospital, where I work as assistant nurse manager. Present: the night charge nurse, the day charge nurse, the house supervisor on the phone and me. Seven people were in the room in total, counting two staff nurses who had come early.
The house supervisor asked our unit to float one nurse to the step-down unit, which was two short. The night charge nurse said we could spare one, since our census had dropped to 31. The day charge nurse said no: three of our patients were on insulin drips or high-flow oxygen, and two admissions were expected from the emergency department before 09:00. Both were right about their facts, and both had been charge nurses for years. Both were getting louder.
What I did: I asked the house supervisor to give us five minutes, asked each charge nurse what would have to hold for their answer to be safe, and wrote both lists on the whiteboard. The night charge nurse's list was short: "the two admissions arrive after 11:00." The day charge nurse's was "the high-flow patient stays with one nurse." We called the emergency department; one admission was coming at 07:30. We floated a nurse at 11:00 instead of 07:00, after the first admission settled, and the step-down unit managed the four hours with its float pool.
The claim, one size down. Not that I lead change, or even that I resolve conflict. That I can hold a decision open for five minutes while two people who disagree are both still talking, and make the facts each of them needs visible.
The other explanation. The disagreement may have cooled because the house supervisor was listening on the phone, or because the emergency department's answer settled it. A different leader saying nothing might have reached the same 11:00 float. I cannot rule that out from one Tuesday. What I can say is that the two lists on the whiteboard were mine to ask for, and that without them the decision would have been made on whoever spoke loudest rather than on the admission time.
Psychological safety in teams depends partly on leaders making it safe to disagree aloud, in front of the people who will decide (Edmondson, 1999); this occasion is a small instance, not proof that I create it.
Reply to Courtney
Courtney, you say the new rounding schedule worked "because you got buy-in." Could the drop in call lights have come from the lower census that month? What would you look at to tell the two apart?
Reply to Marcus
Marcus, you describe calming a family at the bedside. Was anyone else there who might have changed the tone, such as the physician who arrived halfway through? A rival reading would make your claim stronger, not weaker, if you can rule it out.
References
Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350-383. https://doi.org/10.2307/2666999
What the NR 670 Week 1 assignment asks for
Choose one occasion you can date, and describe the workplace only by unit type and rough size. Count who else was there, by role, since leadership claims made about rooms with other people in them need those people accounted for. Keep names out. Then write a single capability sentence that is deliberately smaller than the occasion behind it: not that you lead change, but something narrower that the occasion actually shows. Close with the move most drafts skip, a rival explanation for what happened that does not depend on you. In replies, supply the rival reading for a classmate's claim rather than praising it, and ask who else was present.
How the NR 670 Week 1 example is put together
The sample dates its occasion to 8 September 2026 at 06:50, a staffing huddle with the night and day charge nurses, the house supervisor on the phone, two early staff nurses and the writer. The supervisor asked for a float; one charge nurse said the census allowed it, the other cited drips, high-flow oxygen and expected admissions. The writer asked each for the condition their answer depended on, wrote both down and checked with the emergency department, leading to an 11:00 float. The claim is only that the writer can hold a decision open while both people keep talking. The rival reading is that the supervisor's presence or the emergency department's answer settled it. Two replies supply rival readings for classmates' claims, one about census and one about a physician's arrival.
NR 670 Week 1 rubric: what full points look like
Week 1 posts lose most when they claim large capabilities, such as leading transformation, from a single moment. Next is an occasion with no date or count of who was present, which makes the claim impossible to test. Many posts leave the other people out of the story, as if the writer acted alone. Names of colleagues or employers raise confidentiality concerns. Posts that never offer a rival explanation look unaware of how leadership claims are judged. Replies that congratulate a classmate on handling a situation well add nothing, since the discussion is graded on supplying rival readings. Posts that describe what the writer felt rather than what was said and decided also make the claim hard to judge.
Common NR 670 Week 1 mistakes, and how to avoid them
Choosing one small occasion, and claiming less than it might seem to show, runs against how most leadership writing is done. Working through a short draft, we can date your occasion, count who was present and write a capability sentence one size down from the event. We can also help you find a rival explanation and write replies that offer one for a classmate. A conversation about two or three possible occasions usually shows which one supports a modest, defensible claim. The occasion and the claim are yours.
Get a NR 670 Week 1 example written to your instructions
Send the exact assignment instructions or the rubric your section publishes, and a custom NR 670 example written to them comes back inside 24-48h, with the first one free. Say which week it is and whether your classroom uses a named capability set, since the shape of the post follows that set closely.
More NR 670 papers and MSN samples
- NR 670 Week 2: Competency Self-inventory
- NR 670 Week 3: Leadership Episode Analysis
- NR 670 Week 4: Evidence Portfolio Piece
- NR 670 Week 5: Conflict Decision Write-up
- NR 670 Week 6: Organizational Impact Analysis
- NR 670 Week 7: Development Plan
- NR 670 Week 8: Leadership Portfolio Presentation
- NR 632 Week 1: First Days in Figures
- NR 631 Week 1: Trouble and Sponsor Post
- NR 588AI Week 1: Delegating to Software Post
- NR 529 Week 1: Discussion on Refusing a Request
NR 670 Week 1 questions, answered
I hold no formal title. Is there anything to post about?
Yes, and posts from people without titles are often the stronger ones. Leadership evidence here means occasions where your choice altered what happened: a shift you rearranged at short notice, a complaint you took rather than passed along, a new colleague you quietly covered for. Title holders tend to write about the position instead of the conduct, and a position substantiates nothing on its own.
My example is small. Does scale matter here?
Scale matters far less than clarity about your own part. One conversation you handled badly and then repaired carries more weight than a committee you sat on for a year, because the first has a decision inside it that was visibly yours. Large settings usually dilute the evidence about a person rather than strengthening it.
Can the same occasion come back later in the course?
It usually should. Later weeks take one occasion apart in far more detail, and a first post is a reasonable place to test whether yours has enough inside it to carry that weight. What you cannot do is repeat the same reading of it, since each week puts a different question to the same material.
Where can I find a free NR 670 Week 1 sample paper?
The complete post on a staffing huddle disagreement and a modest leadership claim, with replies to Courtney and Marcus, is on this page.
Why does the NR 670 Week 1 post offer a rival explanation?
The disagreement may have settled because the supervisor was listening or the emergency department replied, and naming that makes the smaller claim more credible.