From leadership research to district action: Leading Change in Health Education: Assessing Organisational Readiness to Implement Simulation in Multidisciplinary Programmes

AI-assisted editorial implementation guide. Proposed district actions are separate from the original authors’ findings and recommendations. Independent peer review of this guide is not asserted.

Read source Search paper agent CC BY 4.0

Evidence and transfer

Education-related source: verify which participants, institutions and outcomes were actually studied before district adoption. Source publication type: research-article. License and identity checks do not establish study quality or causality.

Original authors’ abstract, reproduced under the source license:

Background Simulation‐based education (SBE) is recognised as a highly effective approach for preparing healthcare students for clinical practice. However, its consistent integration and long‐term sustainability remain challenging, often due to insufficient resources, limited faculty capability and the absence of robust educational frameworks. Organisational readiness, which is an important yet under‐examined determinant of SBE success, plays a critical role in overcoming these barriers, particularly in multidisciplinary and multi‐campus contexts. Objective This study aimed to evaluate an organisation’s readiness to implement SBE programmes across diverse health disciplines by applying the Simulation Culture Organisational Readiness Survey (SCORS). Methods The SCORS tool, comprising four subscales and 38 Likert‐scale items, measures readiness for change, availability of resources and capacity for sustainable development. A cross‐sectional survey was conducted via Qualtrics XM, supplemented with demographic data to account for participants’ disciplinary backgrounds. Results A total of 43 staff completed the survey, with the largest representation from Nursing (46%) and Physiotherapy (14%). The highest mean score was observed in Section A—Need and Support for Change (3.04), indicating a strong perceived value for SBE. Conversely, Section C—Time, Personnel and Resource Readiness—recorded the lowest mean score (2.31), signalling significant operational challenges. The overall readiness score of 103.86 placed the organisation as ‘somewhat ready’ for SBE integration, with administrators identified as key influencers in the adoption process. Implications for Nursing Management Findings highlight the need for a centralised, strategically governed SBE framework supported by sufficient resourcing, embedded leadership and faculty development. Clear reporting structures, coordinated resource allocation and a service‐oriented operational model are recommended to ensure interdisciplinary collaboration and sustainability across campuses. These findings have direct implications for nursing management, particularly for nurse education leaders, nursing simulation programme managers and academic nursing managers responsible for aligning simulation governance, faculty workload allocation, capability development and curriculum integration within nursing and wider health programmes. Conclusion Achieving sustainable SBE integration requires a whole‐of‐organisation approach that aligns governance, pedagogy and operational capacity, ensuring that simulation becomes a core, enduring component of health professional education.

Study methods

The study used a cross‐sectional survey design and used the Simulation Culture Organisational Readiness Survey (SCORS) tool [16] together with a demographic question set, identifying the health discipline of participants.

Limitations

The study was conducted at a university based in Victoria, Australia. Therefore, staff at other universities might have differing responses. Although the study examined SBE across multiple health disciplines and campuses, the sample was limited to preregistration health programmes represented within the participating university. It did not include medicine, as this was not offered at the participating university, nor did it examine hospital‐based, postgraduate or continuing professional development simulation contexts, where simulation has distinct and well‐established communities of practice. Consequently, the findings may not fully reflect the organisational conditions, professional cultures, governance structures or simulation practices of all simulation environments. The response rate of 37% is also a limitation and may introduce non‐response bias, as the views of staff who did not participate may differ from those who completed the survey. Accordingly, the findings should be interpreted as reflecting the perceptions of respondents rather than as fully representative of all staff across the participating disciplines. While casual and sessional staff were excluded, the sample included permanent academic and professional staff with detailed organisational knowledge. Although the sample size and response rate were modest, all participating disciplines were represented, providing useful insights into organisational readiness for SBE within this multidisciplinary university context.

A 90-day district inquiry

Days 1–15 · Appraise. Read the source methods, recruitment, comparator, outcomes and limitations. Record how the study setting differs from your district and which claim the design can support.
Days 16–30 · Design. Choose one school improvement question with teachers. Protect a short shared planning cycle, agree an instructional change and use a common rubric for examining student work. Agree participation, privacy protections, baseline and stopping rules before starting.
Days 31–60 · Observe. Collect the pre-agreed measures, keep a log of implementation changes and invite confidential voluntary feedback. Preserve existing support for staff and learners.
Days 61–90 · Decide. Review implementation fidelity, teacher time and independently scored student work against a recorded baseline. Examine access differences and competing explanations before attributing changes to leadership. Make a dated decision to stop, revise or extend the inquiry.

Board decision brief

Present the local problem, source setting, evidence limits, intervention, responsible owner, total cost, measured changes and uncertainty. Separate staff perceptions, implementation measures and student learning outcomes.

Attribution and reuse

James Naismith; Wendy Cross; Kerry Hood; Loretta Garvey. Leading Change in Health Education: Assessing Organisational Readiness to Implement Simulation in Multidisciplinary Programmes. Journal of Nursing Management (2026-01-01). https://doi.org/10.1155/jonm/9136330

Prepared 2026-11-07. Source authorship and DOI are preserved. The abstract and source passages are attributed extracts; this editorial guide is offered under the same CC BY 4.0 license.