Decisional Involvement

Abstract

Enhancing nurse involvement in decision-making is a starting point in addressing the nursing shortage, recruitment, and retention. The purpose of this descriptive comparative secondary data analysis was to describe the level of registered nurses' actual and preferred decisional involvement (DI) in two studies carried out during 2004 and 2010 and to describe the difference in the levels of actual and preferred DI between the 2004 study (N = 290) and the 2010 (N = 111) study in a Midwestern medical center after a new shared governance structure was implemented. In the 2004 and 2010 studies, there were statistically significant differences between actual and preferred levels of DI. A statistically significant decrease in means occurred in actual and preferred DI in 2010 as compared with that in 2004. A concerted effort must be made by nursing leaders to enhance DI, offer adequate resources, promote learning and growth, and recognize nursing contributions within a shared governance.

Factorial Validity of the Decisional Involvement Scale as a Measure of Content and Context of Nursing Practice

“…Using two different samples, Havens andVasey (2003, 2005) reported internal consistency reliability estimates of .79 and .70 for the Unit Staffing Subscale (DIS 1), .82 and .82 for the Quality of Professional Staff Practice Subscale (DIS 2), .89 and .90 for the Professional Recruitment Subscale (DIS 3), .84 and .86 for the Unit Governance/Leadership Subscale (DIS 4), .88 and .90 for the Quality of Support Staff Practice Subscale (DIS 5), and .72 and .70 for the Clinical Liaison Subscale (DIS 6). In other studies, DIS internal consistency reliability estimates ranged from .61 for the Unit Governance/Leadership Subscale to .87 for the remaining subscales (Ahmed & Safadi, 2013;Bina et al, 2013;Havens, Warshawski, & Vasey, 2013;Houston et al, 2012;Jaafarpour & Khani, 2011;Liu, Hsu, & Chen, 2015;Scherb, Specht, Loes, & Reed, 2011;Ugur, Scherb, & Specht, 2015).…”

“…Across studies, staff nurses consistently described their level of preferred decisional involvement as significantly higher than the level of decisional involvement they actually experienced. Typically, staff nurses described shared decisional involvement as their preference but identified administrators or managers as those who actually were involved in making most decisions (Ahmed & Safadi, 2013;Bina et al, 2013;Liu et al, 2015;Jaafarpour & Khani, 2011;Mangold et al, 2006;Scherb et al, 2011).…”

An Exploration of Factors Associated With Nurses' Perceptions of Decisional Involvement

“…21 Assessment of decisional dissonance or the difference between how nurses rate their actual and preferred levels of decision-making is also useful to gauge how effective an organization is in closing the gap and enacting measures to improve nurses' comfort and desire with shared leadership. 5,[22][23][24] Nurse Characteristics Associated With Perceived DI Evidence supports the importance of shared leadership in improving the work environment (eg, staff satisfaction, retention). It is important to further understand the factors that influence DI in nursing practice.…”

“…Bina et al 22 conducted a secondary analysis of factors associated with actual and preferred DI to examine changes in DI after a shared governance structure was implemented. However, both actual and preferred DI decreased significantly (t 110 = −13.61, P < .001) after the implementation of shared governance.…”

An Empirical Assessment of Decision-Making Style (DMS) of Professional Institutions in Public sector: A Comparative Study on Healthcare and Agricultural Administrators of India

“…However, such institutes require administrators, who would be able to demonstrate effective and optimum level of decisionmaking abilities to analyze, prioritize, and interpret available information to deliver timely and efficient decisions (Skyrme, 2002). In fact, March & Simon, 1958;and Cyert & March, 1963, visualized the organizations as decision-making arenas, where administrators are required to make choices in many situations, with devastating variety of concerns, conflict of interests, complications, and challenges that require solid and consistent decision-making (Bina et al, 2014). Decision-making has been defined as a process of deliberately choosing an option from two or more alternatives in a proactive manner appropriate to the demands of the situation, under conditions of uncertainty, the state of being in flux between ends, and the symbolic logic involved with a non-linear situation with blurred options and outcomes in order to reach a specific objective with least amount of risk (Kreitner, 2008, p.206;Cervone, 2005;Scot & Bruce, 1995).…”