| Course | NURS 6201 Leadership in Nursing and Healthcare |
|---|---|
| Week | Week 11 |
| Paper type | Reflection paper |
| Length | About 630 words, 5 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 11
Reflection: The Decision I Would Reverse, Assigning Team Leaders by Seniority
Student Name
College of Nursing, Walden University
NURS 6201: Leadership in Nursing and Healthcare
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Reflection: The Decision I Would Reverse, Assigning Team Leaders by Seniority
The Decision as It Looked at the Time
When the pilot began, I assigned the first team-leader roles by seniority: the four most senior registered nurses on the east hallway led the first teams. At the time the choice had three things going for it. Seniority was visible and easy to defend to staff, since nobody could accuse me of favoritism. It was quick, at a moment when I had a go-live date to meet. And the most senior nurses were also the loudest critics of team nursing, so I reasoned that giving them leadership of the teams would bring them inside the change rather than leave them outside it, criticizing.
What It Produced
Two of the four senior team leaders did well. The other two did not, and the problems were the ones my own week-three analysis had predicted. One senior team leader repeated every assessment her practical nurse had charted, and within two weeks the practical nurse had stopped reporting changes to her; a rising respiratory rate reached the team leader an hour late. On two of the four pilot teams, delegation stalled: team leaders did most of the direct care themselves, practical nurses were underused, and team leaders fell behind on the assessments and teaching that were theirs to do. Being senior had made these nurses excellent at caring for their own patients. It had not made them ready to delegate care to someone else.
The Alternative
My own analysis in week three had already argued for a different basis. Situational leadership holds that readiness is specific to a task (Hersey et al., 2013), and delegation is a task in its own right, distinct from bedside expertise. Under the national delegation guidelines, whoever delegates must judge whether the other person can do the task, explain it clearly and follow up (National Council of State Boards of Nursing, 2016). Readiness for that work could have been assessed directly: by asking each candidate how they would hand over a set of tasks, observing them delegate during a shift before the pilot, and asking charge nurses who delegated well already. Some senior nurses would have led teams; others, including newer nurses who already coordinated care well, might have led instead.
Choosing by readiness would also have fit the evidence better. The team nursing trial I relied on found that units shaped local versions of the model over time rather than applying a fixed template (Fairbrother et al., 2010), which is closer to choosing leaders by what each team needs than by length of service.
The Conversation It Would Have Required
Readiness-based assignment would have required a conversation I avoided. With each of the two senior nurses who later struggled, it would have gone something like this: "You are one of the best clinicians on this unit, and that is not in question. Leading a team asks for a different skill, handing work to someone else and trusting it to be done. I would like you to spend the first two weeks of the pilot coaching a newer nurse who will lead the team, and to take a team yourself in the second phase once you have seen how delegation works here. I know that may feel like a demotion. It is not, and I will say so to the unit."
I avoided that conversation because I feared it would turn two critics into opponents. Looking back, the discomfort of that conversation was smaller than the cost of what followed: a late report on a deteriorating patient, two stalled teams and two senior nurses who experienced the pilot as failure. Next time, I will hold the harder conversation before the pilot, not the easier one after it.
References
Fairbrother, G., Jones, A., & Rivas, K. (2010). Changing model of nursing care from individual patient allocation to team nursing in the acute inpatient environment. Contemporary Nurse, 35(2), 202-220. https://doi.org/10.5172/conu.2010.35.2.202
Hersey, P., Blanchard, K. H., & Johnson, D. E. (2013). Management of organizational behavior: Leading human resources (10th ed.). Pearson.
National Council of State Boards of Nursing. (2016). National guidelines for nursing delegation. Journal of Nursing Regulation, 7(1), 5-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2155-8256(16)31035-3
NURS 6201 Week 11 instructions, in plain terms
The final NURS 6201 week usually asks for a reflection on your leadership during the course or project. You examine one decision in depth: how it looked at the time, what it produced, the alternative and what it would have required. Faculty rank decision analysis above a week-by-week summary. Leadership sources belong in APA 7 only where the analysis leans on them. Admitting a mistake is expected and strengthens the reflection. A decision from the middle of a change is often the most revealing. NURS 6201 faculty want the decision described as it looked at the time, its results shown, the alternative explained and the conversation it needed named. Tie the analysis to a leadership concept.
How this NURS 6201 Week 11 example is built
Written in first person and past tense, the reflection moves in three stages. The first reconstructs the decision as it looked in the moment: seniority was visible, defensible to staff and quick, and the most senior nurses were the loudest critics, so leading teams seemed likely to bring them inside the change. The second reports what followed, including the conflict between a senior team leader and a practical nurse analyzed in week four and the delegation that stalled on two pilot teams. The third names the alternative, readiness for delegation assessed task by task, as the week-three style analysis had already argued. Its closing paragraph writes out the specific conversation that alternative would have required with two senior nurses.
Reading the NURS 6201 Week 11 rubric
A decision examined outranks a term summarized in any closing reflection for this course, and a paper walking week by week through what was learned reads as a recap. Depth credit follows the fairness with which the original choice is reconstructed, since hindsight that makes the past self foolish has analyzed nothing. Integration of course concepts is weighted in a final week, which is why tying the alternative to the week-three argument earns more than introducing a new theory at the end. Specificity carries much of the rest: naming the conversation that was avoided turns a lesson into something another nurse manager could use. First-person reflective voice is expected throughout. Short papers lose ground where the stated lesson would fit any decision at all.
NURS 6201 Week 11 help from the desk
Reflections lose credit when they walk through each week of the course. Pick one decision. Another common gap is judging the decision only by hindsight. Describe why it made sense then. Writers also name an alternative without its cost. Describe the hard conversation it needed. Avoid blaming staff for the outcome. Cite readiness concepts. Keep names out. Close with what you would do next time. Writers also forget to say what they learned about their own habits, such as preferring easy-to-defend choices. Name it. End with the next step you would take. Keep the tone honest.
Get a NURS 6201 Week 11 example written to your instructions
Send the reflection prompt, its length limit and any course concepts the classroom names, and a reflection on one fictional manager's choice comes back. First custom sample free, back in 24 to 48 hours. The rollout is imagined, and no account of decisions made at your own workplace has to be shared for the example to exist.
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 10: Leadership Development Plan
- NURS 6221 Week 11: Reflection
- NURS 6053 Week 11: Interprofessional Presentation
- NURS 6223 Week 11: Reflection
- NURS 6052 Week 11: Dissemination Channel Plan
NURS 6201 Week 11 questions, answered
Can a reflection admit a mistake without hurting the grade?
Yes, provided the mistake is analyzed rather than confessed. The sample reconstructs why seniority seemed right, reports what it produced, and names the alternative. That sequence shows judgment. Marks go missing when a mistake is admitted in one line and followed by a generic lesson that would have been true before the course started.
Does a reflection need citations?
Many sections want one or more, and final-week criteria often reward links to earlier course work. The sample ties its alternative to the week-three style analysis and to situational leadership rather than introducing new sources. Check your prompt: some reflection assignments are explicitly uncited, and adding references there earns no extra credit.
Why choose a decision from the middle of the rollout?
Since this week wants a single choice worth reversing, and a choice whose consequences can be traced across several weeks makes a stronger reflection than a single bad moment. The seniority choice touched the conflict case, the pilot and the development plan, so the reflection can show consequences instead of asserting them.
Where can I find a free NURS 6201 Week 11 sample paper?
The seniority decision reflection is reproduced here with how the choice looked, what it produced, the alternative and the conversation it required.
Which decision would the writer reverse in NURS 6201 Week 11?
Choosing the first team leaders by seniority instead of by readiness and interest, which passed over a capable mid-career nurse.