Potter, Deshields, & Kuhrik (2010) investigated delegation practices between Registered Nurses (RNs) and Nursing Assistive Personnel (NAPs) in the oncology setting to understand how both groups viewed practices of delegation and their possible impact on outcomes. Delegation was defined as “the transfer of responsibility for the performance of a task from one individual to another while retaining accountability for the outcome” (Potter et al., 2010, p. 157). Registered nurses often delegate low-risk, repetitive, and necessary tasks Nursing Assistive Personnel (NAPs), who may be nurse aides, orderlies, nursing assistants or others (Potter et al., 2010). The primary goal of delegation is to increase efficiency, with the delegation of tasks doing
…show more content…
These activities can be delegated to NAPs, freeing up the RNs for more complex and demanding work. A problem arises, however, when lines of communication become confused and delegated tasks are not done or only completed at a lower level of quality. The primary goal of delegation, increased efficiency, is therefore not accomplished. In investigating this problem Potter et al. (2010) provided a valuable investigation of why RNs and NAPs may not communicate correctly and complete their tasks. The answers, elicited from interviews, appear to be simple ones. Differences in personality, levels of experience, and identity characteristics such as age, tend to throw the relationship between NAPs and RNs into conflictive territory. Tasks are incompletely communicated, or not communicated at all, outcomes suffer, then a blame game ensues. Potter et al. (2010)’s research is valuable in aiding managers and others to note the underlying dynamics of interactions, particularly the presentation and acceptance of information (goals), and tasks (each day) that must be completed for generating good outcomes. If outcomes are continuously suboptimal, instead of engaging in conflictive interactions, managers should consider that people do not have enough information to do their jobs competently, and that therefore some kind of superior communication strategies must be
These activities can be delegated to NAPs, freeing up the RNs for more complex and demanding work. A problem arises, however, when lines of communication become confused and delegated tasks are not done or only completed at a lower level of quality. The primary goal of delegation, increased efficiency, is therefore not accomplished. In investigating this problem Potter et al. (2010) provided a valuable investigation of why RNs and NAPs may not communicate correctly and complete their tasks. The answers, elicited from interviews, appear to be simple ones. Differences in personality, levels of experience, and identity characteristics such as age, tend to throw the relationship between NAPs and RNs into conflictive territory. Tasks are incompletely communicated, or not communicated at all, outcomes suffer, then a blame game ensues. Potter et al. (2010)’s research is valuable in aiding managers and others to note the underlying dynamics of interactions, particularly the presentation and acceptance of information (goals), and tasks (each day) that must be completed for generating good outcomes. If outcomes are continuously suboptimal, instead of engaging in conflictive interactions, managers should consider that people do not have enough information to do their jobs competently, and that therefore some kind of superior communication strategies must be