Leadership development needs assessment in healthcare: a collaborative approach

Abstract

Purpose This exploratory study aims to present data collected from a collaborative project designed to assess leadership development needs in a healthcare setting. Design/methodology/approach The research describes a three‐phase design that draws primarily upon qualitative data collected from focus groups, written submissions and interviews with middle managers employed in a provincial health authority, Horizon Health Network, located in Atlantic Canada. Findings The findings reveal a number of considerations for future leadership development programs including the need to make space for leadership development, the role of partnerships in leadership development, and the need for mentoring and coaching. In addition, a number of challenges facing the organization and the possible impact on leadership development are identified. Research limitations/implications The findings are based upon one case study site and this limits the generalizability of the research. In addition, the researchers were only able to make direct contact with one half of the 150 middle managers that will be participants in the eventual leadership development program. Practical implications This research describes a collaborative approach through which to increase buy‐in and commitment to leadership development in healthcare organizations. The approach provides a path to build sustainability in overall organizational performance through a healthy and engaged workforce. Originality/value Most research describes or evaluates leadership development programs with little attention devoted to the process of needs assessment. In addition, the literature focuses upon participants who have finished a program or are part way through a program. This research looks at the possibilities of a collaborative approach to leadership development pre‐leadership development program starting at the needs assessment phase.

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 — 31 citations exist upstream.

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