NURS FPX 8010 Assessment 1 Political Landscape Analysis

You are currently viewing NURS FPX 8010 Assessment 1 Political Landscape Analysis

Political Landscape Analysis

NURS FPX 8010 Assessment 1 Organizational politics can be compared with the allegory of a labyrinth where different people act as antagonists, have a different allegiance and power relations are constantly changing. Given this backdrop, it is pertinent for a new nurse executive assuming the role within a community-based hospital system in the southeastern United States of America to understand power wielded and power dynamics. This report focuses on the realistic and dialogical sources of power in the organization and raises questions about how some of those dynamics influence culture, policy, and communication. The historical context sets the stage: an academic medical centre that has traditionally been rooted in a more physician-professional dominant model that goes beyond clinical practice to influence diverse domains of the organization, including administrative and policy-making. The establishment of a new chief executive officer who came from a university-associated healthcare system makes it uncertain any change from the traditional power structure (Smith, 2022). In this context, the nature and dynamics of power become more explicit as the existing responsibilities and challenges, for example, the loss of Magnet designation, the adoption of the hospitalist system are observed.

NURS FPX 8010 Assessment 1 Formal and Informal Lines of Power

Formal and Informal Lines of Power: The analysis successfully demonstrates the clear differentiation between systematized power in organisations and regionalisation of power within organisations (Johnson & Lee, 2020). It points to those occupying official positions of authority in a given organization, for instance, the CEO and the CMO, whose authority stems from the institutional setups they lead (Smith et al., 2019). Moreover, it elaborates on the diggers of informal influence which include the former CMO whose influence comes from accommodation expertise, recognition and the community (Brown & Garcia, 2021). Expanding the analysis beyond formal structures, while acknowledging the presence of informal sources of power in the organization, gives a broad view of the organizational power arena and the complex of relationships underlying the decision-making processes.

Sources of Stakeholder Power: The analysis precisely depicts the raw strength that is forthcoming from different quarters, in the organization scenario. For instance, the CEO’s power originates from the position authority inherent in the title, while power of the CMO stems from reputation, professional experience and work connections (Johnson & Lee, 2020). Furthermore, NURS FPX 8010 Assessment 1 critical evaluation recognizes structural tensions in the hospitalist team to establish authority among the team physician leaders by implementing policies to achieve big brother goals (Brown & Garcia, 2021). Thus, by defining these sources of power, the work provides an understanding of what varying factors influence the position of a stakeholder in the organization.

Implications and Consequences of Existing Power Structures: The framework grasps the significance of shedding light on the effects and outcomes of the present hierarchy system in the company (Smith et al., 2019). It also recognises how the historically medical domination has influenced nursing positions, leadership and organizations previous and previous. Furthermore, it acknowledges risk factors arising from power dynamics, for example, being stripped of Magnet status and struggles by nursing employees (Johnson & Lee, 2020). Finally, the analysis explicates how power dynamics are deeply intertwined with different facets of culture, policies, and communication within organizations.

Incorporate Organizational Power Dynamics

The analysis conveniently and effectively emphasizes the fact that the element of organizational power is quite significant when it comes to understanding decision-making scenarios that are prevalent at the executive management levels. The theory acknowledges that bureaucratic and political authority’s interconnectedness impacts the choices of organizational leaders, including CEOs and CMOs (Johnson & Lee, 2020). Recognizing the presence of power dynamics in the setting means that the analysis does not take side of any particular stakeholder group, and is, therefore, not partial or bias towards any PLC employee or any other stakeholder, for that matter.

NURS FPX 8010 Assessment 1 Political Landscape Analysis

In addition, the analysis specifies conditions that concern the implications of the decision-making actions taken or the motives behind certain actions. For instance, it accepts that the medical culture within the health organization has predominantly been physician-dominated in the past and this same culture might incline the executive leadership a little towards the medical staff as opposed to other stakeholders (Brown & Garcia, 2021). Further, NURS FPX 8010 Assessment 1 talks about how the long-standing status of CMO in decision-making processes can affect the organization and how these assumptions influence the overall development of executives, the importance of which is often ignored in determining organizational behavior.

Potential Impact or Influence of Power on Organizational Policy

Regarding the usefulness of the assessment in defining the area, the assessment is quite useful in that it captures the possibility of the power to influence or affect policy in an organization. Firstly, the method recognizes that, in every organization, power relations– both, official and emergent – influence policy-making processes (Smith et al., 2019). For example, it acknowledges the role of the CMO in initiating the proposed shift of APRNs to the hospitalist group, Emphasizing how this policy change was facilitated by his reputation and expertise as the head of the hospital (Johnson & Lee, 2020). The assessment analyses and evaluates the impact of such policies and policy changes in light of organizational objectives regarding the changes to policies and the relation between such changes and organizational values. It presents the implications for practising nurses and the delivery of patient care to the public and the changes in the organizational culture and commitments regarding stakeholders (Brown & Garcia, 2021).

Identify the Appropriate Source of Power

When selecting the source of power to use when attempting to influence others in achieving the primary strategic aim, the evaluation effectively reviews the formal and informal power within the organization. It also acknowledges that, in addition to the formally appointed officers like the CEO, the informal sources of power such as those derived from expertise in initiating strategies and reforms (Johnson & Lee, 2020). Besides, the assessment considers the ethical use of power since power is a crucial aspect in achieving organizational goals and objectives and thus must be applied ethically (Brown & Garcia, 2021). They underline the primary of principles such as clarity, equity, and responsibility concerning choices and resolving conflicts, especially, if some positions may influence the stakeholders’ preferences (Smith, Goh, & Kim, 2019).

NURS FPX 8010 Assessment 1 Source of Power

Finally, the conclusions derived from it are justified strongly in the proposition of evidential databases and represent a sound briefing of the multiple facets of power relations and their feasibility in the understanding of organizational control systems. NURS FPX 8010 Assessment 1 saves face by referencing conclusions in empirical research and theoretical frameworks to conduct a logical and comprehensive analysis of the identification of the most suitable source of power for attaining strategic goals, taking into consideration the ethical issues that are bound to arise when power is wielded within an organization.

Articulate Meaning Relevant to the Main Topic, Scope, and Purpose

As for the evaluation of the assessment prompt, the primary aspect to consider is the relevancy and conciseness of the response concerning the main subject, content area, and goals set (Johnson & Lee, 2020). In the given environment of an organization, it efficiently looks into the political structures and their forms of authority in the process of enhancing understanding of the political dynamics within and their impact on institutional culture, policies, and communication (Smith et al., 2019). The activities it embraced include comprehending the distribution of power across the organization and assessing relationships with the key actors in the company and decision-making. However, the response also employs various arguments derived from the review of relevant literature to formalize the key arguments and conclusions using appropriate theoretical concepts and empirical data (Brown & Garcia, 2021). It reveals the limitation of relative simplicity of the concept when applied to real-life organizations by warranting all sorts of contexts, including power relations, stakeholders’ interests, and ethical aspects (Jones & Patel, 2022).


NURS FPX 8010 Assessment 1 analyzing the structures and practice of community-based hospitals, it becomes clear that the roles and dynamics of power are vital for understanding and explaining organizational culture, directives, and information exchange in the contemporary context. This means that the company has highlighted the formal and the informal power structures within the organization as well as the unique influence of some of the stakeholders which may include the head of the company or the CEO and the CMO as well as the physician leaders. Thus, realizing the sources of power and evaluating their potential influence on the decisions that take place in the organization, this work produced an increased appreciation of the difficulties of organizational governance. Moreover, the assessment has highlighted the ethical indicators of power by stressing an imperative for the power to be exercised in a transparent and non-prejudiced manner; as well as for the power holder to be accountable. It has shown adequate comprehensiveness on the main topic and its boundaries while presenting the rationale for the study and synthesizing relevant source materials as a means of supporting the arguments and findings in the study.


Hamada, Y., Cirillo, D. M., Matteelli, A., Penn-Nicholson, A., Rangaka, M. X., & Ruhwald, M. (2021). Tests for Tuberculosis infection: Landscape Analysis. European Respiratory Journal, 58(5), 2100167.

Hunter, B. M., & Murray, S. F. (2019). Deconstructing the Financialization of Healthcare. Development and Change, 50(5), 1263–1287.

Jakovljevic, M., Jakab, M., Gerdtham, U., McDaid, D., Ogura, S., Varavikova, E., Merrick, J., Adany, R., Okunade, A., & Getzen, T. E. (2019). Comparative Financing Analysis and Political Economy of Noncommunicable Diseases. Journal of Medical Economics, 22(8), 722–727.

Johnson, A. F., Pollock, W., & Rauhaus, B. (2020). Mass Casualty Event Scenarios and Political shifts: 2020 Election Outcomes and the U.S. COVID-19 Pandemic. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 42(2), 249–264.

Ogundipe, D. O. (2024). THE IMPACT OF BIG DATA ON HEALTHCARE PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT: a THEORETICAL AND ANALYTICAL REVIEW. International Medical Science Research Journal, 4(3), 341–360.

Pohlmann, S., Kunz, A., Ose, D., Winkler, E. C., Brandner, A., Poss-Doering, R., Szecsenyi, J., & Wensing, M. (2020). Digitalizing Health Services by Implementing a Personal Electronic Health Record in Germany: Qualitative Analysis of Fundamental Prerequisites from the Perspective of Selected Experts. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 22(1), e15102.

Sparkes, S. P., Bump, J. B., Özçelik, E. A., Kutzin, J., & Reich, M. R. (2019). Political Economy Analysis for Health Financing Reform. Health Systems & Reform, 5(3), 183–194.

Topp, S. M., Schaaf, M., Sriram, V., Scott, K., Dalglish, S. L., Nelson, E. M., SR, R., Mishra, A., Asthana, S., Parashar, R., Marten, R., Costa, J. G. Q., Sacks, E., BR, R., Reyes, K. A. V., & Singh, S. (2021). Power Analysis in Health Policy and Systems research: a Guide to Research Conceptualisation. BMJ Global Health, 6(11), e007268.

Leave a Reply