Search

AimSystem leadership is the requirement for a leader of a single organisation to operate on behalf of a wider system, rather than their individual organisation. The current policy landscape does not incentivise system leadership, as many national structures emphasise a focus on individual organisations. This study aims to understand how chief executives in the National Health Service (NHS) in England implement system leadership in practice when faced with decisions that benefit the system to the detriment of their own trust.MethodologySemistructured interviews were conducted with ten chief executives from various NHS trust types to understand their perceptions and decision-making process in practice. Semantic thematic analysis was used to draw out themes in relation to how chief executives approach decisions which weigh up the system and organisation.ResultsInterviewees expressed advantages (such as support in managing demand) and disadvantages (such as increased bureaucracy) of system leadership and practical considerations in operationalisation (such as the importance of interpersonal relationships). Interviewees endorsed system leadership in principle, but did not feel that current organisational incentives support the implementation of system leadership in practice. However, this was not seen as a major challenge or impediment to effective leadership.ConclusionAs a specific policy area, a direct focus on systems leadership is not necessarily helpful. Chief executives should be supported to make decisions in a complex environment, without a specific focus on healthcare systems as a unit of operation.

BackgroundAs systems become more complex, shared leadership (SL) has been suggested to have a dominant role in improving cross-functional working tailored to organisational needs. Little, however, is known about the benefits of SL in healthcare management, especially for UK’s recently formed integrated care system (ICS). The aim of this study was to understand current attitudes, barriers and needs of clinical and non-clinical managers sharing leadership responsibilities in the ICS.MethodTwenty clinical and non-clinical leaders in 15 organisations were interviewed to understand current cross-functional leadership collaborations, and the potential SL may have on the recently established ICS in the National Health Service (NHS). The data were transcribed and analysed thematically.ResultsFindings showed perceptions and experiences of clinical and non-clinical healthcare management in relation to: (1) motivation to execute a leadership position, including the need to step up and a sense of duty; (2) attitudes towards interdisciplinary working, which is reflected in conflicts due to different values and expertise; (3) SL skills and behaviours, including the need for mutual understanding and cooperative attitudes by means of effective communication and collaboration; and (4) barriers to achieve SL in the ICS, such as bureaucracy, and a lack of time and support.ConclusionsSL may help improve current leadership cultures within the NHS; however, for SL to have a tangible impact, it needs to be delivered as part of leadership development for doctors in postgraduate training, and development programmes for aspiring, emerging and established leaders, with clear lines of communication.

IntroductionSimulation-based training (SBT) on shared leadership (SL) and group decision-making (GDM) can contribute to the safe and efficient functioning of a healthcare system, yet it is rarely incorporated into healthcare management training. The aim of this study was design, develop and validate a robust and evidence-based SBT to explore and train SL and GDM.MethodUsing a two-stage iterative simulation design approach, 103 clinical and non-clinical managerial students and healthcare professionals took part in an SBT that contained real-world problems and opportunities to improve patient safety set within a fictional context. Self-report data were gathered, and a focus group was conducted to address the simulation’s degree of realism, content, relevance, as well as areas for improvement.ResultsParticipants experienced the simulation scenario, the material and the role assignment as realistic and representative of real-world tasks and decision contexts, and as a good opportunity to identify and enact relevant tasks, behaviours and knowledge related to SL and GDM. Areas for improvement were highlighted with regard to involving an actor who challenges SL and GDM; more preparatory time to allow for an enhanced familiarisation of the content; and, video debriefs to reflect on relevant behaviours and team processes.ConclusionsOur simulation was perceived as an effective method to develop SL and GDM within the context of patient safety and healthcare management. Future studies could extend this scenario method to other areas of healthcare service and delivery, and to different sectors that require diverse groups to make complex decisions.