| Course | HLTH 4313 Leading and Decision-Making in Health Services |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 5 |
| Paper type | Leadership self-assessment and development plan |
| Length | 1,210 words, about 4 pages plus title and reference pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | American College of Education |
| Program | B.S. in Healthcare Administration |
| Updated | September 2026 |
Free sample paper for HLTH 4313 Module 5
Strong on Modeling, Weak on Inspiring: A Leadership Practices Inventory Self-Assessment and One-Year Development Plan for a New Environmental Services Supervisor
Student Name
American College of Education
HLTH4313: Leading and Decision-Making in Health Services
Module 5 Assignment
Instructor Name
November 2, 2026
Why Assess Myself Now
After three months as night supervisor of environmental services at a composite 300-bed hospital, I have made decisions about how to lead my crew, how to motivate them, whether the department should be outsourced and how to introduce ultraviolet disinfection. Each of those papers described what I intended to do. This one asks how I am actually leading, using a structured instrument and the views of the people I lead, and turns the answer into a plan for my first year.
My instrument was the Leadership Practices Inventory. It asks how frequently a leader displays the five practices at the center of Kouzes and Posner's (2017) framework. In short form, those practices are leading by example, rallying people around a common future, testing the status quo, equipping others to act, and recognizing what people contribute. The inventory has a self version and an observer version, which allowed me to compare my view of myself with the views of my crew and my manager.
The Instrument
The Leadership Practices Inventory contains thirty statements, six for each practice, rated on a ten-point frequency scale from almost never to almost always. A review of the instrument's psychometric evidence, drawing on the publisher's large normative database and on several hundred independent studies, concluded that its reliability and validity hold up well across many kinds of organizations and respondents (Posner, 2016). Its main limitation for my purpose is that it measures how often a leader engages in the practices, as seen by the leader and by others, not whether the practices produce results. It also depends on observers answering honestly, which may be harder for new hires rating their supervisor.
To reduce that problem, the observer forms were distributed and collected by the department's administrative assistant, and I received only averages for groups of at least three respondents. Nine of my fourteen crew members and my manager returned forms.
Results
My self-ratings were highest for model the way, averaging 8.3 of 10, and lowest for inspire a shared vision, at 5.9. The observer ratings followed the same pattern but with interesting differences. My crew rated me higher than I rated myself on enable others to act, 8.1 against 7.2, which I attribute to the route autonomy and trainer roles introduced in the first month. On encourage the heart the gap ran the other way, 6.0 against 7.4. My manager's ratings were close to my own except on challenge the process, where she rated me 8.0 against my 6.5, citing the outsourcing analysis, in which I had helped create an alternative no one had proposed.
The largest gap is on encourage the heart. The six statements for that practice concern recognizing people's contributions, praising work well done and celebrating accomplishments. I believed I was doing this through huddle recognition, but my crew does not experience it as often as I think I do it. A supervisor counting the thank-yous given and a crew counting the ones received can arrive at very different numbers.
Interpreting the Results
Three interpretations follow. First, my strength in modeling the way fits my background. I cleaned rooms for two years before becoming a lead, and I work alongside the crew when a surge hits, which people notice. Second, the vision score deserves the low number it received. I talk about tasks and standards far more than about why the department matters to patients, even though my own Module 1 plan called for exactly that message. Third, the gap on encouraging the heart suggests that recognition delivered in a group huddle, in English, at the start of a shift, may not reach the people I intend it for, particularly crew members whose first language is Spanish or Haitian Creole and who may not catch a quick mention of their name.
Kouzes and Posner (2017) argue that leadership is a set of learnable behaviors rather than a fixed set of traits, and that leaders improve by practicing the specific behaviors behind each practice. That view is encouraging. My weakest practices are not features of my personality to accept but behaviors I can practice and measure.
One-Year Development Plan
The plan sets three goals, each specific and measurable. Goal one, encourage the heart: recognize at least two crew members individually each shift, in person and in their first language where I can, or through a bilingual lead, naming the specific thing they did well. I will keep a simple log to check that recognition is spread across the whole crew rather than concentrated on the veterans I know best. Target: observer score of 7.5 or higher in twelve months.
Goal two, inspire a shared vision: work with the crew to write a one-sentence statement of what the night crew is for, and open every huddle with a concrete example connecting the work to patients, drawing on infection prevention data each quarter. Target: observer score of 7.0 or higher.
Goal three, build a development relationship: ask the hospital's director of patient experience, who is known for recognition practices, to meet with me monthly as a mentor for six months, and complete the hospital's frontline leadership course by March.
I will repeat the full inventory with the same process in twelve months. Between now and then, I will ask two crew members each month for one thing I should keep doing and one thing I should change, which provides faster feedback than an annual survey.
Will Feedback Change Anything?
Collecting feedback is easier than using it. In a meta-analysis of 24 longitudinal studies, Smither et al. (2005) found that improvement in ratings from direct reports, peers and supervisors after multisource feedback was generally small. They also identified the conditions under which improvement is more likely: when the feedback shows that change is needed, when recipients are open to feedback and react positively to it, believe that change is feasible, set goals and take concrete action. The review is a useful warning. Receiving a lower score than expected does not by itself change a leader's behavior.
My plan is built with those conditions in mind. The gap on recognition is large enough to show that change is needed, and I accept it rather than explaining it away. Each goal specifies a behavior small enough to believe I can do it every shift, and the monthly check-ins with two crew members create the kind of follow-up action the review associates with improvement. If my second inventory in twelve months shows little change, the meta-analysis suggests I should look first at whether I set goals and acted on them, rather than at the instrument.
What the Course Has Changed
Looking across the course, the assessment confirms a pattern in my earlier papers. I am comfortable with the structural side of leadership, choosing a model, structuring a decision, planning a change, and less practiced at the human side that makes those plans work. The ultraviolet disinfection plan, for example, relies on reinforcement and recognition, the practice on which I scored lowest. The development plan is therefore not separate from my work; it is a condition for the rest of my plans succeeding.
References
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2017). The leadership challenge: How to make extraordinary things happen in organizations (6th ed.). Wiley.
Posner, B. Z. (2016). Investigating the reliability and validity of the Leadership Practices Inventory. Administrative Sciences, 6(4), Article 17. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci6040017
Smither, J. W., London, M., & Reilly, R. R. (2005). Does performance improve following multisource feedback? A theoretical model, meta-analysis, and review of empirical findings. Personnel Psychology, 58(1), 33-66. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2005.514_1.x
HLTH 4313 Module 5 instructions, in plain terms
HLTH 4313 Module 5 frequently closes the course by turning leadership theory on the student. Prompts usually ask you to complete a leadership assessment, such as a styles inventory, a strengths assessment or a 360-degree instrument, report and interpret your results, and write a development plan with specific goals, actions and timelines. Some sections supply the instrument through Canvas; others let you choose one with published evidence. Expect a paper of about three or four pages in APA 7, written partly in the first person, with sources for the instrument and for any leadership framework you use. If observer ratings are optional in your section, consider collecting them anyway, since they usually produce the most useful findings.
How the HLTH 4313 Module 5 example is put together
The example opens by linking the assessment to the writer's earlier course papers, which gives the reader context. It describes the instrument's five practices, its rating scale and a published review of its reliability and validity, and it explains how observer responses were protected. Results are reported for self, crew and manager, with attention to where the ratings diverge. The interpretation section explains the strongest and weakest practices through the writer's background and habits, including language barriers that may block recognition. The development plan sets three goals that follow from the lowest scores and the largest gap, each with behaviors, a target and a check. A short conclusion ties the plan back to the course.
Where the points sit in the HLTH 4313 Module 5 rubric
Self-assessment rubrics usually reward depth of interpretation more than the scores themselves. The results criterion asks for accurate reporting, often with a comparison across practices or raters. The interpretation criterion carries the most weight: graders want reasons for the results, honest recognition of weaknesses and links to leadership concepts. The development plan is scored on whether goals follow from the results and are specific, measurable and time-bound, with actions that are realistic. Many rubrics also credit use of a credible instrument and a source on its validity. As always, clarity, organization and APA 7 accuracy, including in-text citations for the instrument, complete the rubric.
HLTH 4313 Module 5 help from the desk
Students tend to lose points here by listing their scores and moving straight to goals, without explaining what the results mean or why they came out that way. Another common problem is goals that are too vague to check, such as becoming a better communicator. Writers sometimes pick an online quiz with no evidence behind it, which weakens the paper. Avoid treating a low score as a personality trait you cannot change; the strongest papers treat it as a behavior to practice. If you can, include others' views. If you would like a Module 5 paper built on your own instrument results and your instructor's rubric, the desk can prepare one confidentially.
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 American College of Education 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 HLTH 4313 and B.S. in Healthcare Administration sample papers
- HLTH 4313 Module 1: Leadership Styles Application
- HLTH 4313 Module 2: Organizational Behavior Analysis
- HLTH 4313 Module 3: Structured Decision Analysis
- HLTH 4313 Module 4: Change Management Plan
- HLTH 4343 Module 2: Social Determinants Analysis
- HLTH 4363 Module 4: Tactics and Channel Plan
- HLTH 4343 Module 1: Population Health Profile
- HLTH 4393 Module 3: Quality Data Analysis
HLTH 4313 Module 5 questions, answered
What does HLTH4313 Module 5 usually ask for?
HLTH4313 Module 5 frequently asks you to assess your own leadership with an instrument or structured reflection and to write a development plan with specific, measurable goals. Your classroom's instructions decide the instrument.
What is the Leadership Practices Inventory?
A 30-item instrument measuring how often a leader engages in five practices: model the way, inspire a shared vision, challenge the process, enable others to act and encourage the heart. It has self and observer versions.
Why compare self-ratings with observer ratings?
Because gaps between how you see yourself and how others see you are often the most useful findings, showing where your intentions are not reaching the people you lead.
Where can I find a free HLTH 4313 Module 5 sample paper?
On this page: the full Module 5 leadership self-assessment and development plan, open to anyone, from the title page through the development plan, with a note beside each section explaining the choices behind it.
How do I make leadership development goals measurable?
Tie each goal to a specific behavior, a target score or count and a date, and plan how you will check progress, such as repeating the assessment in a year and asking for feedback monthly.