St. Andrews College, College of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Rm 412, 1121 College Drive, Saskatoon, SK, S7N 0W3, Canada.
College of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, 5D40 Health Sciences Building Box 19, 107 Wiggins Road, Saskatoon, SK, S7N 5E5, Canada.
BMC Med Educ. 2017 Sep 19;17(1):169. doi: 10.1186/s12909-017-0995-z.
With current emphasis on leadership in medicine, this study explores Goleman's leadership styles of medical education leaders at different hierarchical levels and gain insight into factors that contribute to the appropriateness of practices.
Forty two leaders (28 first-level with limited formal authority, eight middle-level with wider program responsibility and six senior- level with higher organizational authority) rank ordered their preferred Goleman's styles and provided comments. Eight additional senior leaders were interviewed in-depth. Differences in ranked styles within groups were determined by Friedman tests and Wilcoxon tests. Based upon style descriptions, confirmatory template analysis was used to identify Goleman's styles for each interviewed participant. Content analysis was used to identify themes that affected leadership styles.
There were differences in the repertoire and preferred styles at different leadership levels. As a group, first-level leaders preferred democratic, middle-level used coaching while the senior leaders did not have one preferred style and used multiple styles. Women and men preferred democratic and coaching styles respectively. The varied use of styles reflected leadership conceptualizations, leader accountabilities, contextual adaptations, the situation and its evolution, leaders' awareness of how they themselves were situated, and personal preferences and discomfort with styles. The not uncommon use of pace-setting and commanding styles by senior leaders, who were interviewed, was linked to working with physicians and delivering quickly on outcomes.
Leaders at different levels in medical education draw from a repertoire of styles. Leadership development should incorporate learning of different leadership styles, especially at first- and mid-level positions.
随着当前对医学领导力的重视,本研究探讨了戈尔曼(Goleman)不同层级医学教育领导者的领导风格,并深入了解了促成实践适宜性的因素。
42 名领导者(28 名一级领导者,权力有限;8 名中级领导者,职责范围更广;6 名高级领导者,组织权力更高)对他们首选的戈尔曼领导风格进行了排序,并提供了评论。另外 8 名高级领导者进行了深入访谈。通过 Friedman 检验和 Wilcoxon 检验确定了组内排序风格的差异。根据风格描述,采用确认模板分析确定每位接受访谈的参与者的戈尔曼风格。采用内容分析法确定影响领导风格的主题。
不同领导层级的风格储备和偏好存在差异。作为一个群体,一级领导者更喜欢民主型风格,中级领导者使用教练型风格,而高级领导者则没有偏好的风格,而是使用多种风格。女性和男性分别更喜欢民主型和教练型风格。不同风格的使用反映了领导理念、领导者的责任、情境适应、情况及其演变、领导者对自身处境的认识,以及个人偏好和对风格的不适应。接受访谈的高级领导者不常使用引领型和指挥型风格,而是与医生合作,快速实现成果。
医学教育不同层级的领导者都从一系列风格中汲取灵感。领导力发展应包括学习不同的领导风格,尤其是在一级和中级职位。