| Course | NURS 6201 Leadership in Nursing and Healthcare |
|---|---|
| Week | Week 10 |
| Paper type | Leadership development plan |
| Length | About 550 words, 4 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Walden University |
| Program | Master of Science in Nursing (MSN) |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for NURS 6201 Week 10
Leadership Development Plan: Two Behaviors, Judged by What Charge Nurses Notice
Student Name
College of Nursing, Walden University
NURS 6201: Leadership in Nursing and Healthcare
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Leadership Development Plan: Two Behaviors, Judged by What Charge Nurses Notice
Current Position
My Week 2 self-assessment found that self-regulation is my weakest area, and a review of a night on record confirmed the predicted behavior: when a shift is going wrong, I commit to a plan out loud while the charge nurse is still reporting, and then I defend it. The team nursing rollout will test this behavior every week, because team leaders will bring me problems I have not seen before. This plan targets two behaviors.
Two Behaviors
Table 1
Behaviors, Triggers, Measures and Observers
| Behavior | Trigger | Replacement | Measure | Observer (role) | Review |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hear the whole report before deciding | A charge nurse begins a report during a staffing problem | Listen to the end; ask one question; then propose a plan | Charge nurses' tally of interruptions per call, logged on a card | Day and night charge nurses | Weeks 4, 8 and 12 |
| Learn where delegation is failing | Once a week during the rollout | Work the first hour of a night shift and ask each team leader which delegation failed that week and why | Number of delegation problems identified and acted on | Night team leaders | Weeks 4, 8 and 12 |
Why These Behaviors
Authentic leadership grounds the choice. Walumbwa et al. (2008) describe it through four components: self-awareness, relational transparency, balanced processing of information and an internalized moral perspective. The first behavior is balanced processing in practice: hearing all the relevant information, including views that challenge my first impulse, before deciding. The second is relational transparency: showing night staff that I want to hear what is going wrong, and acting on it. Avolio and Gardner (2005) argue that authentic leadership develops through leaders' growing self-awareness and self-regulation, which is exactly the gap my assessment found.
The measures rely on observers because my own account cannot be trusted on this point. On the night I reviewed in Week 2, the charge nurse remembered me cutting her off, and my own notes left that out entirely. People's self-assessments tend to be only loosely related to their actual behavior (Dunning et al., 2004), so the charge nurses' tally is the real measure.
Supports
Two supports make the plan workable. First, I will explain the tally to the charge nurses in person and ask them to be blunt; a tally kept politely would be useless. Second, I will ask my director to review the tally with me at each review week, so that someone outside the unit sees the numbers and can challenge my reading of them. The second behavior also needs protected time: the weekly hour on nights will go on my calendar for the full twelve weeks, before the rollout begins, so that it is not the first thing cut in a busy week.
Evidence That the Plan Has Failed
The plan will have failed if, by week 12, the charge nurses' tally shows no fall in interruptions from the first four weeks; if charge nurses stop keeping the tally, which would suggest they do not believe I want it; or if night team leaders report the same delegation failures in consecutive weeks without any change. Any of those results would mean the behavior has not changed, whatever I believe about myself, and I would ask my director for coaching support.
References
Avolio, B. J., & Gardner, W. L. (2005). Authentic leadership development: Getting to the root of positive forms of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(3), 315-338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.03.001
Dunning, D., Heath, C., & Suls, J. M. (2004). Flawed self-assessment: Implications for health, education, and the workplace. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 5(3), 69-106. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1529-1006.2004.00018.x
Walumbwa, F. O., Avolio, B. J., Gardner, W. L., Wernsing, T. S., & Peterson, S. J. (2008). Authentic leadership: Development and validation of a theory-based measure. Journal of Management, 34(1), 89-126. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206307308913
Reading the NURS 6201 Week 10 instructions
NURS 6201 Week 10 turns the Week 2 self-assessment into a plan for change. You state your current position, choose a few behaviors to change, explain why, list supports and say what would show the plan failed. Faculty grade on whether someone else could judge progress. Cite leadership development sources in APA 7. Two well-chosen behaviors beat a long list. The observer should be someone who sees you lead, such as a charge nurse. A theory can frame the plan but is not always required. NURS 6201 faculty want two observable behaviors, the reason each matters, named supports with dates and failure evidence.
How the NURS 6201 Week 10 example is put together
A brief current-position paragraph restates the week-two finding: when a shift is going wrong, the manager commits to a plan out loud while the charge nurse is still mid-report. Two behaviors then appear in a table. In the first, when a charge nurse begins a report during a staffing problem, the manager hears the whole report and asks one question before proposing anything. In the second, once a week during the rollout she works the first hour of a night shift and asks team leaders which delegation failed that week. Each row names a trigger, a measure, an observer by role and a review week. Authentic leadership, through its components of self-awareness and relational transparency, grounds the selection. Its last paragraph spells out the evidence that would show the plan had failed.
Reading the NURS 6201 Week 10 rubric
Someone other than the author has to be able to tell, weeks later, whether a development plan was followed, and that test drives most of the grade. Objectives such as improving communication give it nothing to measure. Specificity takes the heaviest share: the trigger, the replacement behavior and the observer each have to be named. Integration with earlier work earns in its own right, so a plan ignoring the self-assessment it is meant to build on looks written in isolation. Realism earns too: a manager promising nightly rounds throughout a rollout has set a goal the schedule will break. A named leadership framework should shape the selection rather than decorate it. Tables whose measures fail to match the behaviors beside them lose ground under presentation.
NURS 6201 Week 10 help: mistakes that cost marks
Development plans lose the most when objectives are internal, such as becoming calmer. Name behaviors others can see. Another common gap is too many goals. Choose two. Writers also skip failure evidence. Say what would show the plan is not working. Avoid supports with no schedule. Set check-ins. Tie behaviors to the self-assessment. Close with when the observer will first report. Writers also forget to ask the observer how they will report, such as a monthly note. Agree on it. Another frequent slip is a plan that ends without review. Set a review date. Keep behaviors tied to the self-assessment. Close with the observer's first report date.
Get a NURS 6201 Week 10 example written to your instructions
Tell the desk what your prompt asks the plan to include, any template or table your section requires and the planning horizon, and a plan continuing an invented manager's earlier self-assessment is returned. Free on your first custom request, 24 to 48 hours. Performance reviews written about you are never needed and are never recreated.
More NURS 6201 papers and MSN samples
- NURS 6201 Week 1: Discussion Post
- NURS 6201 Week 2: Leadership Self-Assessment
- NURS 6201 Week 3: Leadership Style Analysis
- NURS 6201 Week 4: Team Conflict Case Analysis
- NURS 6201 Week 5: Discussion Post
- NURS 6201 Week 6: Change Management Plan
- NURS 6201 Week 7: Stakeholder Analysis
- NURS 6201 Week 8: Discussion Post
- NURS 6201 Week 9: Communication Plan
- NURS 6201 Week 11: Reflection
- NURS 6221 Week 10: Workforce Budget Analysis
- NURS 6053 Week 10: Change Implementation Plan
- NURS 6223 Week 10: Safety culture analysis
- NURS 6052 Week 10: Appraisal Trail Slides
NURS 6201 Week 10 questions, answered
Why only two behaviors?
Two is enough to show a pattern and few enough to track honestly during a busy rollout. Some prompts set a number, and some ask for goals across several leadership domains. Where the choice is yours, fewer behaviors with real measures usually earn more than a long list nobody could review, because reviewability is what this assignment tests.
Who should the observer be?
Someone who sees the behavior happen and has no reason to flatter. The sample uses the charge nurses, because they are the people the manager interrupts. A mentor or supervisor can serve if your setting makes that more realistic. Presence matters more than title: the observer needs to be there when the trigger occurs, or the measure means nothing.
Does the plan need a leadership theory?
Most versions of this assignment require one. The sample uses authentic leadership because its emphasis on self-awareness and transparency explains why these two behaviors were chosen, and emotional intelligence would also fit. Theory earns when it justifies the selection; a paragraph describing a framework, followed by a plan that never draws on it, earns much less.
Where can I find a free NURS 6201 Week 10 sample paper?
The two-behavior development plan is printed here with the current position, the behaviors, the reasons, supports and evidence of failure.
Which two behaviors does the NURS 6201 Week 10 plan target?
Waiting until the charge nurse finishes before proposing a plan, and asking one question before committing to it.