A systemic approach to developing frontline leaders in healthcare

Abstract

PURPOSE: The purpose of this case study is to extend the understanding of leadership development in healthcare by documenting the impact of a systemic approach to developing frontline leaders in a large Canadian healthcare organization. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: A total of 92 participants working in acute and community settings participated in an eight-day certificate program that combined classroom instruction, practical skill development, and applied projects. Program content was based on a learning needs assessment conducted with potential participants and their supervisors. FINDINGS: Frontline leaders and their supervisors rated the program positively in terms of its impact on participants' confidence and willingness to lead, awareness of leadership opportunities, communication, problem solving, response to conflict, and the ability to support their teams through change. It was also found, however, that supervisors' ratings were generally lower than those of participants. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Systemic approaches to leadership development offer healthcare the best chance of addressing the current leadership crisis. The challenge is finding innovative ways to demonstrate sustainable benefits in an industry that is struggling to address cost pressures. In the present study, personal and supervisor evaluations were used in conjunction with completion of applied change projects to demonstrate a tangible return on investment. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: Leadership can be learned and there is no better point of entry for development than those in frontline leadership positions. However, developing future leaders requires the commitment of an entire leadership community. Healthcare organizations that are experiencing leadership gaps must be prepared to make a long term investment if they want to achieve lasting healthcare reforms.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 59 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.