How Shared Governance Supports Quality in Client Care

11 September 2026

Quality in client care is often talked about in regards to staffing, clinical skill, technology, and regulative requirements. Those aspects matter, but they do not explain why two systems with comparable resources can produce very various care experiences. One of the clearest differences is whether the people closest to client care have a real voice in shaping practice.

That is where Shared Governance, often described now as Professional Governance, becomes crucial. In nursing, the model gives nurses a formal role in choices about their expert practice, typically through councils or similar structures. More recent language from nursing leadership circles has moved towards Professional Governance to emphasize not just participation, but also autonomy, responsibility, meaningful decision-making, and management in practice. That change 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 improves for an easy factor. The clinicians who see patterns in care every day are not just anticipated to perform choices, they help make them. Issues are determined earlier. Solutions fit the medical truth much better. Personnel engagement tends to rise due to the fact that judgment is respected, not merely endured. Clients may never hear the term Shared Governance, however they feel its impacts in much safer, more consistent, more responsive care.
Why governance belongs in any severe quality conversation
Quality in patient care is not developed just through top-down directives. It is developed through thousands of clinical decisions, handoffs, observations, and changes made in real time. Nurses are central to that work. They see modifications in a client's condition, acknowledge workflow barriers, recognize paperwork burdens, and see where policy does or does not match bedside reality.

A governance design that leaves out bedside nurses develops a foreseeable gap. Decisions might be well intended, even proof informed, yet still stop working in practice since they were not formed by the individuals who understand the workflow. Shared Governance minimizes that gap by producing official paths for nurses to affect practice, policy, and professional issues.

This is one reason nursing management organizations connect Professional Governance to much safer, higher-quality client care. The link is not strange. Much better decisions tend to come from much better details, and bedside nurses hold crucial info about what supports quality and what gets in its way. A medication policy may look sound on paper, for example, however nurses may understand that the timing conflicts with real medication pass realities or that a handoff kind invites duplication and missed information. When those insights are heard early, systems enhance before damage or aggravation become normalized.

The American Nurses Association's Code of Ethics enhances this instructions by dealing with collaboration and shared decision-making as essential to nursing's work. It also names shared governance among workforce sustainability efforts. That connection between ethics, sustainability, and quality is worth stopping briefly on. Quality care depends upon a labor force that can think, speak, and impact practice. Silencing expert judgment may protect hierarchy in the short-term, however it deteriorates care over time.
The practical distinction in between a structure and a philosophy
Many companies can point to councils on an org chart. Less can say those councils in fact shape care.

That difference is where discussions about Shared Governance typically become too superficial. A structure by itself does not improve quality. A regular monthly conference does not enhance quality. A council charter does not enhance quality. Quality enhances when the structure is backed by an approach that treats nursing proficiency as essential to organizational decision-making.

Professional Governance records that broader significance. It is not almost representation. It is about autonomy connected to accountability. Nurses are not merely welcomed to respond to choices after they are made. They are expected to lead, weigh compromises, and help define requirements for practice. That is a really various posture.

In healthy governance environments, leaders do not ask bedside personnel for input as a courtesy. They ask because patient care is much safer when professional knowledge is distributed, not focused at the top. Nurses, in turn, are not passive receivers of policy. They are accountable individuals in building and sustaining it.

This matters for quality due to the fact that long lasting improvements rarely come from regulations alone. They originate from expert ownership. When nurses assist form a practice modification, they are most likely to check its usefulness, difficulty weak presumptions, and support execution with reliability among peers. That makes change more steady and less performative.
How Shared Governance reinforces medical judgment at the bedside
One of the strongest, though often overlooked, quality advantages of Shared Governance is that it protects the role of nursing judgment. In highly hierarchical settings, judgment can be ejected by routine. Staff may follow procedures without feeling empowered to question whether those procedures still serve patients well. That kind of culture looks orderly till something goes wrong.

Shared Governance sends a various message. It recognizes that nurses are not just caregivers, but likewise stewards of practice. Through councils or representative groups, they can raise issues about requirements, workflows, education needs, and policy ramifications. That procedure reinforces a professional expectation: if something in practice threatens quality, nurses should speak up and have a place to do so.

Consider a familiar type of scientific issue. An unit is experiencing repeated frustration around a discharge process. Patients are getting guidelines late, families feel hurried, and nurses are attempting to reconcile teaching, documentation, and transportation coordination at the same time. In a conventional top-down model, leadership might merely advise personnel to finish discharge tasks earlier. In a Professional Governance model, the more useful concern is different: what in the present process makes timely discharge mentor tough, and what must be redesigned?

That shift from blame to professional query changes quality work. Nurses can determine where hold-ups really take place, which parts of the process are duplicative, and what assistance is missing. The resulting modifications are usually more grounded because they start with lived practice, not presumptions from a distance.
Engagement is not a soft outcome
There is a tendency in health care to deal with engagement as a morale problem and quality as a clinical concern. In practice, they are deeply connected.

Nursing leadership sources connect Shared Governance and Professional Governance to empowerment, engagement, and retention. Those are not side benefits. They are operating conditions for quality care. An engaged nurse is more likely to raise an issue, take part in improvement work, mentor peers, and persist in fixing a repeating practice problem. A disengaged nurse might still work hard, but frequently within a narrowed frame: get through the shift, prevent mistakes, manage the load, go home. That is easy to understand, however it is not the environment where quality regularly advances.

Retention matters for the very same reason. High turnover interrupts continuity, compromises group trust, and drains pipes institutional understanding. It becomes harder to sustain quality initiatives when experienced nurses leave previously enhancements take hold. Shared Governance supports retention in part because it attends to a common factor nurses disengage: the belief that choices affecting practice are made without them.

When nurses have a meaningful voice, work can feel more professionally coherent. Their know-how shows up. Their issues have a path. Their concepts are expected, not remarkable. That does not remove staffing pressure or operational stress, however it does make the office more professionally sustainable. Gradually, that stability supports better patient care.
What patients experience when governance is strong
Patients and households typically do not see council minutes or governance diagrams. They see coordination, self-confidence, and consistency.

Strong governance typically shows up in client care through smoother team effort and fewer preventable friction points. Directions are clearer since the people who teach clients assisted form the education process. Unit practices are more consistent since nurses had a hand in defining them. Interprofessional communication is stronger because nurses have actually established forums for raising practice issues and teaming up on solutions.

The quality impacts are typically cumulative rather than significant. A better handoff process lowers the chance that small however crucial details are missed out on. A more reasonable policy reduces workarounds. A group that trusts its ability to influence practice is most likely to surface area concerns early. Each enhancement may seem modest on its own, however together they form the dependability of care.

There is also an essential relational measurement. Clients can generally tell when the care group is working with clarity and shared regard. They feel it when responses are consistent, when follow-through occurs, and when concerns are dealt with without visible confusion about who owns the problem. Shared Governance contributes to that environment due to the fact that it enhances accountability within the occupation while supporting partnership across disciplines.
Collaboration is not optional to quality
The ANA's ethics guidance is specifically helpful here due to the fact that it frames collaboration and shared decision-making as important, not aspirational. That language shows the truth of modern-day care. Quality depends on coordinated action amongst experts with various knowledge. Nursing can not be completely efficient in seclusion, and neither can leadership.

Shared Governance helps due to the fact that it produces representative bodies and open forums where practice and policy issues can be talked about collaboratively. In a healthy model, those discussions are not symbolic. They end up being a bridge between bedside experience and organizational decision-making.

This can improve interprofessional collaboration in a couple of practical ways:
nurses bring frontline insight into policy and practice discussions leadership acquires a clearer view of functional barriers impacting care teams can attend to repeating problems before they end up being cultural norms shared choices construct more powerful responsibility for implementation open conversation reduces 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 participation is appreciated, whether feedback loops are genuine, and whether leaders are prepared to share authority in meaningful methods. Still, when the model is authentic, collaboration ends up being less reactive and more disciplined. That is good for personnel and great for patients.
The trade-offs companies should acknowledge
Shared Governance is typically explained in radiant terms, however experienced leaders understand that any governance model brings compromises. Pretending otherwise usually causes disappointment.

The first compromise is time. Meaningful participation takes some time away from already busy scientific environments. Staff require preparation, meeting time, follow-up time, and support to carry concerns back to peers. If leaders discuss governance however never secure time for it, the design becomes performative extremely quickly.

The second trade-off is rate. Shared decision-making can feel slower than a simply top-down technique. More voices are involved. Concerns are raised. Presumptions are evaluated. On the surface area, that can look inefficient. In reality, the slower front end typically avoids unsuccessful rollouts, staff resistance, and duplicated 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 compromise is clearness of responsibility. Some companies have a hard time due to the fact that they puzzle shared governance with consensus on whatever. That is not convenient. Professional Governance supports autonomy and meaningful decision-making, however it likewise depends upon clear functions. Not every concern comes from every council. Not every suggestion can be adopted. Shared authority still needs specified limits, otherwise aggravation increases and trust erodes.

The 4th trade-off is management discipline. Leaders need to be willing to hear concerns that complicate chosen plans. They need to also be willing to state no with transparency when restrictions exist. That balance is more difficult than it sounds. Personnel can tell the difference in between authentic shared decision-making and managed theater, where input is invited but outcomes are predetermined.
Why the language shift to Professional Governance matters
Some nurses still strongly identify with the term Shared Governance, which is easy to understand. It has a long history in nursing practice. At the very same time, the approach Professional Governance shows an essential refinement.

Shared Governance can often be interpreted too directly, as though the main issue is sharing power that originally belongs in other places. Professional Governance places nursing authority more directly within the profession itself. It stresses that nurses are accountable for practice, not merely spoken with about it. That framing aligns with the broader objectives of autonomy, management, and sustainability.

From a quality perspective, this matters due to the fact that responsibility improves when authority is specific. If nurses are expected to maintain requirements, react to practice problems, and contribute to much safer care, then their governance role can not be tokenistic. It should be substantive sufficient to match the responsibility they carry.

The more recent language likewise assists organizations think beyond council mechanics. Professional Governance asks a wider set of questions. Are nurses leading practice decisions that fall within their competence? Are they meaningfully associated with shaping policy? Are they supported to work out judgment, not simply perform tasks? Are governance structures strengthening the profession over time?

Those are much better questions than just asking whether a healthcare facility has councils in place.
What authentic execution tends to require
No single template fits every organization, and it would be unwise to recommend one from limited confirmed context alone. Still, a number of conditions consistently matter if Shared Governance or Professional Governance is anticipated to support quality rather than simply decorate the organization chart.
a formal structure that gives nurses a recognized voice in practice decisions leaders who treat nursing input as vital, not optional representative involvement and open discussion of policy and practice issues clear links between council recommendations and actual decisions accountability for both involvement and follow-through
These conditions sound straightforward, however they are where numerous efforts either gain traction or silently stall. The structure must be visible enough for staff to trust it. The philosophy needs to be strong enough for leaders to act upon it. And the connection to quality must be specific enough that governance work does not wander into abstract conversation disconnected from patient care.

A common failure point is feedback. If nurses raise problems but never ever hear what took place next, self-confidence fades. Another is overloading councils with tasks that have little to do with professional practice. Governance ought to not end up being a discarding ground for various functional work. Its strength lies in focused impact over the standards, policies, and choices that form care.
A practical photo of how quality improves
Quality improvement under Shared Governance rarely appears like a remarkable advancement. More often, it looks like disciplined attention to the practical conditions of care.

An unit council determines that a paperwork step is developing replicate work and sidetracking from patient education. A representative forum surface areas that a policy creates confusion throughout handoff. Nursing leaders acknowledge a repeating practice concern that needs more comprehensive evaluation. Through open discussion, modification, and follow-through, the work ends up being more meaningful. Clients might receive clearer mentor. Staff may have much better consistency. Teams might collaborate with less misunderstandings.

That is the number of meaningful quality gains happen. Not through slogans, but through structures that enable expert competence to form the care environment.

It is also essential to keep in mind that Shared Governance does not replace management. It enhances leadership by making it much better notified and more credible. Strong nurse leaders do not lose authority when nurses gain voice. They get a more dependable method to understand practice, test ideas, and sustain improvement.
The much deeper value for the occupation and for patients
Healthcare organizations often pursue quality through metrics, audits, and targeted initiatives. Those tools are required, but they are https://waylonykov558.scriblorax.com/posts/professional-governance-and-the-importance-of-agent-nursing-bodies https://waylonykov558.scriblorax.com/posts/professional-governance-and-the-importance-of-agent-nursing-bodies not enough on their own. Quality also depends on whether the workforce has the power, obligation, and 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 deliver safe, thoughtful, top quality care should also be able to guide the requirements and decisions that make such care possible.

For clients, the benefit is practical. Care ends up being more secure and more responsive when nurses can formally affect their professional practice. For companies, the benefit is tactical. Engagement, retention, team effort, and leadership development enter into the quality infrastructure instead of separate concerns. For nursing, the benefit is foundational. 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 stronger base. The people closest to care aid form care. That is not a management pattern. It is one of the most sensible methods to enhance how patients are dealt with, how nurses practice, and how healthcare companies learn.

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

Creative Health Care Management (CHCM) is a nursing consulting and education company founded in 1978 by nurse leader Marie Manthey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Manthey. Headquartered in Bloomington, Minnesota, Creative Health Care Management https://chcm.com/ partners with health care organizations 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>