Magnet ® Consulting and the Shift From 14 Forces to 5 Components

16 August 2026

For organizations pursuing Magnet Recognition Program ® classification, the language of the structure matters almost as much as the proof itself. Words form preparation. They impact how leaders arrange teams, how nurses explain practice, and how paperwork is constructed over time. That is why the shift from the original 14 Forces of Magnetism to the existing 5 parts still matters, even years after the design changed.

In Magnet ® Consulting work, this is among the first transitions that needs to be clarified. Many medical facilities still have institutional memory tied to the older forces. Longtime nursing leaders might keep in mind preparing evidence in that language. Staff who have actually inherited Magnet responsibilities sometimes experience legacy binders, old presentations, or redesignation habits developed around a structure that no longer matches the present model. None of that is unusual. What matters is comprehending what changed, why it changed, and how that shift must affect existing planning.

The Magnet Recognition Program ® is an ANCC program that acknowledges health care organizations for nursing quality and quality client results. Its roots trace back to a 1983 research study of health centers that were able to bring in and maintain nurses, often referred to as "magnet" hospitals. The program name officially changed to Magnet Recognition Program ® in 2002, and Magnet status is granted by the American Nurses Credentialing Center, or ANCC. Gradually, ANCC fine-tuned the model used to assess organizations. The current structure is organized around five elements of the empirical model rather than the initial 14 Forces of Magnetism.

That change was not cosmetic. It reflected a much deeper effort to align the design with appraisal information and to present nursing excellence in a manner that was more integrated, more quantifiable, and more practical for modern organizations.
Why the old 14 Forces still come up
Anyone who has spent time around Magnet preparation has actually seen how long lasting language can be. Once a healthcare facility has actually built education sessions, governance materials, and management stories around a set of principles, those ideas tend to stick. The original 14 Forces of Magnetism were foundational to the early program, so they still hold historic significance. They likewise remain useful in one crucial sense: they advise individuals that Magnet was never implied to be a documentation workout. From the start, the focus was on what strong nursing environments in fact looked like in practice.

The issue is that historic familiarity can create functional confusion. A group might understand the old terms however battle to equate them into current ANCC expectations. A primary nursing officer may inherit a redesignation timeline while a number of directors continue sorting stories according to a structure that precedes the existing design. A project lead might recognize, halfway through drafting, that the narrative feels fragmented since it is being assembled force by force rather than element by component.

This is where Magnet ® Consulting typically ends up being less about producing documents and more about assisting a group think plainly. The work begins with reframing. The concern is not whether the older forces mattered. They did. The question is how the current five-component design now organizes the proof that ANCC expects to see.
What changed in 2008, and why it matters
ANCC states that the present model evolved from the earlier 14 Forces of Magnetism after a 2007 statistical analysis of appraisal scores. The 2008 conceptual design organized those forces into five elements:
Transformational Leadership Structural Empowerment Exemplary Professional Practice New Knowledge, Developments, & & Improvements Empirical Outcomes
That restructuring is one of the most important advancements in the modern-day Magnet framework. It informs companies that the program is not asking them to present excellence as a collection of isolated qualities. It is asking to demonstrate a coherent operating model.

That difference sounds abstract until you see it play out in a documentation space. Under the older force-based frame of mind, groups can become overly concentrated on classifying specific examples. A governance council fits here. A recognition story fits there. A professional advancement effort enters another section. The result can end up being detailed however not convincing. It checks out like a set of nursing achievements rather than a system.

The five-component model changes that. It asks an organization to demonstrate how leadership shapes culture, how structures support nurses, how professional practice functions, how innovation is advanced, and whether all of that causes quantifiable outcomes. The model becomes more relational. Instead of asking, "Do https://edwindadp818.iamarrows.com/magnet-r-consulting-transformational-leadership-at-the-core-of-magnet https://edwindadp818.iamarrows.com/magnet-r-consulting-transformational-leadership-at-the-core-of-magnet we have examples for each principle?" the much better concern becomes,"Can we show how our environment produces excellence and how we understand it does?"

That is a far more powerful frame for both designation and redesignation.
The useful difference in between 14 forces and 5 components
The cleanest method to comprehend the shift is to see it as motion from a long list of specifying attributes to a more integrated empirical design. The present framework does not erase the initial thinking. It consolidates and organizes it around wider domains that are much easier to link to results and organizational performance.

In genuine Magnet ® Consulting engagements, this often alters the rhythm of preparation. Under a force-based mentality, teams can become document gatherers. Under the five-component design, they require to end up being pattern recognizers. They are searching for evidence that demonstrates alignment throughout nursing management, structure, practice, innovation, and results.

This is particularly essential since Magnet applicants submit composed documents using Sources of Proof, or proof requirements, tied to the Application Manual. That indicates an organization can not count on broad claims or general pride in its culture. It needs to satisfy written paperwork proof requirements as defined by ANCC. The model is not simply philosophical. It needs to appear in concrete, arranged, defensible evidence.

A typical challenge appears when companies try to map old examples into brand-new classifications without adjusting the narrative. The proof might still stand, but the story around it is thin. For instance, a strong shared governance structure is not just a structural feature. In a well-developed Magnet story, it also links to professional practice, to management expectations, and eventually to outcomes. The 5 elements reward that fuller line of sight.
The 5 parts are more comprehensive, however not looser
Some groups initially presume that moving from 14 forces to 5 parts indicates the basic ended up being easier. More comprehensive categories can look simpler on paper. In practice, they frequently require more discipline.

The factor is simple. Broad components require more powerful synthesis. A narrow classification might enable a company to drop in an example and move on. A broad component forces a team to show how several efforts interact. That is harder, not easier.

Take Empirical Results. The term itself signals a high bar. It is insufficient to state that staff were engaged, leaders were supportive, or practice improved. The company should reveal results. ANCC recognizes Magnet as acknowledgment for nursing excellence and quality patient results, so the expectation for proof naturally centers on what can be shown, not just what can be described.

This is where knowledgeable Magnet ® Consulting can be important, not because specialists possess secret understanding, however due to the fact that they can often identify the gap in between activity and evidence. Many healthcare facilities do excellent work. The difficulty is normally not absence of effort. It is incomplete translation of that effort into a coherent Magnet framework.
A much better method to think of the 5 components
The 5 components are best understood as a linked operating system for nursing quality. Transformational Management sets direction and impact. Structural Empowerment develops the channels, relationships, and opportunities that permit personnel to get involved meaningfully. Exemplary Professional Practice shows how care and professional nursing work are in fact carried out. New Knowledge, Innovations, & Improvements reveals whether the company is advancing rather than merely maintaining. Empirical Outcomes tests whether all of that produces measurable results.

When those elements are developed together, an organization's Magnet story ends up being much more reputable. When one is weak, the weak point normally appears somewhere else. A hospital can talk about innovation, for example, but if staff structures are thin and management support is irregular, the innovation story frequently checks out like a collection of separated pilots. Likewise, a company can have energetic management messaging, however if outcomes are not obvious, the narrative becomes aspirational rather than persuasive.

This is one reason the shift from 14 forces to 5 parts remains so crucial. The current design is harder to video game. It expects internal consistency.
What Magnet ® Consulting need to concentrate on after the shift
A helpful Magnet ® Consulting technique does not start with format or design templates. It starts with analysis. Before anybody prepares a page of composed paperwork, the company needs a typical understanding of what the existing design is asking it to show.

The most efficient early conversations generally revolve around a few practical questions:
Are we organizing our proof around the existing five-component design, not legacy force language? Can we link management choices, nursing structures, practice examples, development efforts, and outcomes in a way that reads as one system? Do our composed examples match the Sources of Proof requirements tied to the Application Manual? Are we preparing for classification or redesignation, and have we represented that distinction in our planning? Do we have a trustworthy process for ongoing appraisal assistance and interim monitoring needs?
Those concerns sound easy, but they change the whole tone of a Magnet journey. ANCC explains the course as the Journey to Magnet Excellence ®, and that phrase deserves taking seriously. A journey suggests advancement over time, not a last-minute writing push. Organizations that carry out finest tend to deal with Magnet as a management discipline, not a submission event.

This is where timing likewise matters. ANCC posts different Magnet application and appraisal cost schedules, consisting of an online application cost and appraisal evaluation fees due at written file submission. While the specific amounts can change and should constantly be verified directly with ANCC, the presence of these phases matters operationally. It implies that readiness is not just a quality concern but a spending plan and sequencing concern. Groups that underestimate the preparation required by the five-component model frequently feel that pressure late.
Designation is not redesignation, and the model matters to both
Another location where the shift in framework impacts preparation is the difference between classification and redesignation. ANCC explains that organizations that have already made Magnet Recognition ought to pursue redesignation to continue being acknowledged. That difference is not administrative trivia. It impacts mindset.

For novice applicants, the work often fixates developing a Magnet narrative and assembling evidence in a disciplined method. For redesignation, there is the included expectation of continual efficiency and continued positioning with ANCC standards. Organizations can not rely on their earlier success as proof of present readiness. The existing model still governs the case they need to make.

In practice, redesignation can be more complicated than preliminary classification because tradition routines collect. Groups may advance old organizational language, old evidence structures, or old assumptions about what satisfied appraisers years previously. The five-component design is useful here since it forces a reset. It asks a redesignating organization to reveal what it is now, not what it once recorded well.

That is frequently an unpleasant but healthy workout. Strong organizations typically find both strengths and blind areas when they stop believing in historical classifications and begin evaluating themselves through the present model.
The role of digital tools and continuous monitoring
ANCC likewise provides digital tools and guides to support the appraisal procedure and interim tracking during classification. That detail is simple to neglect, however it carries an essential message. Magnet is not planned to function as a static, once-written archive. There is an expectation of continuous oversight and structured engagement with the process.

For medical facilities, this has practical implications. The very best preparation systems tend to be living systems. Documents are version-controlled. Evidence is curated, not dumped. Accountability for updates is clear. Leaders know what they own. Nurse leaders comprehend where their examples fit and why they matter. Without that discipline, the five-component design can end up being frustrating due to the fact that its very strength, the combination of numerous domains, requires organizations to manage details well.

I have actually seen groups spend weeks searching for products that ought to have been preserved all along. I have actually also seen lean teams deal with surprising performance due to the fact that they had a basic rule: every significant nursing initiative had to be traceable to several Magnet elements and to whatever proof would later on be needed to support it. That habit does not get rid of the effort, however it avoids unneeded rework.
The shift also changed how companies speak about nursing excellence
There is a subtler effect of the move from 14 forces to five components. It altered internal language. When groups adopt the existing model well, conversations end up being less about whether a system has a success story and more about what the story proves.

That distinction improves executive interaction. It enhances nursing leader accountability. It even improves staff education due to the fact that the design feels more connected to how organizations actually operate. Nurses do not experience their work as a list of disconnected qualities. They experience management, structure, practice, development, and outcomes as intertwined truths. The 5 elements show that lived environment much better than a longer list of separate forces.

This matters when medical facilities discuss Magnet to boards, medical staff, financing leaders, and frontline teams. ANCC says the program offers a roadmap to nursing excellence. Roadmaps work best when they reveal relationships clearly. The five-component model does that. It uses a more powerful way to explain why Magnet is not merely a recognition badge, but a framework for understanding and demonstrating nursing excellence.
Trademark, language, and accuracy still matter
One useful note that deserves attention in any professional conversation of Magnet ® Consulting is terms. Magnet Acknowledgment Program ®, Journey to Magnet Quality ®, and Magnet-related logo designs are trademarked and governed by ANCC guidelines. Designated organizations might utilize official Magnet logo designs under trademark guidelines. That may look like a branding information, however it becomes part of working thoroughly within the program.

Precision matters throughout the process. It matters in how organizations explain their status. It matters in how they go over designation versus redesignation. It matters in how they align evidence to ANCC expectations. Groups that are reckless with language are typically careless with structure, which tends to show up later on in preparation.
Where organizations typically have a hard time after the design change
Most difficulties are not caused by lack of dedication. They come from one of a couple of repeating gaps.

The first is tradition framing. Individuals keep believing in terms that no longer match the present model. The 2nd is overcollection. Groups collect a substantial volume of product without a clear evidentiary method. The third is weak connection in between examples and outcomes. The 4th is irregular ownership, where everybody is"supporting Magnet"but no one is genuinely accountable for component-level coherence. The 5th is dealing with written documentation as the entire project rather of one stage within a wider appraisal and tracking process.

None of those problems are uncommon. All of them are fixable. The common thread is that the present five-component design rewards integration, discipline, and proof.
What the shift ultimately asks of leaders
The relocation from 14 forces to 5 parts asks leaders to think at a higher level without becoming vague. That balance is difficult. It requires nursing executives and Magnet leaders to hold two realities at once. They need to remain close enough to practice to understand what is genuine, and broad enough in point of view to demonstrate how those realities form a system that produces excellence.

That is why the shift still should have cautious attention. It was not an easy repackaging workout. According to ANCC, it followed statistical analysis of appraisal ratings and led to a conceptual model that grouped the initial forces into five components. That advancement matters since it tells companies how Magnet now expects nursing quality to be understood and demonstrated.

For medical facilities pursuing classification or redesignation, that ought to form everything from governance conversations to composing method to interim monitoring routines. For anyone associated with Magnet ® Consulting, it is the important lens. If the team does not understand the shift, it will have a hard time to present a strong case no matter the number of examples it has actually collected. If it does comprehend the shift, the whole preparation process becomes more focused, more meaningful, and far more credible.

The Magnet design now asks an uncomplicated however demanding question: can this organization show, through the present framework and needed evidence, that nursing excellence is not declared however shown? That is the real significance of the relocation from 14 forces to five components, and it is where the very best Magnet work begins.

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

CHCM is a health care consulting and education firm serving hospitals since 1978 by nurse leader Marie Manthey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Manthey. Located in Bloomington, Minnesota, Creative Health Care Management https://chcm.com/ works alongside nursing and clinical teams improve the patient experience https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_experience through its proprietary 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>