Communication style and role clarification in assistive personnel

¶ … communication style is being used by the following personnel. 1. Rashad attended the team meeting with all the rest. When the topic of role clarification for assistive personnel came up, he stated that he thought part of his role was to anticipate the needs of the patients for toileting and personal hygienic care. Robin, one of the staff RNs in their psychiatric care group home, raised her voice as she firmly stated, "You are only an aide. That is in the RN role. We don't expect you to think, just to do what we tell you to when we tell you." Rashad sat quietly without responding because he needed to keep his job but began his plan on how he'd make Robin pay for her statement. Maybe he wouldn't do anything without being told.

The psychiatric nurse was being aggressive. She was humiliating Rashad and belittling him. What she is doing in essence is detrimental for the health care environment since she is potentially demotivating him and breeding potential conflict. Rashad responded by being passive but planned to be passive -- aggressive in the future. The entire situation is destructive for the necessary harmony of a health care environment. 2. Pamela, one of the school nurses in a rural county, was following up on some vision and hearing testing done by one of the volunteers, Brigit. She was concerned about the accuracy of the work due to the way these readings compared to previous readings. Instead of discussing this with Brigite, she decided to do it all herself and retest everyone.

This school nurse was being nonassertive.She was also demonstrating distrust of her colleagues. Instead of openly discussing her assumptions with them and, in a non-threatening way, probing for feedback, she acted on her own volition without informing her peers / subordinates of her intention.

This, too, is potentially destructive for the well-being of the health care environment since it may seed dissension as well as introduce errors and miscommunication (or non-communication) in the workplace environment. 3. Rosa managed the ambulatory care surgical center for a large health-care conglomerate. Mabel, one of the surgical technicians, told her that she would not consider scrubbing in any orthopedic cases. Her rationale was that they were too physically stressful. When Rosa mentioned that, although she wanted the staff to work together as a team, with everyone using his or her strengths to bring the best care for the patients, and that being involved in orthopedic cases was a part of Mabel's job description, Mabel told her menacingly that she was the granddaughter of the chairman of the board and that she'd "get Rosa's head on a platter.." Mabel was aggressive. She, actually, is quite a snob and seems to be a detrimental presence as part of a team. Unwilling to become involved in menial labor or in cases that did not suit her and referring to her connections as excuse, Mable must be quite a difficult person to work with. Her boss, on the other hand, was being assertive and approached the situation in a skilled manner. She pointed out reason why Mable was needed and added that this was part of Mable's job description.

If you could do this over again, how could you improve the communication? How was communicating effectively important in the health care profession and to the outcome of this interaction?

In the first case, if I were Robin I would calmly tell rashad the difference between the RN role and the tasks that Rashad has in mind. I would as clearly, calmly, and patiently inform him of the expectations that the hospital has of his task. I would do this in a humorous, sympathetic manner so that he would not be embarrassed. At the same time, I would keep this short so as not to frustrate and tire the others who are attendant, too, at the meeting. I may add that would Rashhad have any other difficulties he should feel free in consulting em at a later time.

Were I Rashad, this would be a more difficult situation. I would, justifiably, feel hurt. I may discuss my hurt with Robin, but given her personality this may likely only aggravate the matter. I may too discuss the matter with Robin's superior depending on who he/she is. Or I may simply attempt to defuse my hurt by discussing it with friends, or telling myself that Robin's reaction points to some singular character deficiency in herself and possibly some hurt that she is undergoing. I may, or may not, decide to bring it up with her at a later period or simply to ignore.

In the second case, being Pamela, I would take Brigitte aside and ask her, in non-intimidating manner, for descriptives of how she did the test. I would ask her for evidence of operations of procedure too and listening closley and emphatically make sure that I understood every detail in order to decide whether or not to redo the test.

I would probe too regarding details such as context or possible confounding elements to ascertain that I receive the whole picture. If Brigitte needs correcting, I would do so in a gentle sensitive manner focusing on specifics.

In the last case, I may leave the boss's response to Mable as is. If Mable still does not follow up with expectations I may point to consequences. The entire situation is tricky, particularly if Mable may feel justified in relying on her contacts for protection. On the other hand, the boss has to comply with ethical prescription and this means that all workers have to follow the same injunctions. She may have to accomplish further interactions with Mable in the presence of others, a s well as taking other preventative steps, if she indeed thinks that she may receive adverse consequence because of Mable's connections.

Communicating effectively is essential not only to the health profession but also to the outcome of each of these three scenarios.

In the first scenario, Robin was not only demeaning Rashad, thereby preventing him form asking the necessary questions that he needed to know for job improvement, but was also indirectly dissuading others from asking questions. At the same time, Robin was creating conflict and potentially demotivating her employee. She was also causing others to hate her hence seeding negativity in the health care environment.

An effective health-care environment demands peaceful and fraternal relationships as well as accord, support, and open communication between all elves of employees and workers. Robin's behavior was discouraging this. The outcome of the scenario may have simply resulted in a spiraling sequence of negative events where Rashad would avenge the behavior and act in a desultory manner. His reluctance (and that of others) to ask questions may result in an egregious client mishap.