¶ … barriers may interfere with implementing or revising the quality measures described in the study? Barriers that can interfere with implementing or revising the quality measured described in the case study include natural resistance to change. Any change initiative, no matter how worthwhile or beneficial, will be met with resistance from people who are naturally reluctant to change. Beyond this fundamental barrier, though, was the need to change the organizational culture that was in place to one that placed a high premium on developing a "culture of safety" that embedded the need for safety throughout the organizational structure (Jinkerson & Vardiman, 2011).

Another potential barrier to implementation were the daily obligatory "safety visibility" briefings required of all staff members. Even those these meetings were intended to last just 5 to 10 minutes, it is reasonable to suggest that clinicians must plan and prepare for these meetings, travel to the meeting location and back to their workplace...

Dedicated clinicians may be reluctant to subject themselves to this daily regimen of "harping" about safety when they have better things to do -- at least from their perspectives.
The most poignant barrier to implementation of the quality measures described in the case study was the "walk-through" by senior leaders in an effort to gather safety-related information from staff. It is also reasonable to suggest that staff members who are seen divulging sensitive information about safety issues to these senior leaders may be perceived as whistleblowers rather than well-intentioned. The fear of being perceived in this fashion by peers and subordinates may represent a profound barrier to implementation. Moreover, these walk-throughs might be negatively regarded by staff members who perceive them as being spied on instead of inspected. These events would likely be highly disruptive to clinical care processes and would not be well…