2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10755/150718
Type:
Presentation
Title:
Evaluating change theories used by nurse authors
Abstract:
Evaluating change theories used by nurse authors
Conference Sponsor:Sigma Theta Tau International
Conference Year:1992
Conference Date:May 19 - 22, 1992
Author:Hagerman, Zerita, DNS/DNSc/DSN
P.I. Institution Name:Andrews University
Title:Professor Director Graduate Nursing
Between January, 1982, and December 1991, nurse authors with

articles published in American nursing periodicals referenced 59

different planned change theories by non-nurse and nurse theorists.

Some of the non-nurse theorists provided planned change theories

which nurses cited in their efforts to effect change in the

clinical, management, and education areas of nursing. The

multiplicity of theories referenced suggested that nurses lacked a

real basis for knowing which change theories were the most useful

for the holistic, caring, relationship-oriented focus of nursing.



With the development of the Tiffany/Lutjens Change Theory

Evaluation Scale, guidance is available to nurses in choosing a

change theory which would be effective for planned change. This

instrument proved useful in identifying the strengths and

limitations of the planned change theory of Bennis, Benne, and Chin

and the Diffusion of Innovation Theory of Everett M. Rogers; it

assessed their appropriateness to the discipline of nursing. The

scale asks many questions specifically related to the relevance of

a change theory to nurse concerns such as significance, economy,

practicality, and congruence with nursing's perspective. In an

actual application of the scale, the Normative Re-educative theory

of planned change developed by Bennis, Benne, and Chin scored

100.5/124 and the Diffusion of Innovation theory by Rogers earned

a score of 50/124.



Appropriate applications of these two change theories to nursing

situations is possible if users consider the strengths and

weaknesses of each theory. Answers to questions on the tool showed

that each change theory is appropriate for very different settings.



Repository Posting Date:
26-Oct-2011
Date of Publication:
19-May-1992
Sponsors:
Sigma Theta Tau International

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.typePresentationen_GB
dc.titleEvaluating change theories used by nurse authorsen_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10755/150718-
dc.description.abstract<table><tr><td colspan="2" class="item-title">Evaluating change theories used by nurse authors</td></tr><tr class="item-sponsor"><td class="label">Conference Sponsor:</td><td class="value">Sigma Theta Tau International</td></tr><tr class="item-year"><td class="label">Conference Year:</td><td class="value">1992</td></tr><tr class="item-conference-date"><td class="label">Conference Date:</td><td class="value">May 19 - 22, 1992</td></tr><tr class="item-author"><td class="label">Author:</td><td class="value">Hagerman, Zerita, DNS/DNSc/DSN</td></tr><tr class="item-institute"><td class="label">P.I. Institution Name:</td><td class="value">Andrews University</td></tr><tr class="item-author-title"><td class="label">Title:</td><td class="value">Professor Director Graduate Nursing</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="item-abstract">Between January, 1982, and December 1991, nurse authors with<br/><br/>articles published in American nursing periodicals referenced 59<br/><br/>different planned change theories by non-nurse and nurse theorists.<br/><br/>Some of the non-nurse theorists provided planned change theories<br/><br/>which nurses cited in their efforts to effect change in the<br/><br/>clinical, management, and education areas of nursing. The<br/><br/>multiplicity of theories referenced suggested that nurses lacked a<br/><br/>real basis for knowing which change theories were the most useful<br/><br/>for the holistic, caring, relationship-oriented focus of nursing.<br/><br/><br/><br/>With the development of the Tiffany/Lutjens Change Theory<br/><br/>Evaluation Scale, guidance is available to nurses in choosing a<br/><br/>change theory which would be effective for planned change. This<br/><br/>instrument proved useful in identifying the strengths and<br/><br/>limitations of the planned change theory of Bennis, Benne, and Chin<br/><br/>and the Diffusion of Innovation Theory of Everett M. Rogers; it<br/><br/>assessed their appropriateness to the discipline of nursing. The<br/><br/>scale asks many questions specifically related to the relevance of<br/><br/>a change theory to nurse concerns such as significance, economy,<br/><br/>practicality, and congruence with nursing's perspective. In an<br/><br/>actual application of the scale, the Normative Re-educative theory<br/><br/>of planned change developed by Bennis, Benne, and Chin scored<br/><br/>100.5/124 and the Diffusion of Innovation theory by Rogers earned<br/><br/>a score of 50/124.<br/><br/><br/><br/>Appropriate applications of these two change theories to nursing<br/><br/>situations is possible if users consider the strengths and<br/><br/>weaknesses of each theory. Answers to questions on the tool showed<br/><br/>that each change theory is appropriate for very different settings.<br/><br/><br/><br/></td></tr></table>en_GB
dc.date.available2011-10-26T10:40:58Z-
dc.date.issued1992-05-19en_GB
dc.date.accessioned2011-10-26T10:40:58Z-
dc.description.sponsorshipSigma Theta Tau Internationalen_GB
All Items in this repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.