Division of Health Systems Management and Policy, University of Memphis , Memphis, TN , USA.
Department of Preventive Medicine, University of Kentucky , Lexington, KY , USA.
Front Public Health. 2015 Apr 30;3:73. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2015.00073. eCollection 2015.
Workforce and leadership development are central to the future of public health. However, public health has been slow to translate and apply leadership models from other professions and to incorporate local perspectives in understanding public health leadership.
This study utilized the full-range leadership model in order to examine public health leadership. Specifically, it sought to measure leadership styles among local health department directors and to understand the context of leadership in local health departments.
Leadership styles among local health department directors (n = 13) were examined using survey methodology. Quantitative analysis methods included descriptive statistics, boxplots, and Pearson bivariate correlations using SPSS v18.0.
Self-reported leadership styles were highly correlated to leadership outcomes at the organizational level. However, they were not related to county health rankings. Results suggest the preeminence of leader behaviors and providing individual consideration to staff as compared to idealized attributes of leaders, intellectual stimulation, or inspirational motivation.
Holistic leadership assessment instruments such as the multifactor leadership questionnaire can be useful in assessing public health leaders' approaches and outcomes. Comprehensive, 360-degree reviews may be especially helpful. Further research is needed to examine the effectiveness of public health leadership development models, as well as the extent that public health leadership impacts public health outcomes.
劳动力和领导力的发展是公共卫生的未来的核心。然而,公共卫生在将其他专业的领导模式转化并应用于理解公共卫生领导力方面一直进展缓慢,且未能纳入当地视角。
本研究利用全范围领导力模型来考察公共卫生领导力。具体而言,它旨在衡量地方卫生部门主管的领导风格,并了解地方卫生部门的领导背景。
采用调查方法对地方卫生部门主管(n=13)的领导风格进行了考察。使用 SPSS v18.0 进行定量分析,包括描述性统计、箱线图和 Pearson 双变量相关性分析。
自我报告的领导风格与组织层面的领导结果高度相关,但与县卫生排名无关。结果表明,与领导者的理想化特质、智力激发或激励动机相比,领导行为和对员工的个人关注更为突出。
多因素领导力问卷等整体领导力评估工具可用于评估公共卫生领导者的方法和结果。全面的 360 度评估可能特别有帮助。需要进一步研究公共卫生领导力发展模型的有效性,以及公共卫生领导力对公共卫生结果的影响程度。