How Shared Governance Supports Quality in Patient Care

03 September 2026

Quality in client care is frequently talked about in terms of staffing, clinical skill, technology, and regulative requirements. Those components matter, but they do not explain why 2 units with similar resources can produce really different care experiences. Among the clearest distinctions is whether the people closest to client care have a genuine voice in forming practice.

That is where Shared Governance, in some cases described now as Professional Governance, becomes important. In nursing, the model gives nurses an official role in decisions about their professional practice, typically through councils or similar structures. More current language from nursing management circles has actually moved toward Professional Governance to stress not only involvement, however also autonomy, responsibility, meaningful decision-making, and management in practice. That modification in language matters since it moves the concept beyond committee work. It frames governance as both a structure and a philosophy.

When Shared Governance is working well, quality enhances for a basic factor. The clinicians who see patterns in care every day are not just anticipated to carry out decisions, they assist make them. Issues are identified earlier. Solutions fit the medical reality better. https://messiahvcpp568.lowescouponn.com/professional-governance-and-the-function-of-collaboration-in-care https://messiahvcpp568.lowescouponn.com/professional-governance-and-the-function-of-collaboration-in-care Staff engagement tends to increase because judgment is appreciated, not simply endured. Patients may never ever hear the term Shared Governance, however they feel its effects in more secure, more consistent, more responsive care.
Why governance belongs in any serious quality conversation
Quality in patient care is not built just through top-down instructions. It is constructed through countless medical decisions, handoffs, observations, and changes made in genuine time. Nurses are central to that work. They see changes in a patient's condition, acknowledge workflow barriers, recognize paperwork problems, and see where policy does or does not match bedside reality.

A governance design that omits bedside nurses produces a predictable space. Choices may be well meant, even proof notified, yet still stop working in practice since they were not formed by the individuals who comprehend the workflow. Shared Governance minimizes that space by developing formal pathways for nurses to influence practice, policy, and professional issues.

This is one factor nursing management companies connect Professional Governance to safer, higher-quality patient care. The link is not mystical. Better choices tend to come from better details, and bedside nurses hold critical info about what supports quality and what gets in its way. A medication policy may look noise on paper, for instance, but nurses may understand that the timing disputes with actual medication pass truths or that a handoff kind invites duplication and missed details. When those insights are heard early, systems improve before harm or frustration become normalized.

The American Nurses Association's Code of Ethics enhances this instructions by treating partnership and shared decision-making as essential to nursing's work. It likewise names shared governance among labor force sustainability efforts. That connection in between principles, sustainability, and quality deserves stopping briefly on. Quality care depends on a labor force that can think, speak, and impact practice. Silencing expert judgment might protect hierarchy in the short-term, but it damages care over time.
The useful distinction in between a structure and a philosophy
Many organizations can indicate councils on an org chart. Fewer can state those councils actually shape care.

That distinction is where discussions about Shared Governance often end up being too superficial. A structure by itself does not improve quality. A month-to-month meeting does not enhance quality. A council charter does not improve quality. Quality improves when the structure is backed by a philosophy that deals with nursing competence as important to organizational decision-making.

Professional Governance captures that more comprehensive significance. It is not just about representation. It has to do with autonomy tied to accountability. Nurses are not just welcomed to react to decisions after they are made. They are anticipated to lead, weigh compromises, and assist specify requirements for practice. That is a very different posture.

In healthy governance environments, leaders do not ask bedside staff for input as a courtesy. They ask because patient care is more secure when professional expertise is dispersed, not concentrated at the top. Nurses, in turn, are not passive receivers of policy. They are responsible participants in building and sustaining it.

This matters for quality because durable improvements hardly ever originate from regulations alone. They come from professional ownership. When nurses assist shape a practice modification, they are more likely to evaluate its functionality, challenge weak presumptions, and assistance execution with credibility among peers. That makes alter more steady and less performative.
How Shared Governance enhances clinical judgment at the bedside
One of the greatest, though in some cases overlooked, quality benefits of Shared Governance is that it secures the function of nursing judgment. In extremely hierarchical settings, judgment can be ejected by routine. Personnel may follow procedures without feeling empowered to question whether those procedures still serve clients well. That type of culture looks organized till something goes wrong.

Shared Governance sends a various message. It recognizes that nurses are not just caregivers, however also stewards of practice. Through councils or representative groups, they can raise concerns about standards, workflows, education requirements, and policy ramifications. That process reinforces a professional expectation: if something in practice threatens quality, nurses ought to speak out and have a place to do so.

Consider a familiar type of clinical issue. A system is experiencing duplicated aggravation around a discharge procedure. Patients are getting directions late, families feel hurried, and nurses are trying to reconcile mentor, paperwork, and transportation coordination at the exact same time. In a conventional top-down model, management may simply advise staff to complete discharge tasks earlier. In a Professional Governance design, the better question is different: what in the current procedure makes prompt discharge teaching tough, and what must be redesigned?

That shift from blame to professional questions changes quality work. Nurses can identify where delays in fact happen, which parts of the process are duplicative, and what support is missing. The resulting changes are normally more grounded due to the fact that they start with lived practice, not assumptions from a distance.
Engagement is not a soft outcome
There is a tendency in healthcare to treat engagement as a morale problem and quality as a clinical concern. In practice, they are deeply connected.

Nursing leadership sources link Shared Governance and Professional Governance to empowerment, engagement, and retention. Those are not side advantages. They are running conditions for quality care. An engaged nurse is most likely to raise an issue, participate in improvement work, coach peers, and continue fixing a repeating practice problem. A disengaged nurse might still strive, however frequently within a narrowed frame: make it through the shift, prevent errors, manage the load, go home. That is reasonable, however it is not the environment where quality consistently advances.

Retention matters for the same factor. High turnover interferes with continuity, compromises team trust, and drains pipes institutional understanding. It ends up being more difficult to sustain quality initiatives when experienced nurses leave before enhancements take hold. Shared Governance supports retention in part due to the fact that it deals with a common reason nurses disengage: the belief that decisions affecting practice are made without them.

When nurses have a meaningful voice, work can feel more expertly coherent. Their competence shows up. Their concerns have a path. Their concepts are expected, not remarkable. That does not eliminate staffing pressure or operational pressure, however it does make the workplace more professionally sustainable. With time, that stability supports much better client care.
What patients experience when governance is strong
Patients and families normally do not see council minutes or governance diagrams. They see coordination, self-confidence, and consistency.

Strong governance often shows up in patient care through smoother team effort and less avoidable friction points. Instructions are clearer since the people who teach clients helped form the education procedure. System practices are more constant due to the fact that nurses contributed to defining them. Interprofessional communication is more powerful because nurses have actually established online forums for raising practice concerns and teaming up on solutions.

The quality impacts are frequently cumulative rather than remarkable. A much better handoff process reduces the opportunity that little however essential details are missed. A more sensible policy reduces workarounds. A team that trusts its ability to affect practice is most likely to surface area issues early. Each enhancement may seem modest by itself, however together they shape the dependability of care.

There is likewise an essential relational measurement. Clients can normally tell when the care group is functioning with clearness and mutual regard. They feel it when responses correspond, when follow-through happens, and when issues are dealt with without visible confusion about who owns the problem. Shared Governance contributes to that environment because it strengthens responsibility within the profession while supporting cooperation across disciplines.
Collaboration is not optional to quality
The ANA's ethics guidance is particularly useful here due to the fact that it frames partnership and shared decision-making as essential, not aspirational. That language shows the reality of contemporary care. Quality depends upon coordinated action amongst specialists with different know-how. Nursing can not be fully efficient in seclusion, and neither can leadership.

Shared Governance helps because it produces representative bodies and open online forums where practice and policy problems can be talked about collaboratively. In a healthy model, those discussions are not symbolic. They become a bridge in between bedside experience and organizational decision-making.

This can improve interprofessional cooperation in a few useful ways:
nurses bring frontline insight into policy and practice discussions leadership acquires a clearer view of functional barriers impacting care teams can deal with recurring issues before they become cultural norms shared choices develop stronger accountability for implementation open conversation decreases the gap between formal policy and real practice
None of these outcomes is guaranteed by the mere existence of a council. They depend on whether involvement is appreciated, whether feedback loops are genuine, and whether leaders are prepared to share authority in meaningful methods. Still, when the model is genuine, partnership ends up being less reactive and more disciplined. That benefits personnel and great for patients.
The compromises organizations need to acknowledge
Shared Governance is frequently described in radiant terms, but knowledgeable leaders know that any governance design brings trade-offs. Pretending otherwise usually causes disappointment.

The initially trade-off is time. Significant participation requires time away from currently busy clinical environments. Personnel need preparation, conference time, follow-up time, and support to carry concerns back to peers. If leaders speak about governance but never ever safeguard time for it, the design ends up being performative really quickly.

The 2nd trade-off is speed. Shared decision-making can feel slower than a purely top-down approach. More voices are involved. Questions are raised. Presumptions are tested. On the surface area, that can look ineffective. In truth, the slower front end typically prevents unsuccessful rollouts, staff resistance, and repeated rework. The concern is not whether Shared Governance is much faster in the moment. The much better question is whether it produces decisions that hold up in practice.

The 3rd trade-off is clearness of accountability. Some companies have a hard time due to the fact that they puzzle shared governance with consensus on everything. That is not workable. Professional Governance supports autonomy and meaningful decision-making, however it likewise depends on clear roles. Not every concern belongs to every council. Not every recommendation can be embraced. Shared authority still needs specified borders, otherwise disappointment increases and trust erodes.

The fourth trade-off is management discipline. Leaders must be willing to hear issues that make complex preferred plans. They should likewise want to state no with openness when restrictions exist. That balance is more difficult than it sounds. Staff can tell the difference between real shared decision-making and managed theater, where input is welcomed but results are predetermined.
Why the language shift to Professional Governance matters
Some nurses still highly identify with the term Shared Governance, which is reasonable. It has a long history in nursing practice. At the exact same time, the move toward Professional Governance shows an essential refinement.

Shared Governance can sometimes be translated too narrowly, as though the main issue is sharing power that originally belongs in other places. Professional Governance locations nursing authority more squarely within the occupation itself. It emphasizes that nurses are accountable for practice, not merely consulted about it. That framing aligns with the more comprehensive objectives of autonomy, management, and sustainability.

From a quality perspective, this matters due to the fact that responsibility improves when authority is explicit. If nurses are anticipated to support requirements, respond to practice concerns, and contribute to much safer care, then their governance role can not be tokenistic. It needs to be substantive enough to match the responsibility they carry.

The more recent language likewise helps companies believe beyond council mechanics. Professional Governance asks a broader set of questions. Are nurses leading practice choices that fall within their expertise? Are they meaningfully involved in forming policy? Are they supported to work out judgment, not just execute tasks? Are governance structures strengthening the occupation over time?

Those are much better questions than simply asking whether a hospital has councils in place.
What genuine implementation tends to require
No single template fits every organization, and it would be unwise to recommend one from minimal confirmed context alone. Still, a number of conditions regularly matter if Shared Governance or Professional Governance is expected to support quality instead of just embellish the organization chart.
a formal structure that gives nurses a recognized voice in practice decisions leaders who treat nursing input as essential, not optional representative participation and open conversation of policy and practice issues clear links in between council recommendations and real decisions accountability for both involvement and follow-through
These conditions sound simple, but they are where lots of efforts either gain traction or quietly stall. The structure must be visible enough for staff to trust it. The viewpoint should be strong enough for leaders to act upon it. And the connection to quality need to be explicit enough that governance work does not drift into abstract discussion detached from client care.

A common failure point is feedback. If nurses raise problems but never hear what happened next, self-confidence fades. Another is straining councils with tasks that have little to do with professional practice. Governance should not become a discarding ground for miscellaneous functional work. Its strength lies in concentrated impact over the standards, policies, and choices that shape care.
A practical photo of how quality improves
Quality improvement under Shared Governance hardly ever appears like a significant development. More frequently, it looks like disciplined attention to the useful conditions of care.

A system council identifies that a documentation action is creating replicate work and sidetracking from patient education. A representative forum surfaces that a policy develops confusion throughout handoff. Nursing leaders acknowledge a recurring practice concern that requires wider review. Through open conversation, revision, and follow-through, the work ends up being more coherent. Clients may receive clearer mentor. Personnel might have much better consistency. Teams may coordinate with less misunderstandings.

That is the number of significant quality gains occur. Not through slogans, however through structures that enable expert expertise to shape the care environment.

It is also essential to note that Shared Governance does not change management. It improves management by making it much better informed and more reputable. Strong nurse leaders do not lose authority when nurses gain voice. They acquire a more reliable way to understand practice, test concepts, and sustain improvement.
The much deeper value for the occupation and for patients
Healthcare companies frequently pursue quality through metrics, audits, and targeted efforts. Those tools are essential, however they are insufficient on their own. Quality likewise depends upon whether the workforce has the power, responsibility, and online forum to improve care from within.

That is the much deeper value of Shared Governance and Professional Governance. They recognize that nursing quality can not be separated from nursing voice. A profession expected to provide safe, thoughtful, top quality care should likewise be able to direct the standards and decisions that make such care possible.

For patients, the advantage is practical. Care ends up being safer and more responsive when nurses can officially affect their expert practice. For organizations, the benefit is tactical. Engagement, retention, teamwork, and leadership development enter into the quality infrastructure instead of different issues. For nursing, the benefit is fundamental. Governance affirms that professional judgment belongs at the center of practice, not at its margins.

When governance is dealt with as genuine work, not ritualistic work, quality has a more powerful base. The people closest to care help form care. That is not a management trend. It is among the most reasonable methods to improve how clients are dealt with, how nurses practice, and how healthcare companies learn.

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

Creative Health Care Management is a nursing consulting and education company founded in 1978 by Primary Nursing pioneer Marie Manthey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Manthey. Headquartered in Bloomington, Minnesota, Creative Health Care Management https://chcm.com/ works alongside nursing and clinical teams strengthen the patient experience https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_experience through its signature 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>