| Course | HCM-5020 Healthcare Administrator Leadership |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 7 |
| Paper type | Discussion forum: initial post and two replies |
| Length | About 618 words |
| Format | Discussion post with APA 7 citations |
| School | Thomas Edison State University |
| Program | Master of Science in Healthcare Management |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for HCM 5020 Module 7
Module 7 Discussion: Encouraging Creativity and Innovation
From a Technologist's Phone Video to a Tested Change: What a Leader Owes a Good Idea
Research on workplace creativity draws a useful line between having ideas and putting them into practice. Anderson et al. (2014), reviewing more than a decade of studies, defined creativity and innovation as two stages of one process: generating a new idea and then implementing it. Their review shows that most organizations are better at the first stage than the second. In my experience as an imaging director at a community hospital, ideas from staff are rarely the scarce resource. What is scarce is a leader who protects an idea long enough to test it.
Last spring one of our MRI technologists noticed that anxious outpatients often asked to stop partway through a scan, forcing repeats or rescheduling. On her own time she recorded a two-minute phone video walking through the MRI room, the noises the scanner makes and what to expect, and asked whether we could text it to patients the day before. My first instinct, I admit, was to think about approval: marketing, privacy, the patient portal. Instead, I asked her to define what she expected to improve and how we would know.
We then looked for evidence. Madl et al. (2023) randomized 142 adult MRI patients to standard care, an informational video or a relaxation video before the scan and found that average scan time was shorter with the relaxation video, about 33 minutes against 39 for standard care, while the informational video's difference did not reach significance. That gave us a reason to add a short breathing segment to her video, not only facts.
My role as leader was to remove barriers and keep the test small: one scanner, two weeks, a simple log of interrupted scans and minutes per exam. Her role was to own the idea. When the test showed fewer interruptions, she presented the results at our staff meeting, and two colleagues have since proposed their own tests. I think that is the real outcome. Innovation spreads when staff see an idea move from a hallway conversation to a measured change, with credit going to the person who had it.
Reply to Keisha
Keisha, I agree that recognition matters, but I think the type of recognition matters more than the amount. A gift card thanks someone for an idea; giving them time and data to test it treats them as an innovator. Anderson et al. (2014) note that research has looked at creativity at the individual, team and organizational levels, and that the conditions supporting idea generation are not always the ones that support implementation. Your suggestion box collects ideas well, but who on your unit is responsible for helping the best ones get tested? Without that person, a box can quietly teach staff that ideas go nowhere. Could your unit commit to testing one idea from the box each quarter and reporting the result back to everyone?
Reply to Tomas
Tomas, your point that not every idea should be implemented is important, and I would add that a good test should be allowed to fail. Hudson et al. (2022) reviewed two years of MRI appointments across a multi-center service and found that scans left incomplete because of claustrophobia occurred in under 1% of examinations, with the rate depending on scanner design, the body part and patient characteristics. If I had judged our technologist's idea only by completed scans, the improvement might have been too small to see. Choosing the right measure, in our case interruptions and minutes per scan, decided whether the test could show anything at all. How do you decide which measure to use when an idea's benefit is likely to be modest?
References
Anderson, N., Potočnik, K., & Zhou, J. (2014). Innovation and creativity in organizations: A state-of-the-science review, prospective commentary, and guiding framework. Journal of Management, 40(5), 1297-1333. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314527128
Hudson, D., Heales, C., & Meertens, R. (2022). Review of claustrophobia incidence in MRI: A service evaluation of current rates across a multi-centre service. Radiography, 28(3), 780-787. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2022.02.010
Madl, J., Janka, R., Bay, S., Sturmbauer, S. C., & Rohleder, N. (2023). Effects of video-based patient preparation for MRI on clinical processes and patient experience. European Journal of Radiology, 158, Article 110621. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2022.110621
HCM 5020 Module 7 instructions, in plain terms
HCM-5020 has ten graded discussion forums, worth 30% of the course grade together, and Module 7, Encouraging Creativity and Innovation, connects to the first and fourth objectives: the leader's role in positive outcomes and the elements of successful plans. The syllabus asks that every discussion response include at least one outside source cited in APA format and suggests responses of at least 75 words, while encouraging more when you have more to say. A typical Module 7 prompt asks how leaders foster creativity and innovation, often with an example from your experience. Write an initial post with a clear point and evidence, then reply to classmates with substance, not agreement alone.
How the HCM 5020 Module 7 example is put together
The initial post opens with a research distinction between generating and implementing ideas, then tells one story that illustrates it. The story includes the leader's honest first reaction, which makes the lesson credible. A randomized trial is used to improve the idea before testing, showing evidence-informed innovation. The leader's role and the technologist's role are separated, and the post ends on the outcome that matters most for a leadership course: other staff began proposing tests. The two replies each engage a classmate's specific point, add a new source, extend the argument and end with a question that invites further discussion, which is what makes a reply substantive.
HCM 5020 Module 7 rubric: what earns full marks
Discussion forums in HCM-5020 are graded on the quality of the initial post and replies: a clear response to the prompt, use of outside scholarly sources as required, application to real healthcare leadership, and substantive engagement with classmates. Mentors reward an initial post that argues one clear point with evidence instead of summarizing the readings, and for replies that add a source, a counterpoint or a question instead of simple agreement. Length guidelines are minimums; depth earns credit. Each response should carry its own APA citation and its own short reference list. Timeliness matters too, so check the Course Calendar for when initial posts and replies are due. Posting early also gives classmates time to respond to your ideas.
HCM 5020 Module 7 help from the desk
Many discussion posts on innovation describe brainstorming or a suggestion box in general terms and never show an idea reaching practice. Use a specific example, ideally one you were part of, and explain what the leader did. Another weak spot is a reply that simply agrees; add evidence, a different angle or a question. Students sometimes forget that each response needs its own outside source under this course's rules. Keep posts readable: short paragraphs and a point in the first sentence. If you want a model post and replies built around an example from your own work, our writers can prepare them following your Module 7 prompt. Read your post aloud once before submitting it.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Thomas Edison State University document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
More HCM 5020 and Master of Science in Healthcare Management sample papers
- HCM 5020 Module 1: Strategic Leadership Paper
- HCM 5020 Module 2: Leadership Communication Paper
- HCM 5020 Module 3: Workplace Conflict Paper
- HCM 5020 Module 4: Planning for Growth Paper
- HCM 5020 Module 5: Final Project Part 1
- HCM 5020 Module 6: Team Analysis Paper
- HCM 5020 Module 8: Final Project Part 2
- HCM 5010 Module 2: Intermediaries Written Assignment
- HCM 5030 Module 4: Final Project
- HCM 5000 Module 1: U.S. Health System Overview Paper
- ORR 5100 Module 2: Application Exercise: Problem Statement, Questions and a Short Literature Review
HCM 5020 Module 7 questions, answered
Where can I find a free HCM 5020 Module 7 sample paper?
This page holds the full Module 7 discussion example, an initial post plus two peer replies, each citing an outside source, along with notes on what makes a reply substantive.
How long should HCM-5020 discussion posts be?
The syllabus gives at least 75 words per response as a guideline and encourages more when you have more to say. Each response must cite at least one outside source.
What is the difference between creativity and innovation?
Creativity is generating new ideas; innovation includes putting them into practice. Research treats them as two stages of one process.
How can a leader encourage innovation from staff?
By giving staff time, data and permission to test ideas on a small scale, removing barriers and making sure credit goes to the person who had the idea.
What makes a reply to a classmate substantive?
Engaging their specific point, adding new evidence or a different view, and asking a question that moves the discussion forward.