Dataset Information

ILead-a transformational leadership intervention to train healthcare managers' implementation leadership.

ABSTRACT: Leadership is a key feature in implementation efforts, which is highlighted in most implementation frameworks. However, in studying leadership and implementation, only few studies rely on established leadership theory, which makes it difficult to draw conclusions regarding what kinds of leadership managers should perform and under what circumstances. In industrial and organizational psychology, transformational leadership and contingent reward have been identified as effective leadership styles for facilitating change processes, and these styles map well onto the behaviors identified in implementation research. However, it has been questioned whether these general leadership styles are sufficient to foster specific results; it has therefore been suggested that the leadership should be specific to the domain of interest, e.g., implementation. To this end, an intervention specifically involving leadership, which we call implementation leadership, is developed and tested in this project. The aim of the intervention is to increase healthcare managers' generic implementation leadership skills, which they can use for any implementation efforts in the future.The intervention is conducted in healthcare in Stockholm County, Sweden, where first- and second-line managers were invited to participate. Two intervention groups are included, including 52 managers. Intervention group 1 consists of individual managers, and group 2 of managers from one division. A control group of 39 managers is additionally included. The intervention consists of five half-day workshops aiming at increasing the managers' implementation leadership, which is the primary outcome of this intervention. The intervention will be evaluated through a mixed-methods approach. A pre- and post-design applying questionnaires at three time points (pre-, directly after the intervention, and 6 months post-intervention) will be used, in addition to process evaluation questionnaires related to each workshop. In addition, interviews will be conducted over time to evaluate the intervention.The proposed intervention represents a novel contribution to the implementation literature, being the first to focus on strengthening healthcare managers' generic skills in implementation leadership.

SUBMITTER: Richter A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4966756 | biostudies-other | 2016 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVES:The present study aimed to evaluate the iLead intervention and to investigate whether or not transfer of training can be supported by contextualising the intervention (recruiting all managers from one branch of the organisation while focusing on one implementation case, as well as training senior management). DESIGN:A pre-evaluation-postevaluation design was applied using mixed methods with process and effect surveys and interviews to measure the effects on three levels. SETTING:Healthcare managers from Stockholm's regional healthcare organisation were invited to the training. PARTICIPANTS:52 managers participated in the iLead intervention. Group 1 consisted of 21 managers from different organisations and with different implementation cases. Group 2, representing the contextualised group, consisted of 31 managers from the same organisation, working on the same implementation case, where senior management also received training. INTERVENTION:iLead is an intervention where healthcare managers are trained in implementation leadership based on the full-range leadership model. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES:Reactions, knowledge and implementation leadership are measured. RESULTS:Quantitative and qualitative analyses indicate that iLead was perceived to be of high quality and capable of increasing participants' knowledge. Mixed effects were found regarding changes in behaviours. The contextualisation did not have a boosting effect on behaviour change. Hence, group 2 did not increase its active implementation leadership in comparison with group 1. CONCLUSIONS:iLead introduces a new approach to how implementation leadership can be trained when knowledge of effective leadership for implementations is combined with findings on the importance of environmental factors for the transfer of training. Even though managers reported general positive effects, transfer was not facilitated through the contextualisation of the intervention. There is a need to further develop approaches to help participants subsequently apply the learnt skills in their work environment.

Project description:BackgroundIn healthcare and allied healthcare settings, leadership that supports effective implementation of evidenced-based practices (EBPs) is a critical concern. However, there are no empirically validated measures to assess implementation leadership. This paper describes the development, factor structure, and initial reliability and convergent and discriminant validity of a very brief measure of implementation leadership: the Implementation Leadership Scale (ILS).MethodsParticipants were 459 mental health clinicians working in 93 different outpatient mental health programs in Southern California, USA. Initial item development was supported as part of a two United States National Institutes of Health (NIH) studies focused on developing implementation leadership training and implementation measure development. Clinician work group/team-level data were randomly assigned to be utilized for an exploratory factor analysis (n?=?229; k?=?46 teams) or for a confirmatory factor analysis (n?=?230; k?=?47 teams). The confirmatory factor analysis controlled for the multilevel, nested data structure. Reliability and validity analyses were then conducted with the full sample.ResultsThe exploratory factor analysis resulted in a 12-item scale with four subscales representing proactive leadership, knowledgeable leadership, supportive leadership, and perseverant leadership. Confirmatory factor analysis supported an a priori higher order factor structure with subscales contributing to a single higher order implementation leadership factor. The scale demonstrated excellent internal consistency reliability as well as convergent and discriminant validity.ConclusionsThe ILS is a brief and efficient measure of unit level leadership for EBP implementation. The availability of the ILS will allow researchers to assess strategic leadership for implementation in order to advance understanding of leadership as a predictor of organizational context for implementation. The ILS also holds promise as a tool for leader and organizational development to improve EBP implementation.

Project description:Research has shown that the modes of leadership and management may influence health outcomes. However, majority of health leaders and managers in many low-income countries are promoted on account of clinical expertise. It has been recognised that these new managers are often ill-prepared for managing complex health systems. In response to this challenge, the Zambian Ministry of Health (MoH) has developed the Governance and Management Capacity Building (GMCB) Strategic Plan (2012-2016), whose overarching goal is to improve health sector governance and create an environment that is result-oriented, accountable and transparent. This led to the introduction of a new in-service leadership and management course, which has come to be known as the Zambia Management and Leadership Academy (ZMLA). This paper presents the results of an impact evaluation of the ZMLA programme conducted in 2014.This was a cross-sectional mixed method study. The study targeted health workers, stakeholders and course implementers. ZMLA trainees were targeted to gain perspectives on the extent to which the programme affected levels of self-confidence resulting from knowledge gained. Perspectives were sought from both ZMLA and non ZMLA trainees to measure changes in the work environment. Stakeholder perspectives were collected from trainers and key informants involved in providing ZMLA training.On average, knowledge levels increased by 38% after each workshop. A comparison of the average self-rated scores from 444 management and leadership survey responses before ZMLA and after ZMLA training showed a significant increase in the proportion of participants that felt adequately trained to undertake management and leadership, from 63% (before) to 99% (after) in phase 1 and 43% (before) to 98% (after) in the phase II cohort. The calculated before and after percentage change for work environment themes ranged from 5.8% to 13.4%. Majority of respondents perceived improvements in the workplace environment, especially in handling human resource management matters. The smallest improvement was noted in ethics and accountability. Qualitative interviews showed improvements in the meeting culture and a greater appreciation for the importance of meetings. Shared vision, teamwork and coordination seemed to have improved more in work places where the overall manager had received ZMLA training.Leadership and management training will be a key ingredient in health system strengthening in low-income settings. The ZMLA model was found to be acceptable and effective in improving knowledge and skills for health system managers with minimal disruption to health services.

Dataset Information

ILead-a transformational leadership intervention to train healthcare managers' implementation leadership.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets