Why Nursing Competence Belongs at the Center of Governance

14 September 2026

Hospitals and health systems make hundreds of decisions that shape client care long before a clinician strolls into a room. Policies specify escalation pathways. Committees approve documents standards. Management groups set staffing techniques, quality concerns, devices choices, and education strategies. Those decisions are not abstract. They land at the bedside, in the emergency department, in procedural locations, in centers, and in every handoff where a missed information can end up being a major problem.

That is why nursing know-how belongs at the center of governance, not at the edge of it.

For years, many organizations have utilized the term Shared Governance to explain a model in which nurses have a formal voice in decisions about their professional practice, typically through councils or equivalent bodies. More just recently, Professional Governance has actually gained traction as a more exact method to explain the same core commitment, while also honing the focus on autonomy, responsibility, significant decision making, and leadership in practice. That shift in language matters because words shape expectations. Shared Governance can sound like participation by invitation. Professional Governance makes a stronger claim. It acknowledges governance not as a courtesy encompassed nurses, however as part of how a profession governs its own practice.

Anyone who has actually hung out in scientific operations has actually seen the difference between decisions made with nursing input and choices made without it. A workflow might look efficient on paper, but break down entirely during a high-acuity admission. A documents modification might appear minor to a task team, yet include lots of clicks during the busiest hour of a shift. A patient education requirement may read well in a policy binder, while disregarding who really strengthens that mentor over twelve hours of direct care. Nurses see these spaces early because they live inside the care process. Leaving out that knowledge from governance does not make decisions cleaner or quicker. It generally makes them more fragile.
Governance is not a conference, it is a practice of accountability
One of the consistent misconceptions about Shared Governance is that it is primarily a council structure. Councils matter. Formal systems matter. Representation matters. However the underlying issue is bigger than committee design.

Professional Governance is both a structure and a philosophy. Structurally, it offers nurses an organized, noticeable location in choice making. Philosophically, it asserts that the profession brings obligation for practice, requirements, and outcomes, and therefore must assist govern them. Those two components need each other. Structure without viewpoint ends up being theater. Viewpoint without structure ends up being aspiration.

That distinction ends up being apparent when organizations state the best aspects of nurse voice however reserve the real choices for a small administrative group. The councils satisfy. Minutes are tape-recorded. Staff are requested feedback. Then a significant policy change appears totally formed, without any meaningful capability to shape it. Technically, nurses were spoken with. Practically, governance never ever happened.

The much healthier model is different. Nurses are included early, when alternatives are still open. Their input alters the proposal, not simply the phrasing of the statement. Their proficiency is dealt with as operationally required and expertly authoritative. That is what meaningful decision making looks like.

This is likewise where the language shift from Shared Governance to Professional Governance earns its worth. It moves the conversation beyond involvement and towards expert obligation. Nurses are not there to back decisions after the truth. They exist to help identify how practice needs to be performed, what requirements are practical, what compromises are acceptable, and where a policy may produce risk.
The bedside view is not a narrow view
There is a tendency in governance discussions to divide point of views into tactical and operational, as if executive leaders hold the tactical view and frontline clinicians hold just the regional one. In nursing, that split is frequently false.

Bedside nurses, charge nurses, teachers, advanced practice nurses, and nurse leaders see patterns that span departments and time horizons. They know where discharge procedures fail due to the fact that they are the ones explaining hold-ups to patients and families. They know whether a new escalation standard actually supports early acknowledgment or just includes another layer of documents. They understand when interprofessional partnership is working due to the fact that they depend on it every shift, typically under pressure.

That kind of understanding is tactical. It reveals whether organizational concerns can make it through contact with genuine care delivery.

A nurse looking after 4 or 5 patients on a medical surgical floor might see that a well desired policy creates repeated interruptions throughout medication administration. A procedural nurse may see that a scheduling decision impacts pre-op teaching and informed approval circulation. An important care nurse may identify that a devices rollout needs a different competency method than originally planned. None of those observations are small details. They are precisely the details that figure out whether a governance decision enhances care or complicates it.

When nursing knowledge is focused, governance ends up being more reality-based. The organization gets earlier warning about unintentional effects. It also gets more practical options. Nurses are accustomed to balancing safety, timeliness, client education, family dynamics, and group communication at the exact same time. That is not just scientific work. It is system thinking in real conditions.
Better care depends upon meaningful nurse voice
The greatest argument for focusing nursing knowledge is easy. Client care is much safer and higher quality when the people closest to practice aid form the conditions of practice.

Leadership sources have regularly linked Shared Governance and Professional Governance to more secure, higher-quality care, stronger team effort, interprofessional partnership, empowerment, engagement, and retention. Those are not separate results sitting in different buckets. They strengthen each other.

A nurse who has a meaningful voice in practice decisions is most likely to speak up early about a design defect, a security issue, or a policy that does not fit client needs. An unit where nurses have genuine authority over aspects of expert practice often sees more powerful ownership of requirements, due to the fact that those standards were not merely enforced. They were constructed, disputed, and improved by the people accountable for bring them out.

There is likewise a cultural effect that experienced leaders acknowledge rapidly. When nurses can influence governance, the tone of professional life changes. Personnel move from passive compliance toward active stewardship. Rather of saying, "This is the new guideline," they are more likely to ask, "Does this improve care, and if not, what requires to alter?" That is a much healthier concern. It reflects maturity, not resistance.

This matters for teamwork also. Interprofessional collaboration is strongest when each discipline is respected for its unique know-how. Nurses do not strengthen collaboration by becoming quiet implementers. They strengthen it by contributing what just they can see, while engaging freely with colleagues from medication, pharmacy, therapy, operations, quality, and administration. Good governance does not flatten differences between professions. It uses those differences to make much better decisions.
Why terms has actually shifted, and why it matters
The motion from Shared Governance towards Professional Governance can sound cosmetic if it is dealt with casually. It is not cosmetic when leaders understand what is being clarified.

Historically, Shared Governance has been the familiar term across nursing. It usually describes official systems that give nurses a voice in decisions affecting professional practice. That structure stays essential. Yet the newer language of Professional Governance locations more powerful emphasis on ownership of practice, accountability, and leadership. It recommends not just that choices are shared, however that the profession should govern crucial measurements of its own work.

That shift assists remedy 2 typical problems.

First, it presses versus the idea that nurse involvement is optional. If nursing practice is central to client care, then nursing competence is not one stakeholder point of view amongst numerous. It is a governing viewpoint for problems that directly form care delivery.

Second, it raises expectations for nurses themselves. Professional Governance is not just about being heard. It also needs preparedness to analyze proof, weigh completing concerns, represent peers fairly, and accept accountability for choices. That is a stronger expert posture than merely asking for input.

In useful terms, the terms shift can assist companies move away from symbolic involvement and toward substantive authority. It can likewise assist nurses see governance as part of practice, not as extra work scheduled for a few enthusiastic volunteers.
The cost of keeping governance too far from practice
Every company has constraints. Time is tight. Resources are limited. Choices can not be postponed indefinitely. These truths are frequently used, in some cases all the best and in some cases defensively, to validate structured governance. The argument generally sounds reasonable. There is seriousness. We require consistency. We can not run every decision through several groups.

Fair enough. Not every choice requires the exact same level of deliberation.

But there is a covert cost when governance wanders too far from practice. Choices may move faster initially, yet produce drag later through confusion, revamp, frustration, uneven adoption, and preventable security concerns. Frontline skepticism grows. Leaders hang around fixing execution failures that could have been prevented previously by including nurses in a meaningful way.

Anyone who has seen a major practice modification stumble can acknowledge the pattern. Education is hurried since workflows were not validated well enough. Questions appear that must have been addressed throughout preparation. Supervisors and teachers become the clean-up team. Personnel start dealing with future efforts with caution because they keep in mind the last rollout that looked polished in a slide deck and untidy in reality.

Professional Governance does not remove these threats. It decreases them by putting know-how where it belongs, at the point of decision.
Nurse engagement and retention are governance issues
It is tempting to speak about engagement and retention as if they were primarily products of payment, scheduling, and work. Those aspects are very important, but they are not the entire story. Nurses likewise remain where their judgment matters.

An office can offer a strong orientation and competitive advantages, yet still lose skilled clinicians if the expert culture treats them as end users rather than decision makers. In time, that kind of environment deteriorates commitment. Proficient nurses become less happy to invest discretionary energy in improvement work when they think significant choices are already set elsewhere.

Leadership sources connect Shared Governance and Professional Governance https://pastelink.net/zklnnvd1 https://pastelink.net/zklnnvd1 with empowerment, engagement, and retention for great factor. The relationship is instinctive to anyone who has led teams. Individuals are more likely to devote to an organization when they can affect the standards and systems that form their work. They are also more likely to grow as leaders.

There is a useful labor force angle here that is worthy of more attention. Not every outstanding nurse wants a formal management course. Professional Governance creates another opportunity for leadership, one rooted in practice knowledge instead of supervisory authority alone. A personnel nurse can lead a council conversation, aid improve a policy, represent coworkers in an open forum, or bring unit-based issues into a broader organizational process. That type of contribution reinforces the profession and provides companies a deeper management bench.

The outcome is not only much better morale. It is a more durable clinical culture.
Shared choice making is an ethical expectation, not a luxury
The ethical case for nurse-centered governance is more powerful than lots of organizations acknowledge. The ANA Code of Ethics determines cooperation and shared choice making as essential to nursing's work, and it explicitly includes shared governance among labor force sustainability initiatives. That informs us something crucial. Governance is not merely an organizational choice. It sits near the ethical conditions required for sustainable professional practice.

This matters since ethical nursing practice does not occur in a vacuum. Nurses can be personally committed, scientifically proficient, and deeply thoughtful, yet still battle in systems where practice choices are made without their input. Ethical strain grows when clinicians are accountable for outcomes however omitted from the structures that form those outcomes.

Shared decision making helps close that gap. It lines up accountability with impact. If nurses are anticipated to promote requirements of care, then they need real participation in forming those standards and the environments in which they are delivered.

That principle likewise safeguards clients. A labor force that is heard, respected, and professionally engaged is much better positioned to determine emerging threats, collaborate across disciplines, and sustain quality over time.
What efficient governance looks like in real settings
No single template fits every healthcare facility or health system. Size, service lines, staffing models, and culture all matter. Still, efficient Professional Governance tends to share a few identifiable features.
Nurses have formal representation in decisions about professional practice. Councils or representative bodies go over practice and policy problems in open forum. Input is gathered early enough to influence the outcome. Nurse leaders support the process without controlling every result. Accountability for choices is clear, including follow-through.
Those features sound simple, however the subtlety is in how they are lived.

Formal representation can not be restricted to a handpicked couple of who constantly agree with management. Open forum can not imply conversation without repercussion. Early input can not be replaced by last-minute evaluation. Assistance from leaders can not become peaceful veto power. And accountability can not stop at approving minutes.

The best governance structures feel rigorous, not ceremonial. Questions are welcomed. Compromises are called clearly. When a suggestion can not be embraced as proposed, the factor is described. When a council's work causes change, the company closes the loop so nurses can see the effect of their contribution.

That last point is often underestimated. Nothing weakens governance quicker than invisible effect. Nurses will continue to engage when they can trace the line in between expert discussion and operational change.
The compromises leaders need to manage
Centering nursing proficiency in governance does not get rid of tension from decision making. In some cases, it surfaces tension more honestly.

A council might support a practice suggestion that enhances professional autonomy but needs more application time than operations leaders hoped for. Nurses may identify patient care threats in a proposed procedure that uses monetary or logistical advantages in other places. Different nursing groups may disagree with each other, particularly across acute care, ambulatory, procedural, and specialty contexts.

These are not indications of failure. They are indications that governance is doing real work.

Strong leaders do not utilize dispute as a reason to bypass Professional Governance. They utilize governance to resolve dispute responsibly. In some cases that implies piloting a modification in one area before broad adoption. Sometimes it suggests adjusting a policy instead of standardizing every information. Often it indicates accepting that the fastest path is not the best one.

Good governance also needs discipline from nursing representatives. It is inadequate to bring concerns forward. Agents require to compare choice and concept, between separated inconvenience and systemic danger. That becomes part of professional maturity. Governance works best when nurses come prepared to promote highly, listen seriously, and think beyond their own unit.
When Shared Governance ends up being hollow
Many organizations use the language of Shared Governance while wandering away from its function. The indication are familiar.
Councils evaluate decisions after they are already finalized. Attendance is expected, however authority is vague. Staff hear about governance work, yet rarely see useful outcomes. Leaders invoke nurse voice selectively, mainly when it supports an established direction. The procedure becomes so governmental that frontline clinicians can not take part consistently.
Once that occurs, cynicism follows. Nurses begin to deal with governance as another obligation layered onto scientific work rather than as a significant opportunity for professional influence. Reversing that cynicism is hard. It takes more than relaunching a committee or rejuvenating bylaws. It requires restoring trust that involvement leads to action.

That frequently begins with a little number of noticeable wins. A practice issue is advanced, gone over honestly, modified based upon nurse input, and implemented with clear interaction back to personnel. People observe. Reliability returns one concrete decision at a time.
Why this is a leadership test
Professional Governance is often described as empowering nurses, which holds true, but it also checks leaders. It asks whether executives, directors, and supervisors are willing to share authority in areas where nursing knowledge need to bring real weight. That is harder than backing the idea in principle.

Leaders who genuinely support nurse-centered governance do a few things regularly. They make room for dissent without punishing it. They resist the desire to solve every concern before representative groups can engage it. They deal with governance work as operationally crucial, not peripheral. And they protect time and attention for it, even when the calendar is crowded.

That support can not be passive. Nurses can not govern practice meaningfully if every governance job is squeezed into leftovers, after a full shift, with little access to info and no noticeable reaction from choice makers. If a company states nursing proficiency is main, its structures must show it.

There is a practical management benefit here also. Organizations that center nursing proficiency get better intelligence. They hear sooner where policy and practice diverge. They identify friction points previously. They emerge concepts from clinicians who understand the work thoroughly. That is not just great for nursing. It is great governance, full stop.
Placing the profession where it belongs
The case for centering nursing knowledge is not sentimental, and it is not political in the narrow sense. It is operational, professional, ethical, and clinical.

Shared Governance created an essential structure by insisting that nurses need a formal voice in decisions about their expert practice. Professional Governance sharpens that foundation by calling what is really at stake, autonomy, responsibility, meaningful decision making, and management in practice. Together, these concepts point to a fundamental truth. The profession can not be responsible for care while remaining peripheral to governance.

Nurses are present at the point where policy becomes action, where coordination becomes outcome, and where system style either supports safe care or weakens it. They see what works, what stops working, what includes problem, what constructs reliability, and what patients in fact experience. That understanding is too essential to be infiltrated governance after the fact.

When companies position nursing proficiency at the center, they do more than enhance committee style. They enhance teamwork, support workforce sustainability, respect the principles of shared decision making, and make better options for client care. They likewise send a clear message about what nursing is, not a labor force to be managed around, but an occupation that helps govern the standards and systems on which care depends.

That is precisely where nursing belongs.

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

Creative Health Care Management (CHCM) is a nursing consulting and education company serving hospitals since 1978 by nursing pioneer Marie Manthey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Manthey. Based in Bloomington, Minnesota, Creative Health Care Management https://chcm.com/ partners with hospitals, health systems, and care teams transform 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>