A Triad of Opportunities: A Nursing Competency Framework

Wednesday, 24 July 2013: 1:50 PM

Mark J. Fielding, RN, PGrad CC, PGrad Ed, MN, MEd
Critical Care Nursing, Rashid Hospital, Dubai, United Arab Emirates
Jane Leanne Gordon (Griffiths), RN, BAN, MHP
Department of Nursing, Rashid Hospital, Dubai, United Arab Emirates
Stuart Andrew Newman, RN, DipTch (Nsg), BEd (Nsg), MHA
Sydney Nursing School, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia

Learning Objective 1: ...appreciate and diferentiate the differences between skill driven tasks and competencies which require a more holistic approach

Learning Objective 2: ...appreciate the differences between the different streams of nursing identified in the research and how these are integrated into the nurse’s development.

Purpose: The purpose of this research was to clearly articulate stream-specific positions within the nursing department at Rashid Hospital and how we can better advocate, mentor and evaluate the performance of those nurses within these positions.

Methods: The Nursing Competency Framework covers the career paths of all nurses in Rashid Hospital. The three career options open to these nurses are delineated and given structure by the competencies expected of individuals. The matrix follows a scheme of increasing complexity of tasks and runs from basic domain independent skills through to higher level competencies requiring greater levels of experience and aptitude. Evaluation of competencies are undertaken through review of work and projects that meet the organization’s goals and at higher levels require the application of peer and colleague review.

Evaluation data were collected using two instruments, a questionnaire and focus groups. The outcome of the initial pilot resulted in minimal changes to the framework. The same methodology was used for the evaluation of the entire program in 2012.

Results: The overall findings of the evaluation are extraordinarily positive and the level of overall satisfaction with the programme is high (mean 3.16; SD 0.79). Other indicators which have shown significant improvement include resource management, research implementation and dissemination and risk management strategies.

Conclusion: Overall, participants have evaluated the programme highly and there is clearly a demonstrated commitment to continue. While there are no majorly significant poor findings, the main areas requiring review go largely to the management of the programme vis-à-vis the general communication, preparatory education, assessment and mentoring.

Despite the programme only being run for  24 months, there has been demonstrable personal advancements e.g. promotions, conference papers, there has also been significant improvements and benefits in resource utilisation and adherence to accreditation standards.