1. Team Rules of Engagement
   1. Quality Work
      1. Purpose and mission
      2. Completed on time
         1. Collaborative Effort
   2. Satisfied with work
      1. Trust members
         1. Grades Reflect Quality
   3. Never miss a deadline
      1. Completes projects early
         1. Applies time management
            1. Knows how to delegate
            2. Ask for help when needed
         2. Sensitive to time demands
   4. Quality
      1. open minded
         1. support/honest
            1. Regularity
            2. email/phone with questions
            3. Style
            4. Precise/Positive
            5. Avoid argument, aggression, or tension
            6. Open/supportive
            7. Required dates
   5. Communication
      1. Email/text/google hangout
         1. Identify issues
            1. Instructor contacted
            2. Potential problems
            3. Failure to return communication, participate in meetings, agree on direction
   6. Feedback
      1. Meaningful discussion
         1. Coach adjustments
            1. Engaged feedback
            2. Send Ecards/emails
   7. Supportive
      1. produce better outcomes for goals set
      2. Offer help
      3. Acceptance towards others
         1. Empathsize
         2. Input is valued/appreciated
            1. Conflict Resolution
            2. Communicate openly
            3. Identify issues early
            4. language clear/free of coercion
   8. Objectives
   9. Measure of Success
   10. Timeliness
   11. Communication
   12. Problem Solving Process
       1. Members see a problem, bring attention to group
   13. Recognition
   14. Behavior
2. Vision Statement
3. To manage clincial healthcare environments
   1. Any clinical inpatient or outpatient location
   2. Team strategies
      1. Theory: team strategies will show improvement and be more useful
      2. Promotion
         1. positive relationships
         2. satisfaction
            1. Both patients and staff
         3. effectiveness
   3. Individuals
4. Article 8
   1. Citation: De Rond, M. 2010.
   2. Description: Assess qualities needed for high performing teams
   3. Framework: comparison of business to healthcare setting
   4. Design: 1,052 analysts in different settings
   5. Characteristics: business/sport environment, multiple tasks
   6. Variables: age, setting, career
   7. Outcomes: choose your best team for project objectives
   8. Data adequacy: high number with variety
   9. Findings: qualities needed: drive, focus, intelligence, high expectations
   10. Level and Quality: Level IV, good quality
5. Article 5
   1. Citation: Patel, S. 2015.
   2. Description: examples of companies with fantastic cultures
   3. Framework: aspects of culture can decided employee benefits
   4. Design: 10 companies reviewed
   5. Characteristics: technology based with core values
   6. Variables: size of company, employee satisfaction rates
   7. Outcomes: Employees want to feel empowered
   8. Data adequacy: only 10 companies reviewed
   9. Findings: core values vary from person to person
   10. Level and Quality: level IV, low quality
6. Article 7
   1. Citation: McAdam, R, 2002.
   2. Description: Critique and review role in idea generation
   3. Framework: literature review from individual and team perspectives
   4. Design: 51 studies reviewed from 1998-2001
   5. Characteristics: creativity, innovation, idea generation
   6. Variables; multiple dates from studies with different key elements
   7. Outcome: need more research on idea generation
   8. Data adequacy: multiple studies but outdated
   9. Findings: identifies agenda for further research
   10. Level and Quality: Level V, good quality
7. Article 3
   1. Citation: Miners, C, et all, 2015.
   2. Description: new approach to management structure focusing on collaboration
   3. Framework: 120 tope teams in various industries reviewed
   4. Design: quantifies key factors affecting effectiveness
   5. Characteristics: define teams, outcomes, dimensions of climate
   6. Variables; size of teams, location, age
   7. Outcome: teams designed and assembled based on desired outcome
   8. Data adequacy: variety of team structure and numbers
   9. Findings: clearly define team role and climate for positive outcomes
   10. Level and Quality: Level II, good quality
8. Article 4
   1. Citation: Mukherjee, N et all. 2016
   2. Description: study on groups vs. individuals in decision making process and key insights
   3. Framework: database search from 1995-2015 with key words of 50 articles
   4. Design: key word search and year with methodology
   5. Characteristics: intellectual and judgemental tasks
   6. Variables: date, name, key objectives validity
   7. Outcome: limited number of studies, variabilities on gender
   8. Data adequacy: Not a high number of articles, many outdated
   9. Findings: groups effective with management and policy issues
   10. Level and Quality: Level I, good quality
9. Article 9
   1. Citation: Andretta, P., Marzano, D. 2012.
   2. Description: How team factors contribute to clinical performance and patient outcomes
   3. Framework: literature review providing descriptions of optimal team based competencies
   4. Design: 91 studies from 2003-2010
   5. Characteristics: clinical area of obstetrics and gynecology
   6. Variables: date of publication, patient outcomes, quality, safety
   7. Outcomes: Stable team with defined roles provides success
   8. Data Adequacy: 91 articles with relevant information
   9. Findings: interdisciplinary teams are essential for success and management of patients
   10. Level and Quality: Level V, good quality
10. Article 10
    1. Citation: Landry, A., Erwin, C. 2015.
    2. Description: Investigate how team processes work to facilitate effectiveness
    3. Framework: survey sent to healthcare professionals about processes
    4. Design: survey from American College of Healthcare Professionals
    5. Characteristics: good communication, coordination, collaboration, cooperation
    6. Variables: all levels of healthcare teams, characteristics
    7. Outcomes: team processes need work in many areas
    8. Data adequacy: large sample size with all questions answered
    9. Findings: team processes need improvement in communication, conflict, and resolution
    10. Level and Quality: Level V, good quality
11. Article 2
    1. Citation: Bossy, D etall. 2016.
    2. Description: investigate how individuals perceive participation in group-based management support
    3. Framework: focus group study using interview guide
    4. Design: qualitative study with 16 individuals
    5. Characteristics: logic with social spaces to construct identity
    6. Variables: 3 focus groups, setting, age
    7. Outcomes: policy contributes to group decisions
    8. Data adequacy: only 16 participants with 6 in each group, no control group
    9. Findings: participants maintained a strong emphasis on their own responsibilty
    10. Level and Quality: Level III and low quality
12. Article 6
    1. Citation: McEvily, et all, 2015>
    2. Description: Identify concepts for linking formal and informal elements for team goals
    3. Framework: survey to companies addressing areas of growth
    4. Design: 18 companies used with a total of 10 areas
    5. Characteristics: social networks, organizational functioning, structure
    6. Variables: size and type of company, age
    7. Outcome: need common goals to align in order to meet organizational components
    8. Data adequacy: current with multiples different types
    9. Findings: social networking is key to the function and structure
    10. Quality and Level: Level IV, good quality
13. Article 1
    1. Citation: Domke-Damont et all. 2014
    2. Description: Individual vs. Teams on reflections of desired behavioral norms
    3. Framework: teams in strategic management classroom given 1 of 2 versions of assignment
    4. Design: graduate students multi gender age 22-45
    5. Characteristics: classroom, paper and pencil, quiet environment
    6. Variables: age, gender, time, personal opinion
    7. Outcome: desired norms, effectiveness, project scores
    8. Data adequacy: not a high number of participants one study only
    9. Findings: higher team effectiveness and scores but not higher satisfaction
    10. Level and Quality: Level II, low quality
14. Innovation Tools
15. Activity Map
    1. Purrpose
       1. Escape from past patterns
    2. Participants
       1. 3-5 co-workers
    3. Time
       1. Typical work day= 10 hours
    4. Materials
       1. computer, paper, pen
    5. Information gained
       1. capture/drill down what is really happening
    6. Facilitate project
       1. HIghlight relationships, evaluate value, eliminate redundancies
    7. Brainstorming
       1. Purpose
          1. Generate new ideas
       2. Participants
          1. 5-10 co-workers
       3. Time
          1. One hour= 100 ideas
       4. Materials
          1. colored pens, paper, white board, meeting room
       5. Information gained
          1. sharpen focus, build off other's ideas, perfect vision statement
       6. Facilitate project
          1. provides solutions to question, formats information, clear direction
    8. Prototype
       1. Purpose
          1. Experience events/situations
       2. Participants
          1. members of leadership team
       3. Time
          1. 1-2 weeks
       4. Materials
          1. computer, internet, paper, pen
       5. Information gained
          1. understand real working system; find flaws
       6. Facilitate project
          1. create new design; find out what can be changed; what works
16. Capstone Projects Assessment
    1. CompletedCapstoneProjects-TEMPLATE.docx
       1. Relationship: Multi-step; group centered; patient involvement
       2. Relationship: Creates value, creative, need metrics
       3. Relationship: Quality management, risk taking, measurable
       4. Relationship: integrative therapies, staff satisfaction, cost
       5. Relationship: new experiences, improve education
       6. Relationship: increase knowledge, continuity of care
       7. Project 1
       8. Project 2
       9. Project 3
       10. Project 4
       11. Project 5
       12. Project 6
17. Evidence Table
18. Peer Review
    1. Internal feedback
       1. Added other healthcare areas/ask why
          1. capstone questions.docx
    2. External Feedback
       1. Broad include patient care/strength in collaboration
    3. Survey Questions
       1. external response questions.docx
19. References
    1. capstone references.docx
20. Obstacles
    1. Verbal
    2. Nonverbal
       1. Template
          1. ObstaclesBarriers-TEMPLATE.docx
    3. No Feedback
21. Reflection
    1. Risk taker
       1. Creative/Open minded
          1. Continue self assessments
       2. Knowledge share
          1. Build trust
       3. Embrace change
    2. Define goals and roles
       1. Facilitate positive movement
          1. Engage others
       2. Set timelines
       3. Obtain more feedback
          1. Collaborate with a mentor
    3. Personal Characteristics
    4. Professional Strategy
22. Elevator speech
    1. Wow speech
    2. Introduction
    3. Hook
    4. Under 60 sec
    5. Goal clearly defined
    6. Peer review
       1. elevator speech.pdf
23. Article searches
24. Capstone 1
25. Key Learnings
    1. Concise Ideas to reflect leadership style
       1. Personal Application: Toxic behaviors can empower change and innovation
       2. Use past experience to shape Elevator Speech
          1. Personal Application: Elevator speech concise and on topic with key elements addressed in creative way
          2. Strategies
    2. Use Evidence to support theory
       1. Personal Application: PICOT question formation and policy change
       2. Rate and understand evidence
          1. Personal Application: Use EBP to drive future changes
          2. Strategies
    3. Utilize innovation organization systems as example
       1. Personal Application: OSU lacking as an innovative driven organization compared to others nationwide
       2. Rely on theory for support
          1. Personal Application: Theories shape organization innovation
          2. Strategies
    4. Use communication strategy to understand audience
       1. Personal Application: Leading health indicators of populations in disparity to meet risk reduction objectives
       2. Critical Thinking and teamwork to understand bias
          1. Personal Application: Critical thinking paper helps to understand bias, persuasion, and fallacies
          2. Strategies
    5. Innovative Leadership: Leading from Within
    6. Evidence Based Practice
    7. Innovation in High Performing Organizations
    8. Health Promotion/Disease Prevention