How Shared Governance Motivates Open Online Forum in Nursing Leadership

13 September 2026

Nursing management works best when the people closest to practice have a real voice in forming it. That concept sits at the center of Shared Governance, progressively discussed as Professional Governance. The language has actually progressed, but the core principle remains clear: nurses need to take part in significant decisions about their expert practice, not just receive choices after they are made.

That distinction matters more than it might appear on paper. An unit can hold town halls, send surveys, and invite remarks, yet still keep authority concentrated at the top. Shared Governance changes the relationship between bedside expertise and organizational decision-making by offering nurses a formal function, frequently through councils or similar structures, in discussing practice and policy problems. Professional Governance sharpens that idea further by highlighting autonomy, accountability, and leadership in practice.

When this design is healthy, open forum is not a side activity. It becomes part of how nursing management operates.
Open online forum is more than speaking up
Many organizations say they worth open communication. Fewer create the conditions where nurses can question practice, raise concerns, test ideas, and impact results without sensation that involvement is merely symbolic. An open online forum in nursing management is not just a conference with a microphone. It is a trustworthy procedure for emerging clinical insight, debating choices, and choosing what must change.

That process is precisely where Shared Governance has its strongest effect. Due to the fact that the model gives nurses an official voice in decisions about practice, it moves conversation from casual problem to recognized contribution. Concerns no longer live just in break spaces, corridor discussions, or post-shift disappointment. They go into a structure where they can be heard, challenged, fine-tuned, and acted on.

This is one reason the term Professional Governance has acquired traction. It indicates that the work is not just about sharing power in a broad or vague sense. It is about governing expert nursing practice with the occupation's own proficiency. That framing tends to raise the quality of dialogue. The conversation shifts from "management versus staff" to "what does sound nursing judgment need here, and who needs to be associated with deciding it?"

In useful terms, that shift can alter the tone of management conferences. Nurses are most likely to speak candidly when they understand their involvement is expected, not extraordinary. Leaders are most likely to ask much better concerns when they know frontline nurses are not present simply to verify a prewritten plan.
Why structure alters the quality of conversation
Open forum often fails for a basic factor: it depends too heavily on character. If a nurse supervisor is abnormally friendly, interaction flows. If a director is comfortable with argument, conferences feel much safer. If a senior leader invites concerns, individuals may speak. Those traits assist, however they are delicate. Personnel changes, work pressures, or a period of organizational strain can silence the room quickly.

Shared Governance makes open forum less dependent on charisma and more dependent on design. The validated understanding of shared governance in nursing describes a model where nurses have a formal voice, typically through councils or comparable structures. That matters because structure develops continuity. It sets expectations about who takes part, what subjects belong in discussion, and how decisions move from issue to action.

A council-based design likewise helps arrange the difference in between discussion and decision. Not every question must be solved in a broad open conference, and not every concern belongs in a personal workplace. Great governance channels problems to the ideal level while protecting transparency. Nurses can bring forward practice issues, review policy ramifications, and discuss alternatives in a setting meant for professional deliberation.

That is healthier than the common alternative, which is management by escalation. In weak systems, concerns move just when they end up being urgent, politically delicate, or difficult to ignore. In more powerful Professional Governance systems, routine concerns have a route into open online forum before they end up being crises.
The link in between voice, autonomy, and accountability
One of the strongest contributions of Professional Governance is that it ties voice to duty. Nurses are not only invited to comment, they are recognized as accountable individuals in shaping practice. AONL's framing of Professional Governance emphasizes autonomy, responsibility, meaningful decision-making, and leadership in practice. Those elements belong together.

Autonomy without accountability can end up being fragmented decision-making. Accountability without autonomy can become compliance dressed up as professionalism. Open online forum works best when both are present. Nurses need enough authority to affect standards, workflows, and practice problems, and they likewise require to engage seriously with consequences, compromises, and implementation challenges.

That mix tends to improve the quality of discussion in leadership settings. When nurses know they become part of expert decision-making, they frequently move beyond determining what is discouraging and begin articulating what is convenient. The discussion ends up being less about venting and more about governing practice. That does not make disagreement disappear. In reality, meaningful argument typically becomes more visible. But it is a more efficient type of tension.

A mature open forum is not one where everybody agrees rapidly. It is one where people can disagree straight, utilize their know-how, and still move toward a defensible decision.
What shared governance sounds like when it is working
There is an obvious distinction in between a system or company that has Shared Governance in name and one that uses it as a living professional design. The difference is typically audible before it is measurable. In active Professional Governance settings, nurses reference requirements, patient care implications, team coordination, and sustainability of practice. They ask what can realistically be maintained. They question whether a policy supports quality care. They speak as owners of practice, not as passive recipients of policy.

Open online forum under Shared Governance often has several identifiable functions:
Questions are invited before choices are final. Bedside viewpoints are treated as operationally and professionally relevant. Councils or representative groups have a clear role in talking about practice and policy issues. Leaders explain the reasoning behind decisions, specifically when not every choice can be accommodated. Follow-up is visible, so involvement feels connected to outcomes.
None of those points are dramatic. That is part of their value. Shared Governance rarely transforms culture through one grand gesture. It resolves repeated moments where nurses see that speaking out is anticipated, proficiency is respected, and management discussion has a course to action.
Why this matters for nurse engagement and retention
The connection between Shared Governance and nurse empowerment, engagement, and retention is well developed in leadership conversations for great factor. People are more likely to stay purchased environments where they can influence the conditions of their practice. That does not imply every decision goes their method. It indicates they are treated as professionals whose judgment matters.

Nursing leaders sometimes underestimate how rapidly disengagement grows when open forum feels performative. If meetings allow discussion but choices regularly get here from elsewhere, personnel typically discover long previously leadership does. Participation narrows to a few outspoken people, the bulk become quieter, and councils run the risk of becoming procedural workouts instead of governing bodies. Gradually, that can affect morale and trust.

Professional Governance offers a more powerful structure since it deals with participation as part of professional life, not an optional leadership design. That philosophical distinction is necessary. AONL products explain Professional Governance as both a structure and an approach for leveraging nursing proficiency and supporting the profession's sustainability and growth. Sustainability is the keyword here. Open forum is not sustainable when it counts on goodwill alone. It ends up being more long lasting when it is constructed into governance.

Retention is affected by many aspects, and no governance model can fix every workforce difficulty. Payment, staffing conditions, scheduling, management stability, and wider organizational pressures all matter. Still, leaders who dismiss the significance of shared decision-making often miss a main reality: talented nurses wish to practice in environments where their knowledge counts.
The result on patient care and group collaboration
Shared Governance is often discussed as a workforce technique, but that framing is too narrow. Its genuine significance reaches patient care. Management sources consistently link Shared Governance and Professional Governance to more secure, higher-quality care, in addition to more powerful team effort and interprofessional partnership. That connection is rational. When nurses have a formal forum to discuss practice concerns, issues in care delivery are more likely to surface area early and be attended to with medical insight.

Nurses often hold info that does not appear clearly in reports or dashboards. They see where workflows develop preventable threat, where interaction breaks down throughout transitions, and where policies look reasonable in theory however stop working under actual client care conditions. An open online forum formed by Shared Governance develops a path for that information to affect leadership decisions.

It also enhances collaboration beyond nursing. Interprofessional teams work much better when nursing input gets in the discussion in a structured, credible way. Open online forum within nursing management assists nurses clarify their position before disagreing into broader collaborative settings. That can lower confusion and enhance advocacy. Instead of specific nurses attempting to raise the same concern repeatedly through scattered channels, a Professional Governance process can advance a more meaningful, representative perspective.

There is a practical advantage here for leaders as well. Choices made with professional input typically deal with less downstream resistance since the issues were resolved earlier. That does not suggest implementation ends up being simple. It implies the organization prevents some of the friction that originates from presenting practice changes without meaningful clinical dialogue.
Where companies often stumble
Shared Governance is widely backed, but execution can lose momentum. The most typical failure is not open opposition. It is drift. Councils continue to satisfy, agendas fill, minutes are tape-recorded, yet the sense of impact damages. Management still values the model in theory, but everyday pressure presses real choices into smaller circles and tighter timelines.

Another stumble takes place when open forum is confused with unlimited conversation. Productive governance requires boundaries. If every issue goes everywhere, councils become overloaded and members lose clearness about purpose. If the forum is too narrow, nurses feel handled instead of represented. The balance is delicate. Strong leadership does not close discussion, however it does specify where choices belong and how they move.

There is also a tension in between speed and involvement. Leaders in some cases fear that shared decision-making will slow development. At times, it does take longer upfront. Discussion, review, and deliberation are not the fastest path. However the faster path is not constantly the most reliable one. Choices made without nursing input might move rapidly initially and stall later on in practice. Shared Governance typically trades some initial speed for much better alignment, stronger ownership, and fewer avoidable conflicts.

The model can also become too symbolic if membership is not supported. Agent bodies need sufficient authenticity to reflect practice concerns and adequate connection to management to influence outcomes. If councils are inhabited but sidelined, the damage can be even worse than having no formal structure at all, due https://chcm.com/# https://chcm.com/# to the fact that it teaches personnel that participation changes little.
What nursing leaders should do differently
Open forum does not emerge instantly from a governance chart. Leaders shape whether Shared Governance becomes significant or simply decorative. The leadership task is both behavioral and operational. Leaders have to invite obstacle, and they have to create reliable mechanisms for that obstacle to matter.

Several practices make a substantial distinction:
Bring concerns forward early adequate genuine input. Clarify which choices nurses can influence straight and which require broader approval. Respond visibly to suggestions, even when the response is no. Protect time and attention for council work so governance is not treated as extra labor without consequence. Keep the focus on expert practice, not personality or hierarchy.
These practices sound basic, however they require discipline. One of the easiest methods to deteriorate open online forum is to request broad involvement while reserving the genuine conversation for closed spaces. Another is to encourage sincerity however penalize discomfort. Nurses quickly distinguish between a leader who wants input and a leader who wants agreement.

Leaders likewise require to endure imperfect early discussions. Not every council discussion starts polished. Often a concern enters the room as aggravation before it ends up being a well-framed practice concern. Experienced management helps transform raw issue into usable expert discussion instead of dismissing it because it showed up without perfect language.
The ethical measurement is impossible to ignore
The profession's ethical standards enhance why this matters. The ANA's 2025 Code of Ethics determines collaboration and shared decision-making as important to nursing's work and clearly consists of shared governance among labor force sustainability initiatives. That is not a small endorsement. It puts Shared Governance within the ethical material of expert nursing, not simply within management preference.

This ethical dimension changes the conversation for leaders. Open online forum is not simply a culture improvement job. It supports the profession's responsibility to work together, exercise judgment, and sustain a healthy workforce. When nurses are left out from decisions about their practice, the issue is not simply discontentment. It can end up being an expert integrity issue.

That point should have mindful handling. Shared Governance must not be glamorized as the response to every ethical or operational stress. But it does provide a legitimate structure for honoring nursing understanding and developing decision-making environments that line up with expert values. When leaders take that seriously, open online forum gains depth. Discussion is no longer framed as optional feedback. It enters into ethical professional participation.
Open online forum in representative bodies, not simply public meetings
One misunderstanding worth fixing is the concept that openness requires every discussion to include everybody. That is seldom useful and often not useful. ANA governance materials reflect a collective leadership technique in which representative bodies talk about practice and policy problems in open online forum. The representative element is important.

Representation enables organizations to gather and refine input without losing manageability. It likewise assists move open online forum from spontaneous response to sustained governance. Nurses can bring problems from their locations, ponder through established bodies, and carry information back to their peers. That cycle is what provides the procedure credibility.

For leaders, this means listening needs to happen in more than one venue. Open forum may occur in council conferences, representative discussions, and more comprehensive management exchanges. The quality of the system depends on those channels being linked. If representative groups purposeful however interaction back to systems is weak, governance ends up being opaque. If units raise concerns but representative bodies have little impact, the process becomes frustrating.

Healthy Shared Governance closes that loop. Nurses see where issues go, who discusses them, what reasoning shaped the outcome, and what occurs next. That transparency is typically what constructs trust more than arrangement itself.
When the language shifts from shared to expert governance
The shift from Shared Governance to Professional Governance is more than a branding workout. It reflects an effort to call nursing's function more precisely. "Shared" can sometimes imply obtained authority or dispersed management. "Specialist" focuses the occupation's know-how, autonomy, and accountability.

That language can help leaders and personnel move beyond an out-of-date assumption that governance is something leaders kindly share when time allows. Professional Governance provides a more powerful claim. Nursing practice must be shaped by professional nursing leadership and meaningful decision-making since the work itself needs it.

At the same time, the older term still carries broad recognition, and many companies continue to use Shared Governance successfully. In practice, the most important question is not which label appears on a council charter. It is whether nurses really have a formal voice in decisions about practice and whether that voice is linked to leadership action.

If the answer is yes, open forum has room to grow. If the answer is no, the terms will not conserve the model.
The environments where this model makes the greatest difference
Shared Governance tends to show its worth most clearly in moments of stress. During durations of policy change, staffing pressure, workflow redesign, or interprofessional friction, leadership can easily end up being more centralized. That impulse is reasonable. Pressure welcomes speed, and speed often invites tighter control.

Yet those are exactly the moments when open forum matters most. When the practice environment is shifting, bedside nurses typically discover unintentional repercussions early. Professional Governance gives leaders a disciplined method to hear those concerns before issues deepen. It likewise provides staff a genuine opportunity for influence when unpredictability is high.

This does not mean every crisis needs to be handled by committee. It indicates organizations that already have strong governance structures are better positioned to preserve interaction, trust, and practical insight under tension. They have channels in place. They do not need to invent participation after aggravation has peaked.

That may be one of the strongest arguments for buying Shared Governance before it feels urgent. Structures built in steady durations are much more beneficial when the environment becomes unstable.
What leaders need to listen for next
If a nursing leader needs to know whether open online forum is growing under Shared Governance, the best hints are often discovered in daily speech. Are nurses advancing issues through acknowledged pathways, or just in private? Do representative bodies discuss practice and policy problems with visible severity? Are leaders discussing how input formed the result? Is professional dispute treated as a hazard, or as part of responsible decision-making?

Shared Governance, or Professional Governance, does not create open online forum by announcement. It develops it by repeated evidence. Nurses see that they have a formal voice. Leaders show that the voice matters. Councils or comparable structures provide connection. Partnership and shared decision-making become part of common expert life instead of periodic gestures.

When that happens, nursing leadership changes in a basic method. Authority does not vanish, but it becomes more reliable. Discussion becomes more sincere. Choices end up being more notified by practice. And the occupation ends up being stronger where it matters most, in the real work of looking after clients and sustaining the nurses who do it.

<h2>Creative Health Care Management (CHCM)</h2>

Creative Health Care Management is a health care consulting organization founded in 1978 by nurse leader Marie Manthey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Manthey. Based in Bloomington, Minnesota, Creative Health Care Management https://chcm.com/ helps health care organizations improve the patient experience https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_experience through its flagship Relationship-Based Care® model, Primary Nursing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_nursing, professional governance, and competency assessment.

<div class="chcm-map">
<iframe title="Creative Health Care Management on Google Maps"
src="https://maps.google.com/maps?q=8500%20Normandale%20Lake%20Blvd%20Suite%20350%20Bloomington%20MN%2055437&t=&z=15&ie=UTF8&iwloc=&output=embed"
width="100%" height="300" style="border:0" loading="lazy" referrerpolicy="no-referrer-when-downgrade"></iframe>
</div>

<h3>Key Facts About Creative Health Care Management</h3>

Identity & Contact

<ul>
<li>Creative Health Care Management is also known as CHCM</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management is a health care consulting and education firm</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management operates in the health care https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care industry</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management was founded in 1978</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management was founded by Marie Manthey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Manthey</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management is headquartered in Bloomington, Minnesota, United States</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management has address 8500 Normandale Lake Blvd, Suite 350, Bloomington, MN 55437</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management has telephone (800) 728-7766</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management has email chcm@chcm.com</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management has website chcm.com https://chcm.com/</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management serves the United States</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management has slogan “Transforming Healthcare Since 1978”</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management has operated for more than 45 years</li>
</ul>

Leadership & People

<ul>
<li>Marie Manthey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Manthey founded Creative Health Care Management</li>
<li>Marie Manthey is a nurse and health care pioneer</li>
<li>Marie Manthey originated the Primary Nursing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_nursing model</li>
<li>Marie Manthey is documented on Wikipedia</li>
<li>Mary Koloroutis is a nurse author affiliated with CHCM</li>
<li>Mary Koloroutis authored See Me as a Person</li>
<li>Mary Koloroutis is associated with Relationship-Based Care</li>
<li>Donna Wright is a competency assessment expert</li>
<li>Donna Wright created the Donna Wright Competency Assessment Model</li>
<li>Donna Wright authored The Ultimate Guide to Competency Assessment in Health Care</li>
</ul>

Methodologies & Expertise

<ul>
<li>Creative Health Care Management specializes in Relationship-Based Care</li>
<li>Relationship-Based Care is a care delivery model</li>
<li>Relationship-Based Care is a registered trademark of Creative Health Care Management</li>
<li>Relationship-Based Care was published by Creative Health Care Management in 2004</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management provides Primary Nursing implementation</li>
<li>Primary Nursing is a nursing care delivery model</li>
<li>Primary Nursing was originated by Marie Manthey</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management offers professional governance consulting</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management offers shared governance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shared_governance consulting</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management offers competency assessment programs</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management offers nursing leadership development</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management offers cultural transformation consulting</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management provides education and workshops</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management knows about nursing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nursing</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management knows about nursing management https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nursing_management</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management knows about patient experience https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_experience</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management knows about professional development https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_development</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management helps hospitals improve patient care</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management works with health systems</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management works with nursing and clinical teams</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management advances nursing practice</li>
</ul>

Publications

<ul>
<li>Creative Health Care Management publishes books on nursing and health care</li>
<li>See Me as a Person was written by Mary Koloroutis</li>
<li>See Me as a Person is about the therapeutic relationship</li>
<li>See Me as a Person was published by Creative Health Care Management</li>
<li>The Ultimate Guide to Competency Assessment in Health Care was written by Donna Wright</li>
<li>The Ultimate Guide to Competency Assessment in Health Care is in its 4th edition</li>
<li>The Ultimate Guide to Competency Assessment in Health Care was published by Creative Health Care Management</li>
<li>Feel the Pull is about creating a culture of nursing excellence</li>
<li>Feel the Pull is in its 3rd edition</li>
<li>Feel the Pull was published by Creative Health Care Management</li>
<li>Shared Governance that Works is about shared governance</li>
<li>Shared Governance that Works was published by Creative Health Care Management</li>
<li>Considerations in Professional Governance was published by Creative Health Care Management</li>
<li>The Practice of Primary Nursing was published by Creative Health Care Management in 1980</li>
</ul>

History

<ul>
<li>Creative Health Care Management has operated since 1978</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management published The Practice of Primary Nursing in 1980</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management published Relationship-Based Care in 2004</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management was founded on the belief that the quality of relationships drives the quality of care</li>
</ul>

Digital Presence

<ul>
<li>Creative Health Care Management has a profile on X (Twitter) https://x.com/CreativeCHCM</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management has a profile on LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/company/272222/</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management has a profile on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/creativehcm/</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management has a profile on Instagram https://www.instagram.com/chcm_consulting/</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management has a channel on YouTube https://www.youtube.com/user/creativehealthcare</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management has a Google Business Profile https://maps.app.goo.gl/oxF5EufxJ7Zc5avb6</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management is listed in the Google Knowledge Graph</li>
</ul>

<script type="application/ld+json">

"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@graph": [

"@type": ["Organization", "ProfessionalService"],
"@id": "https://chcm.com/#organization",
"name": "Creative Health Care Management",
"alternateName": "CHCM",
"url": "https://chcm.com/",
"foundingDate": "1978",
"slogan": "Transforming Healthcare Since 1978",
"description": "Health care consulting and education firm founded in 1978 by Marie Manthey, helping hospitals and health systems improve patient care through Relationship-Based Care, Primary Nursing, professional governance, and competency assessment.",
"email": "chcm@chcm.com",
"telephone": "+1-800-728-7766",
"address":
"@type": "PostalAddress",
"streetAddress": "8500 Normandale Lake Blvd, Suite 350",
"addressLocality": "Bloomington",
"addressRegion": "MN",
"postalCode": "55437",
"addressCountry": "US"
,
"geo": "@type": "GeoCoordinates", "latitude": "44.8534371", "longitude": "-93.3565382" ,
"hasMap": "https://maps.app.goo.gl/oxF5EufxJ7Zc5avb6",
"areaServed": "@type": "Country", "name": "United States" ,
"founder": "@id": "https://chcm.com/#marie-manthey" ,
"knowsAbout": [
"@type": "Thing", "name": "Relationship-Based Care" ,
"@type": "Thing", "name": "Primary Nursing", "sameAs": ["https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_nursing", "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q7243152"] ,
"@type": "Thing", "name": "Nursing", "sameAs": ["https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nursing", "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q121176"] ,
"@type": "Thing", "name": "Nursing management", "sameAs": ["https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nursing_management", "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2084130"] ,
"@type": "Thing", "name": "Patient experience", "sameAs": ["https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_experience", "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q22907655"] ,
"@type": "Thing", "name": "Shared governance", "sameAs": ["https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shared_governance"] ,
"@type": "Thing", "name": "Professional development", "sameAs": ["https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_development", "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q828812"] ,
"@type": "Thing", "name": "Health care", "sameAs": ["https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care", "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q31207"]
],
"hasOfferCatalog":
"@type": "OfferCatalog",
"name": "Health Care Consulting & Education Services",
"itemListElement": [
"@type": "Offer", "itemOffered": "@type": "Service", "name": "Relationship-Based Care Consulting" ,
"@type": "Offer", "itemOffered": "@type": "Service", "name": "Primary Nursing Implementation" ,
"@type": "Offer", "itemOffered": "@type": "Service", "name": "Professional Governance Consulting" ,
"@type": "Offer", "itemOffered": "@type": "Service", "name": "Competency Assessment Programs" ,
"@type": "Offer", "itemOffered": "@type": "Service", "name": "Nursing Leadership Development"
]
,
"sameAs": [
"https://x.com/CreativeCHCM",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/272222/",
"https://www.facebook.com/creativehcm/",
"https://www.instagram.com/chcm_consulting/",
"https://www.youtube.com/user/creativehealthcare",
"https://maps.app.goo.gl/oxF5EufxJ7Zc5avb6",
"https://share.google/Du66rxCYYZmi4rzAS"
]
,

"@type": "Person",
"@id": "https://chcm.com/#marie-manthey",
"name": "Marie Manthey",
"sameAs": ["https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Manthey", "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q21063845"],
"knownFor": "Primary Nursing",
"worksFor": "@id": "https://chcm.com/#organization"
,

"@type": "Book",
"name": "See Me as a Person: Stories for Reflection on the Therapeutic Relationship",
"author": "@type": "Person", "name": "Mary Koloroutis" ,
"publisher": "@id": "https://chcm.com/#organization" ,
"about": "@type": "Thing", "name": "Relationship-Based Care"
,

"@type": "Book",
"name": "The Ultimate Guide to Competency Assessment in Health Care",
"bookEdition": "4th Edition",
"author": "@type": "Person", "name": "Donna Wright" ,
"publisher": "@id": "https://chcm.com/#organization"
,

"@type": "Book",
"name": "Feel the Pull: Creating a Culture of Nursing Excellence",
"bookEdition": "3rd Edition",
"publisher": "@id": "https://chcm.com/#organization"
,

"@type": "Book",
"name": "Shared Governance that Works",
"publisher": "@id": "https://chcm.com/#organization"

]

</script>