Print Сite this

Respiratory Complications Reduction: Barriers

Proposed Change

Preventing Respiratory Complications in Patients Undergoing Interventional Radiological Procedures under Conscious Sedation at Kendall Regional Medical Center

We will write a
custom essay
specifically for you

for only $16.05 $11/page
308 certified writers online
Learn More

Non-Human Barriers to Change Implementation

The process of change implementation implies overcoming numerous obstacles and barriers. Practice shows that it is human-related difficulties that are particularly problematic to manage (Rosenberg & Mosca, 2011). In the meantime, it does not mean that non-human factors should be neglected while planning the change. On the contrary, these barriers need proper consideration so that they are eliminated before the change implementation begins.

The review of the relevant literature shows that the most common non-human obstacles that need to be considered are associated with finances and technology resources (Brandão de Souza & Pidd, 2011). Thus, the lack of resources or the shortage of the necessary technologies can impede the implementation progress and require the revision of the entire implementation strategy. Since the change activities include providing additional training for nurses that implies expenses associated with both professional and technical resources, it is assumed that the described barriers are likely to appear in the course of the change implementation. As a result, it is proposed to design a plan aimed at overcoming potential obstacles.

The Plan Proposed to Overcome the Target Obstacles

Basic Concept

The plan proposed to overcome the financial and technology-related barriers relies on the assumption that these obstacles are associated with poor and inaccurate evaluation. Thus, Grol, Wensing, Eccles, and Davis (2013) suggest that the failure to assess the required resources adequately leads to repeated setbacks in the operation flow. While the overestimation of the resource scope is not likely to have any adverse impact on the implementation course, its underestimation might turn out to be crucial.

Hence, the management that fails to consider all the expenses and required technologies will have to search for resources in the middle of the change process which is very difficult and time-consuming. Practice shows that regular delays and stoppages are apt to discourage and demotivate the key actors of the change (Dubois, Bentein, Mansour, Gilbert, & Bédard, 2014).

Proposed Measures

Since poor evaluation is considered to be the key determinant of the financial and technology-related obstacles, it is suggested that this process is carried out particularly effectively. To ensure an accurate evaluation of the required resources, it is proposed to take several measures. First and foremost, the review of previous financial reports might be useful for identifying the key assessment flaws and preventing them. Second, Jones and Preston (2011) point out that assessment can be carried out more carefully in case a bottom-up approach is applied to it.

The latter implies involving the relevant employees in evaluating the scope of resources required for implementing a particular change. Due to the practical experience and awareness of the relevant realities, employees are expected to provide a more accurate evaluation than managers whose assumptions can be ungrounded or excessively optimistic. Lastly, it is proposed to review the best practices of other organizations and apply their experience to the strategic planning processes.

Get your
100% original paper
on any topic

done in as little as
3 hours
Learn More

Key Actors

The key actor that is supposed to be responsible for the plan realization is a team manager. Likewise, the implementation of the bottom-up estimation approach implies the involvement of the employees that have a clear vision of the required resource scope. External parties can also be employed to provide additional consultations, share valuable experience, and assist in preventing potential difficulties and obstacles (Grol et al., 2013).

Reference List

Brandão de Souza, L., & Pidd, M. (2011). Exploring the barriers to lean health care implementation. Public and Money Management, 31(1), 59-66.

Dubois, C. A., Bentein, K., Mansour, J. B., Gilbert, F., & Bédard, J. L. (2014). Why some employees adopt or resist reorganization of work practices in health care: Associations between perceived loss of resources, burnout, and attitudes to change. International Journal of Environmental Research, 11(1), 187-201.

Grol, R., Wensing, M., Eccles, M., & Davis, D. (2013). Improving patient care: the implementation of change in health care. New York, New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Jones, R. N., & Preston, B. L. (2011). Adaptation and risk management. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews, 2(2), 296-308.

Rosenberg, S., & Mosca, J. (2011). Breaking down the barriers to organizational change. International Journal of Management and Information Systems, 15(3), 139-146.

Cite this paper

Select style


StudyCorgi. (2020, November 10). Respiratory Complications Reduction: Barriers. Retrieved from


StudyCorgi. (2020, November 10). Respiratory Complications Reduction: Barriers.

Work Cited

"Respiratory Complications Reduction: Barriers." StudyCorgi, 10 Nov. 2020,

* Hyperlink the URL after pasting it to your document

1. StudyCorgi. "Respiratory Complications Reduction: Barriers." November 10, 2020.


StudyCorgi. "Respiratory Complications Reduction: Barriers." November 10, 2020.


StudyCorgi. 2020. "Respiratory Complications Reduction: Barriers." November 10, 2020.


StudyCorgi. (2020) 'Respiratory Complications Reduction: Barriers'. 10 November.

This paper was written and submitted to our database by a student to assist your with your own studies. You are free to use it to write your own assignment, however you must reference it properly.

If you are the original creator of this paper and no longer wish to have it published on StudyCorgi, request the removal.