Collegiality: Through the Eyes of the Staff Nurse

Saturday, 16 November 2013

Karen H. Morin, DSN, RN, ANEF, FAAN
College of Nursing, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Milwaukee, WI
Katherine I. Menard, MSN, RN, CCRN
School of Nursing, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Milwaukee, WI
Susan Dean-Baar, PhD, RN, FAAN
College of Nursing, University of Missouri-St. Louis, St. Louis, MO

Learning Objective 1: The learner will be able to describe the components of the Survey of Collegial Communication.

Learning Objective 2: The learner will be able to describe why measuring collegility in the nursing work environment is important to the discipline.

Positive working relationships (collegial) have received little attention in nursing research.  The lack of a measurement tool for collegiality is a crucial gap in the state of this area of nursing science. The Survey of Collegial Communication (SCC) (Beyer, 1979) was developed to study collegiality among nursing faculty; however, it is unclear if the tool is appropriate for use with staff nurses.  The purpose of this methodological study was to determine content and construct validity of the SCC specifically when employed with acute care bedside staff nurses. The SCC is a 40-item instrument based on Likert’s ideal model of highly effective work groups.  Content validity analysis (CVA) utilized a panel of five experts.  Content validity indices (CVI) were calculated for each item and qualitative comments were considered. The SCC’s eight ‘components’ consist of five items each.  The components are: confidence/trust, teamwork, open communication, mutual help, mutual support, creativity, freedom from threat and friendliness/enjoyment.  Validity of the construct and it’s applicability to staff nurses were studied through two focus groups consisting of bedside staff nurses working in acute care. A structured interview guide aided in gathering staff nurse perceptions of the components of collegiality. Item specific CVA resulted in indices ranging from 0.6-1.  Total scale relevance resulted in a CVI of 1.  As a result of the CVIs and qualitative data, two items were deleted.  Two additional items were created and the wording of twelve items was revised.  Focus group themes clearly matched one of the eight components of the SCC.  Content and construct validity of the SCC have been supported through minor revisions to the instrument.  The instrument is applicable and appropriate for use with acute care bedside staff nurses.  The SCC would benefit from further psychometric testing with a larger sample.