在不断变化的世界中评估领导力发展?医疗保健组织的替代模式和方法

Paul Joseph-Richard, J. McCray
{"title":"在不断变化的世界中评估领导力发展?医疗保健组织的替代模式和方法","authors":"Paul Joseph-Richard, J. McCray","doi":"10.1080/13678868.2022.2043085","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Internationally, healthcare is undergoing a major reconfiguration in a post-pandemic world. To make sense of this change and deliver an integrated provision of care, which improve both patient outcomes and satisfaction for key stakeholders, healthcare leaders must develop an insight into the context in which healthcare is delivered, and leadership is enacted. Formal leadership development programmes (LDPs) are widely used for developing leaders and leadership in healthcare organizations. However, there is a paucity of rigorous evaluations of LDPs. Existing evaluations often focus on individual-level outcomes, with limited attention to long-term outcomes that might emerge across team and organizational levels. Specifically, evaluation models that have been closely associated with or rely heavily on qualitative methods are seldom used in LDP evaluations, despite their relevance for capturing unanticipated outcomes, investigating learning impact over time, and studying collective outcomes at multiple levels. The purpose of this paper is to review the potential of qualitative models and approaches in healthcare leadership development evaluation. This scoping review identifies seventeen evaluation models and approaches. Findings indicate that the incorporation of qualitative and participatory elements in evaluation designs could offer a richer demonstration and context-specific explanations of programme impact in healthcare contexts.","PeriodicalId":47369,"journal":{"name":"HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT INTERNATIONAL","volume":"4 2","pages":"114 - 150"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating leadership development in a changing world? Alternative models and approaches for healthcare organisations\",\"authors\":\"Paul Joseph-Richard, J. McCray\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13678868.2022.2043085\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Internationally, healthcare is undergoing a major reconfiguration in a post-pandemic world. To make sense of this change and deliver an integrated provision of care, which improve both patient outcomes and satisfaction for key stakeholders, healthcare leaders must develop an insight into the context in which healthcare is delivered, and leadership is enacted. Formal leadership development programmes (LDPs) are widely used for developing leaders and leadership in healthcare organizations. However, there is a paucity of rigorous evaluations of LDPs. Existing evaluations often focus on individual-level outcomes, with limited attention to long-term outcomes that might emerge across team and organizational levels. Specifically, evaluation models that have been closely associated with or rely heavily on qualitative methods are seldom used in LDP evaluations, despite their relevance for capturing unanticipated outcomes, investigating learning impact over time, and studying collective outcomes at multiple levels. The purpose of this paper is to review the potential of qualitative models and approaches in healthcare leadership development evaluation. This scoping review identifies seventeen evaluation models and approaches. Findings indicate that the incorporation of qualitative and participatory elements in evaluation designs could offer a richer demonstration and context-specific explanations of programme impact in healthcare contexts.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47369,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT INTERNATIONAL\",\"volume\":\"4 2\",\"pages\":\"114 - 150\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT INTERNATIONAL\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13678868.2022.2043085\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT INTERNATIONAL","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13678868.2022.2043085","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

摘要在国际上,在后疫情时代,医疗保健正在经历一场重大重组。为了理解这一变化并提供综合护理,提高患者的治疗效果和关键利益相关者的满意度,医疗保健领导者必须深入了解医疗保健的提供和领导力的实施背景。正式的领导力发展计划(LDP)被广泛用于培养医疗保健组织的领导者和领导力。然而,对最不发达国家方案缺乏严格的评价。现有的评价往往侧重于个人层面的结果,而对团队和组织层面可能出现的长期结果关注有限。具体而言,与定性方法密切相关或严重依赖定性方法的评估模型很少用于LDP评估,尽管它们与捕捉意外结果、调查随时间推移的学习影响以及在多个层面研究集体结果有关。本文的目的是回顾定性模型和方法在医疗保健领导力发展评估中的潜力。本范围审查确定了17种评估模式和方法。研究结果表明,在评估设计中纳入定性和参与性元素,可以为医疗保健背景下的方案影响提供更丰富的示范和具体背景的解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Evaluating leadership development in a changing world? Alternative models and approaches for healthcare organisations
ABSTRACT Internationally, healthcare is undergoing a major reconfiguration in a post-pandemic world. To make sense of this change and deliver an integrated provision of care, which improve both patient outcomes and satisfaction for key stakeholders, healthcare leaders must develop an insight into the context in which healthcare is delivered, and leadership is enacted. Formal leadership development programmes (LDPs) are widely used for developing leaders and leadership in healthcare organizations. However, there is a paucity of rigorous evaluations of LDPs. Existing evaluations often focus on individual-level outcomes, with limited attention to long-term outcomes that might emerge across team and organizational levels. Specifically, evaluation models that have been closely associated with or rely heavily on qualitative methods are seldom used in LDP evaluations, despite their relevance for capturing unanticipated outcomes, investigating learning impact over time, and studying collective outcomes at multiple levels. The purpose of this paper is to review the potential of qualitative models and approaches in healthcare leadership development evaluation. This scoping review identifies seventeen evaluation models and approaches. Findings indicate that the incorporation of qualitative and participatory elements in evaluation designs could offer a richer demonstration and context-specific explanations of programme impact in healthcare contexts.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
11.40
自引率
11.10%
发文量
43
期刊介绍: Human Resource Development International promotes all aspects of practice and research that explore issues of individual, group and organisational learning and performance. In adopting this perspective Human Resource Development International is committed to questioning the divide between practice and theory; between the practitioner and the academic; and between traditional and experimental methodological approaches. Human Resource Development International is committed to a wide understanding of ''organisation'' - one that extends through self-managed teams, voluntary work, or family businesses to global enterprises and bureaucracies. Human Resource Development International also commits itself to exploring the development of organisations and the life-long learning of people and their collectivity (organisation), their strategy and their policy, from all parts of the world. In this way Human Resource Development International will become a leading forum for debate and exploration of the interdisciplinary field of human resource development.
期刊最新文献
Pause for reflection: musings from the editorial team The coach bots are coming: exploring global coaches’ attitudes and responses to the threat of AI coaching Publishing quantitative research: exploring the peer-review process and manuscript acceptance rates Leaders and followers in transition: building the shared leadership memory bank Applying generative AI ethically in HRD practice
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1