| Course | NR 670 Advanced Nursing Leadership Concluding Graduate Experience |
|---|---|
| Week | 6 |
| Paper type | Organizational impact analysis |
| Length | About 1,100 words, 5 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Chamberlain University |
| Program | MSN, Nurse Executive |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for NR 670 Week 6
Organizational Impact Analysis: Four Things on a Medical Unit That Are Different Now, My Share in Each and Whether Each Would Survive My Leaving on a Friday
Student Name
College of Nursing, Chamberlain University
NR 670: Advanced Nursing Leadership Concluding Graduate Experience
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Organizational Impact Analysis: Four Things on a Medical Unit That Are Different Now, My Share in Each and Whether Each Would Survive My Leaving on a Friday
Thing 1: The Admission Acceptance Checklist at the Night Charge Desk
What someone would see: a laminated one-page checklist at the charge desk and in the unit's policy binder, version 2, approved 4 September 2026.
My share: I drafted it and revised it with the night charge nurses; the manager approved it; the house supervisor added a line.
The Friday test: if I left on a Friday, would it still be used on Monday night? Probably yes. It is in the policy binder, the night charge nurses rewrote part of it, and two of them say the on-call step has brought a nurse in. It does not depend on me to remind anyone.
Thing 2: The Five-Minute Pause at the Morning Staffing Huddle
What someone would see: at the 06:50 huddle, when charge nurses disagree about a float or an assignment, someone asks both charge nurses to name the condition their answer depends on, and both answers go on the whiteboard.
My share: I started it on 8 September and have done it at most huddles since.
The Friday test: probably not. It is a habit I bring, not a step anyone else owns. The day charge nurse has used it twice when I was off, which is encouraging, but it is not written anywhere and depends on whoever runs the huddle.
Thing 3: The Holiday Rotation Clarification
What someone would see: one sentence added in October to the unit's scheduling guidelines, approved by the practice council, saying that swaps do not change the holiday rotation.
My share: I proposed the clarification after the holiday dispute and drafted the sentence; the council debated and approved it.
The Friday test: yes. It is written into guidelines the manager and council own.
Thing 4: A Night Resource Nurse Two Nights a Week
What someone would see: on Fridays and Saturdays, one experienced nurse on nights carries three patients instead of five and acts as a resource for admissions, rapid responses and new nurses.
My share: small. I gave the manager overtime and admission data for the summer, showing that Friday and Saturday nights had the most admissions after midnight. The manager made the case to the director and found the hours.
The Friday test: yes, as long as the budget holds. It is in the staffing plan, not dependent on me.
What Reverted
Two things I started have not lasted, and they belong in the analysis as much as the four that did. A weekly email summarizing falls on the unit, which I sent from March to June, stopped when I took on the schedule; nobody missed it enough to restart it. And a buddy system pairing new graduates with experienced nurses for their first three night shifts lasted two months, then lapsed when two experienced nurses left. Both depended on effort rather than on a place in the unit's routines.
Why the Reversions Matter
It would be easy to leave the falls email and the buddy system out, since they no longer exist. Including them is the point: they are the evidence that effort without a structure fades. The falls email took about an hour a week and was read by most staff while it ran; when it stopped, no one asked for it back, which suggests it was useful but not owned. A useful thing that nobody owns is exactly what the Friday test is designed to find. The buddy system helped two cohorts of new graduates and then depended on two people who left.
Reading Across the List
The changes that would survive my leaving share a feature: each is written into something the unit already uses, such as the policy binder, the scheduling guidelines or the staffing plan, and each has an owner other than me. The ones that would not survive, the huddle pause, the falls email and the buddy system, depend on a person. That pattern is what the list teaches: my impact lasts where I hand it to a structure and fades where I carry it myself. A large review tied relationship-focused leadership to stronger results for nurses and their workplaces (Cummings et al., 2018), and handing a change to a structure is one way that ownership becomes durable.
How the Friday Test Was Applied
For each change I asked two questions: is it written somewhere the unit already uses, and does someone other than me own it? A change needed both to pass. I checked the answers with the unit manager on 20 October, who agreed with every verdict except the night resource nurse, which the manager said was "at risk every budget cycle." I have kept it as surviving, with that caveat noted beside it.
What Others Would Name as My Impact
I asked the day charge nurse and one night charge nurse what they thought had changed because of me. Both named the checklist. Neither named the huddle pause, though the day charge nurse uses it. One said I had made it easier to disagree in front of the supervisor, which echoes research linking psychological safety to team learning (Edmondson, 1999). Staff engagement in shared governance has been associated with better nurse outcomes (Kutney-Lee et al., 2016), and the scheduling clarification went through the council for that reason.
What This Means for the Next Six Months
I will write the huddle pause into the huddle guidelines, with the day charge nurse as its owner and the manager's approval, and ask the new graduate educator to take on the buddy system as part of orientation rather than reviving it myself.
Sizing the Claim
It would be easy to present this list as a year of transformation, and it is not. None of these changes is large, and none was dramatic. Together they are what an assistant manager on one unit can reasonably change in a year. The night resource nurse is the most consequential, and my share of it was data, not decision. The manager made the case, the director approved the hours and the night staff made the role work. If the analysis credited me with the resource nurse, it would fail its own test of honest sizing.
References
Cummings, G. G., Tate, K., Lee, S., Wong, C. A., Paananen, T., Micaroni, S. P. M., & Chatterjee, G. E. (2018). Leadership styles and outcome patterns for the nursing workforce and work environment: A systematic review. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 85, 19-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2018.04.016
Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350-383. https://doi.org/10.2307/2666999
Kutney-Lee, A., Germack, H., Hatfield, L., Kelly, S., Maguire, P., Dierkes, A., Del Guidice, M., & Aiken, L. H. (2016). Nurse engagement in shared governance and patient and nurse outcomes. Journal of Nursing Administration, 46(11), 605-612. https://doi.org/10.1097/NNA.0000000000000412
NR 670 Week 6 instructions, in plain terms
Set out three or four things at the site that are different, each concrete enough that somebody could go and look: a step added to a routine, a form with a new field, a meeting that now happens, a colleague appointed. Against each, size your own part without inflation. Then apply the test the week turns on: would the thing still be happening if you left on a Friday and never came back? Explain how you applied the test and who checked it. Include what reverted, since things that stopped are evidence too. Close by reading across the list for what the surviving changes share, and say what you will do about the ones that depend on you.
How the NR 670 Week 6 example is put together
The sample's four changes are a checklist in the policy binder, a five-minute pause at the 06:50 huddle, a council-approved scheduling sentence and a Friday and Saturday night resource nurse. The writer drafted the checklist and sentence, started the pause and supplied data for the resource nurse, which the manager made the case for. The checklist, sentence and resource nurse pass the Friday test; the pause does not. A weekly falls email and a new graduate buddy system have stopped. The manager checked the verdicts and flagged the resource nurse as at risk each budget cycle. The pattern is that structures with owners survive, and the writer will hand the pause and buddy system to owners. Colleagues' views of the writer's impact are recorded, naming the checklist but not the pause.
NR 670 Week 6 rubric: what full points look like
Impact analyses lose most when they list activities rather than changes someone could go and see. Next is a share of credit inflated beyond what the writer did, especially for changes others made the case for. Many analyses never test whether a change would survive the writer's departure, which is the point of the week. Reversions are usually left out, though they show what does not last. Analyses that list changes without reading across them miss the finding. Graders also notice when the writer claims outcomes, such as fewer falls, that no one has measured. Analyses that never record what colleagues think changed also miss an independent check on the writer's view. Graders value that outside perspective.
Common NR 670 Week 6 mistakes, and how to avoid them
Testing your own impact honestly, including what has already stopped, is uncomfortable but revealing. Working from your list of changes, we can describe each concretely, size your share fairly and apply the Friday test with someone checking the verdicts. We can also help you include reversions and read across the list for a pattern. Asking colleagues what they think changed because of you often adds an item you did not expect. The analysis and its verdicts are yours. Including colleagues' views of what changed is part of that help too.
Get a NR 670 Week 6 example written to your instructions
Send the assignment instructions and the rubric rows your classroom lists, and a custom NR 670 example arrives inside 24-48h, the first one free. It helps to say how long ago your work at the site finished, because elapsed time changes what an analysis of this kind can honestly claim.
More NR 670 papers and MSN samples
- NR 670 Week 1: Leadership Occasion Post
- 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
- NR 670 Week 7: Development Plan
- NR 670 Week 8: Leadership Portfolio Presentation
- NR 632 Week 6: Barrier Analysis
- NR 631 Week 6: Approval Map
- NR 588AI Week 6: Override Policy Draft
- NR 529 Week 6: Incident Follow-Up Memo
NR 670 Week 6 questions, answered
Does this week want the project's numbers?
Only where a number carries a claim about your part in it. A measure that moved belongs to the work, and this analysis belongs to the person who moved it, so a figure appears in a line while the argument about contribution takes the paragraph. Once the numbers are running the document, it has quietly become a different assignment.
What if nothing at the site survived?
Then that is the analysis, and it can be a strong one. Write what existed while you were there, when each piece went, and what you now think each was resting on. A clear account of a change that did not hold shows more judgment than a list of improvements nobody is able to verify.
Can something count if it appeared after I left?
Yes, with the route stated. Work often lands late, and a practice adopted six months after you finished is legitimate evidence where you can show how it traveled: the document you left behind, the person who picked it up, the decision that followed. Without that route it is a coincidence you happen to like.
Where can I find a free NR 670 Week 6 sample paper?
Here you will find the complete organizational impact analysis, with four changes, two reversions and the Friday test.
What does the Friday test in the NR 670 Week 6 analysis ask?
Whether each change would still be happening if the writer left on a Friday and never returned, which only changes owned by a structure pass.