"Why do we have to do this? Because of one person? One incident?" It's hard to refute questions like these as a manager. I continue to answer these questions, and I often ask these kinds of questions of myself.
Precedents often change everything. Something happened with one patient or one nurse, and suddenly there is a hospital-wide policy working to prevent it again. Or maybe you've been in a situation where one team member strayed from the course, and the entire team got mass counseling to ensure it doesn't happen again, rather than that single team member receiving the discipline.
Some may call this punishing the masses for the crimes of a few. We often think of it negatively, because when framed positively, it's kudos for teamwork. It's a reactive strategy that grows from deep hurt or serious safety concerns.
It really does span a broad spectrum. For example, one patient receives a lethal dose of medication because the boxes of the two doses look identical. Therefore, after one incident, all future shipments are double-checked and more clearly identified by the pharmacy staff. In another scenario, one team member posts a comical picture on her locker that offends someone else, and then nothing is allowed to be posted on the outside of lockers. See? Broad spectrum.
Most of the time, I do not advocate a policy or a process based on a single person or a single situation. However, there are certain times when it is necessary. It heavily depends on the severity of the situation.
What do you think about policies or processes shaped because of one person or one incident? Do you have an example to share of this happening at your institution?
Tweet This
12 
