Complete the Finding and Using Information Worksheet. Note: This assignment will be graded using a rubric. For information on rubrics, please watch the Assignment Rubrics video.
Submit your assignment by uploading your completed worksheet.
Review the following support videos, as needed. For technical support, please contact our Student Technical Support line at 1-877-832-4867, so they can assist you.
Downloading & Saving an Assignment Document
Uploading a Saved Assignment Document
Resources
University Library
Develop a Search Strategy
Tutorial of the University of Phoenix Online Library
How Do I Evaluate Sources
Center for Writing Excellence
Reference and Citation Generator
Grammar Assistance
GEN/201 v11
Finding and Using Information Worksheet
GEN/201 v11
Page 2 of 2
Finding and Using Information Worksheet
Complete Parts 1 and 2
below.
In Part 1, you will find and evaluate two sources from at least two different databases in the University Library. EBSCOhost and ProQuest are the most popular databases in the University Library.
In Part 2, you will write a brief 150- to 200-word response describing your experience using the library databases. This
is a required part of the assignment.
Part 1: Source Evaluation
Select one of the following topics for this assignment:
Obesity
Affordable Care Act
Healthcare disparities
Cyberbullying
Online predators
Information security
Social media
Renewable energy
Financial literacy
Technology in education
Healthy life habits
Career exploration
Mindfulness in business or education
Immigration
Homeland security
Global women’s rights
Concussions and the NFL
Highlight or
bold your topic selection in the list above, so your faculty member can easily see which topic you selected.
Locate 2 articles related to your selected topic from different databases, such as EBSCOhost and ProQuest, in the
University Library. You may use the course-specific library resources found on the
GEN/201 University Success page to locate your articles.
Complete the tables below for each article you have chosen. An example table is provided first. Make sure to refer to the
How Do I Evaluate Sources information in the University Library as you evaluate each article.
Example
Article Information and Questions
Responses
Chosen topic
Social Media
Title of the article
Facebook as a Platform of Social Interactions for Meaningful Learning
Author(s) of the article
Jumaat, Nurul Farhana; Ahmad, Noriesah; Abu Samah, Norazrena; Ashari, Zakiah Mohamad; Ali, Dayana Farzeeha;
Abdullah, Abdul Halim
Currency: When was the article published? Is the article current?
2019 The article was published within the past 5 years so the information can be considered current.
Relevance: Is the article relevant to your selected topic? Explain your response.
The article is relevant because it discusses issues related to the selected topic of social media.
Accuracy: Is the information in the article accurate? How do you know?
The information in the article can be considered accurate. First, the article is peer-reviewed which ensures that it has been verified by other experts on this topic. Also, there is cited evidence and research throughout the article.
Authority: Is the author/ publisher / or source of the information credible? How do you know?
The article was published in a reputable academic publication,
The International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning. The authors of the article are all affiliated/employed at Universiti Teknologi Malaysia and therefore could be considered credible.
Purpose: What is the purpose of the article? Is the information fact, opinion, or propaganda? How do you know?
The purpose of the article is to inform readers about social interactions that exist in Facebook and how it can be used to enhance learning. The authors were not biased because they are not providing an opinion-based piece. They rely on facts and research for their analysis.
After evaluating the source using the CRAAP method, do you think this is a good source to use in an academic research assignment? Why or why not?
This would be a good source to use in an academic research assignment because it is informative and fact-based. This article meets all 5 criteria in the CRAAP method for evaluating the credibility of research sources.
First Source
Article Information and Questions
Responses
Chosen topic
Title of the article
Author(s) of the article
Currency: When was the article published? Is the article current?
Relevance: Is the article relevant to your selected topic? Explain your response.
Accuracy: Is the information in the article accurate? How do you know?
Authority: Is the author/ publisher / or source of the information credible? How do you know?
Purpose: What is the purpose of the article? Is the information fact, opinion, or propaganda? How do you know?
After evaluating the source using the CRAAP method, do you think this is a good source to use in an academic research assignment? Why or why not?
Second Source
Article Information and Questions
Responses
Chosen topic
Title of the article
Author(s) of the article
Currency: When was the article published? Is the article current?
Relevance: Is the article relevant to your selected topic? Explain your response.
Accuracy: Is the information in the article accurate? How do you know?
Authority: Is the author/ publisher / or source of the information credible? How do you know?
Purpose: What is the purpose of the article? Is the information fact, opinion, or propaganda? How do you know?
After evaluating the source using the CRAAP method, do you think this is a good source to use in an academic research assignment? Why or why not?
Part 2: University Library Experience
Write a 150- to 200-word response to the following:
Briefly describe your experience using the library databases to research your chosen topic. Remember to include the names of the two databases you used. Discuss any challenges you encountered.
What strategies will you use to find sources in the University Library going forward?
Copyright 2022 by University of Phoenix. All rights reserved.
Copyright 2022 by University of Phoenix. All rights reserved.
image1.png
SHOW MORE…
Certified Specialist Business Intelligence (CSBI) Reflection Part 6
Describe what you learned from the Course.
Describe how you may apply the information in your current or future career.
Reflection Part 6
CSBI Course 6: Relationship, Change Management and Consulting skills
Leading Change
Finding Opportunity
Communicating Within the Industry
Proving Value
Leading Change
Consultants leverage knowledge,expertise and communications competency to support
decision-makers in considering data and information in ways that reveal robust opportunities for
organizations. Some of these opportunities have not previously been envisioned at an
operations level because meaningful information has not been available or presented.
Exercising Influence and Stimulating Action
A well-considered and integrated use of emotional intelligence, a variety of leadership styles and
appropriate use of power will be valuable to the BI/Analytics consultants as a change agent in
times of turbulence. We will describe each of these attributes and then discuss how their
integrated use creates strong leverage for influence.
Much has been written over the past fifteen years about the success of those who work with
emotional intelligence(EI). High-EI people can understand and read, in real time, their own
emotions while simultaneously understanding those of others and subsequently advancing their
positions by interacting with greater skill and influence than others. This capability is present
even in the heat of the moment, when most individuals would turn to more base-level
interpretations of and reactions to themselves, others and a situation.
Daniel Goleman, a well-known author on EI, finds that leadership performance is affected by
ones ability to work within the two EI competency sets- personal and social. Specifically, ones
ability to engage certain personal and social competencies yields stronger leadership
performance and subsequent results as a change agent.
Self Awareness
Emotional awareness
Accurate self-assessment
Self confidence
Self Management
Self control
Trustworthiness
Conscientiousness
Adaptability
Innovation
Motivation
Achievement drive
Commitment
Initiative
Optimism
Empathy
Understand others
Develop others
Service orientation
Leveraging diversity
Political awareness
Social Skills
Influence
Communication
Conflict management
Leadership
Change catalyst
Building bonds
Collaboration and cooperation
Team capabilities
Exercise Influence and Stimulating Action
It can be surmised that building bonds would be helpful in the complex healthcare environment.
A key in building bonds is to develop extensive informal networks where mutually beneficial
relationships are carefully cultivated. The networks are chosen based on expertise that each
member brings to the table and willingness to extend knowledge or expertise when needed.
Innovation is not seen as a necessary change agent competency because the change agent
helps others unlock their ideas and work through them.
Leadership styles and competencies
Goleman asserts that one can develop higher EI competency through practice. Self tests are
available to see where one stands compared to others. EI can be practiced by learning to use
the six leadership styles listed. Practice of each style sharpens ones EI in specific
competencies. They should all be used at points where such an effect is needed. Use in
combination is appropriate.
The Power Bases
The social skill influence is an EI competency that leaders leverage to get things accomplished.
Influence is grounded in the power individuals exercise, according to Kenneth W. Thomas, PhD.
Thomas presents six power types along with the influence effect each type produces.
The key aim for the BI/Analytics consultant related to influence is to build commitment to an
idea, an approach, a KPI or a new way of looking at or making decisions.
Note the commitment effect is related to personal power bases expertise and information, which
the BI/Analytics consultant should have or can build in abundance. Also needed is compliance
from those outside ones direct control to successfully conduct experiments and launch new
analytic approaches. Goodwill should also be used to build commitment. Successful use of
these power bases relies on communication.
6 Power bases are:
1. Authority-ones formal right to direct others in certain matters and others obligation to
follow those directions.
2. Reward-ones control over things others desire.
3. Discipline-Ones formal right to punish others.
4. Information-Facts or reasoning that one possesses and is able to share convincingly
with team members.
5. Expertise-Ones superior judgment or knowledge in a specific area.
6. Goodwill-Feelings of support and respect that one has built with others.
The influence effect that each power base produces is presented here. Some sources of power
base production are presented here. Some sources of power are positional, while others are
personal. Positional power bases often are not available to the BI/Analytics consultant, as they
require one to be in position of direct authority over another. Positional power bases are not
needed to build commitment. However, ensuring compliance is necessary, along with
occasionally overcoming resistance, and these do not come from commitment alone.
Depending on the situation, one may be available to wield positional power when acting in
project management capacity, though this is difficult. Whennot in a positional power position,
one can exercise personal power to reward individuals that fosters compliance. Mechanisms
need to be in place to make this happen. It is essential to have the ability to use all power types
as appropriate to spur progress.
Source of Power Power Base Influence Effect
Position Authority Compliance
Discipline Resistance
Reward Compliance
Personal Information Commitment
Expertise Commitment
Goodwill Commitment
Fostering Commitment
Now one has a tool set for action. However, conscious use of the tools must be engaged. The
stakeholder provides insights into the interests and needs of individuals involved at all
organizational levels. From this analysis, one should have a keen appreciation of how to
engage EI social competencies. This strengthens political awareness. Action steps, if
developed carefully in the stakeholder process, can address political issues and act as power
mechanisms of reward and goodwill to foster compliance and commitment. For example, set
up the plan for someone who wants a say and participation, so they can participate and talk.
They will feel rewarded. Enrolling them in the process through participation because you
can(exercise goodwill) engage team capabilities. In turn, those drawn in will now exhibit goodwill
to others as it has been extended to them, which leads to commitment.
Other Tools-Sponsorship
One of the other tools to engage in the process is sponsorship. Sponsorship can be defined as
fostering transparency and accountability in the group process, again fitting with necessary EI
competencies of political awareness, initiative and influence. Although one may not be engaged
in a formal project management (PM) situation, the PM tool of sponsorship ensures that enough
organizational executive influence is available to exert pressure against possible resistance.
Others Tools-Communication
Communication is another tool. Its important to understand ones own communication style and
preferences and be sensitive to the styles and preferences of others. A number of self-scoring
tools are available that can be used to master interpersonal communication skills. Some of
these are:
DiSC profile-this tool illuminates ones communication preferences(dominant, influencer,
steadiness & conscientiousness). When these preferences are known, one can work to
understand and interact with others in the context of their preferred styles of
communication.
Myers Briggs Temperament Index: This tool helps individuals and groups understand
the basic differences in the ways they prefer to use their perception and judgment.
Kolbe Conative Index-this tool offers a measure of how people are hardwired to take
action in one of four ways(fact finder, follow through, quick start or implementer).
Exercising influence and Stimulating Action
Whether using these or other tools, its helpful to understand communications preferences and
styles in oneself and in team members. The aim is to carefully build a team that is balanced in
communication styles to achieve diversity of thought and action. Then continue to hone these
skills across the course of the work.
Is it this simple? No. Conscious action is required along with careful and forward-looking
networking and preparation. There is no substitute. There are those who might eschew this
process as contrived and surreptitious. However, goodwill-the most powerful of the power bases
due to the broad spectrum of activities and methods. Goodwill is easily dissipated where
transparency and open action are not in force.
Finding Opportunity
Focus on performance
Using the approaches discussed earlier for working across the organization at all levels, one
can uncover areas and issues of importance that need to be addressed. Here the organization
can see if attainment of the benchmark is possible and what it might take to achieve it based on
the what if findings. And the organization can see what is possible today. So decision-making
related to targets is in line with the 5 key power decision attributes-more targeted, replicable,
expeditious and lower in cost.
Are Policies and rules in Place?
Also revealed in this type of analysis is whether the organization has the policies in place, and
whether actual practice and compliance are in line with these policies, to perform at desired
levels. As the predictive analytic experimentation process requires ia set of rules by which to
make predictions(this is how the organization wants or should operate), the set of rules by which
the organization actually operates becomes clear.
Then the what if questions always prompt the questions: So what are you doing now? Often it
has been found that significant issues with compliance exist and, frequently enough, policies
and rules do not exist. They must be built.
So experimentation reveals 2 things:
The data needed(ADT, clinical, financial, etc or process performance)
The policies and rules by which the predictions and prescriptions must be developed and
implemented with any analytics.
Who is responsible?
As part of moving along this path, one will have performed a stakeholder analysis. This analysis
will have revealed another important area of information: Who is involved in the chain of events
that makes up the item in question? Who is ultimately responsible? Who executes the item on
a daily basis? For example, staffing on nursing floors, collection decisions or how the marker
for high 30-day readmit risk is actually addressed. Or regarding outpatient demand
management activity in Primary Care- to manage identified chronic healthcare users with
diabetes. After building a new very expensive construct dashboard with very detailed metrics
as requested-does the operating areas use it? Do the metrics move?
One can easily surmise the highly sensitive situation that begins to present itself. The capability
and willingness of operating managers at several levels may be called into question. This is the
reason for advance engagement of the stakeholders analysis and plan, EI building bonds and
networking and sponsorship tools, along with involving the operating managers in the
experiment development process.
However, this uncovers the need for sponsorship and in some situations where distributed
decision-making is required, this need is absolute. This a model to ensure the aims planned are
actually executed down the line.
In particular, the sponsorship tool calls for finding a sponsor at the highest level who can hold
accountable all actors involved in the work. The CFO cannot hold the COO or CNO
accountable, therefore the CEO must be the sponsor. If this is not possible, then the initiative
should not be engaged.
Case study
Consider this real case regarding outpatient demand management activity in Primary Care. The
initiatives aim is to manage identified chronic condition healthcare users having diabetes. After
building an expensive dashboard with detailed metrics(as requested) to support operating
managers(those responsible for execution) to address the issue, does the outpatient primary
care office and clinic facilities use it? Do metrics move? The senior leadership team is asking
questions to validate the use of the tool to address the issue as the metrics are not moving
appreciably.
Case Study-Answer
CEO-Correct. No. Not necessarily intuitive, yet the initiative involves clinical staff(medical &
nursing) along with the support of administrative staff. All of these positions stop with the CEO.
It might be considered below the CEOs work, yet as in the chart presented, the sponsor must
have the authority to mobilize action. In this case the clinical teams and administrative team
must become and remain mobilized.
Chief Admin Officer-Incorrect. This position has no leverage over the CMO, when push comes
to shove in organizational politics.
CNO-Incorrect. The CNO is the usual suspect for clinical accountability. However, what about
the medical team? What about the necessary support of the clinical staff by administrative
team? The CNO has no leverage here.
VP of Primary Office Admin: Incorrect. This individual has no authority or leverage over clinical
execution.
CFO: Incorrect. This individual has no authority or leverage over clinical execution.
VP of Finance: Incorrect. This individual has no authority or leverage over clinical execution.
Director of BI/A: Incorrect. This individual has created a tool according to specs but does not
have authority or leverage over clinical execution.
Communicating within the organization
The BI/A consultant must present the results data effectively in a general sense. In addition,
however, he or she must present results in terms to which others in the organization will relate.
The typical return on investment(ROI) findings leave many cold. Often the first thought is that
ROI means loss of jobs. This can easily be the case in clinical areas, since labor is largely the
only visible expense. ROI to many is based on cost reduction only. To mitigate this tendency, it
is critical to involve not only the unit director or manager when starting with the experiment
design process. Stakeholders, specifically staff members involved in the process should
participate. It is helpful to have staff members who are vocal about the need for change
because they have an invaluable ground-level viewpoint that should be taken into consideration.
Communicating of Analytic Process and Information
This complement of participants provides the base of information about how things are done to
engage the foundational discovery work needed at the start of designing the experiment, such
as process flowcharting, value stream mapping and policy/operating practice identification. At
the same time, the BI/Analytics consultant can teach participants about the work being done and
its meaning.
The real payoff of involving this larger group threefold:
An outcome will be defined in advance in terms the stakeholders understand(negotiating
with key stakeholders and managing expectations)
Policies and practices, whether they are good, absent or lacking in performance, will
become transparent and can be appropriately addressed
The group will have a greater level of understanding and analytics sophistication
An additional benefit of this process is the advisory role one can develop with the team over the
time of the working relationship. The transparency of the process called for the assistance of
analytics in developing solutions.
This process leverages EI competencies, leadership styles and robustly leverages power
bases. It is also well known as part of the Total Quality Management process, lean processes
and similar implementations used over the last 20 years.
Proving Value
ROI
Because everyone else is” is, of course, not a reasonable statement for winning approval. The
question regularly asked is how does one show ROI? Consider, first, that ROI means many
things. Straight dollar costs or revenues, care quality and process improvement cover the
major functional concerns.
Regarding costs, consider the following:
First, look at performance against known benchmarks. Organizations normally track a
number. Tracking against benchmarks is fraught with disagreement as to
appropriateness and applicability, often depending on who is speaking and how the
benchmark makes their area appear. Remember that with cost being the predominant
indicator of performance, defending a position often revolves around how thethings
driving cost in our business look nothing like the others in the benchmark cohort. And it
is best not to spend a great deal of time arguing about this. The benchmark is not an
absolute, it is a relative position with all other things being equal. Benchmarks provide
needed directional information( i.e., is the organization on the right highway?).
For example, lets look at the biggest organizational expense, labor. Suppose one finds
labor cost related to revenues to be in excess of benchmarks determined by a cohort of
best-practice organizations, or even the benchmark overall, by upwards of 10%. Are
there differences in a host of operating conditions?
Yes, maybe. Do they account for a difference of 10%? One may be a different road
altogether. More importantly, one has a tremendous opportunity for return even with a
few points improvement, as the dollar amounts are so large. Careful simultaneous use
of analytics across all three types discussed( descriptive, predictive & prescriptive) will
unlock this potential.
Similarly, related to supply expense, best-practice organizations run these costs in the
very low 20% range. Calculate what these mean for your organization in excess dollars
spent.
Quality and return
The relationship between clinical quality and return is becoming obvious when one
considers the cost savings of fewer re-hospitalizations, lower numbers of MRSA cases
and earlier detection of high blood pressure, for example. These are not necessary soft
costs. The challenge will be for the BI/Analytics consultant to set up straw-man
experiments using predictive models that look at the possibilities in advance and obtain
agreement on the range of outcomes. Then compare these to a cost table. Again, likely
the 3-year return will show clearly.
The question is, how does one monetize some aspects of performance that need to be
considered, such as clinician coverage or process redesign? Again, careful
experimentation is called for. As part of the experiment, one will first need to flowchart,
measure the value and stream map the processes involved, looking carefully at the time
needed for performing tasks(resource consumption), timing of tasks and the time
wasted between tasks. This gives a comparison baseline to see if any clinical changes(
such as length of stay), result from processes of coverage change. And what changes
are likely to be related to improvements in healthcare user condition?
Working with clinical informaticists can lead to much richer experimentation and
analysis, such as investigation of particular clinical factors, interventions, processes,
outcomes, etc. related to operational aspects( such as unit coverage, timing of shifts,
availability of supplies,etc.,).
If there are no clinical informaticists in your organization to work with you will have to
develop some organizational capacity that incorporates the thinking of this discipline into
your analytics work. Unfortunately, the path for doing this is beyond the scope of this
course.
Measuring Performance Gains
If significance was found in fewer SL 1P cases after opening the urgent care center, one
adjusts processes to ensure more SL 1P cases go to the urgent care center(which could
be monetized and studied and might lead to staffing the ED differently). The new ED
staffing might be focused on fewer RNs but may require RNs with greater experience
and competency to handle the now higher severity mix. The cost for RN labor could be
measured, as it should be. And since one performed value stream mapping prior to
making changes, it could be conducted again to measure performance gains in task
time(cost). All of these would be looked at in relation to ED practice information that is
available on throughout and outcome improvements.
The key here is