Search

Public health leadership is an important topic in the era of U. S. health reform, population health innovation, and health system transformation. This study utilized the full-range leadership model in order to examine public health leadership. We sought to understand local public health leadership from the perspective of local health department leaders and those who work with and for them. Public health leadership was explored through interviews and focus groups with directors (n=4) and staff (n=33) from local health departments. Qualitative analytic methods included reflexive journals, code-recode procedures, and member checking, with analysis facilitated by Atlas.ti v.6.0. Qualitative results supported and expanded upon previously reported quantitative findings. Leading by example and providing individual consideration to followers were found to be more important than other leader factors such as intellectual stimulation, inspirational motivation, or idealized attributes of leaders. Having a clear and competent vision of public health, being able to work collaboratively with other community agencies, and addressing the current challenges to public health with creativity and innovation were also important findings. Idealized leadership behaviors and individual consideration should be the focus of student and professional development. Models that incorporate contextual considerations, such as the situational leadership model, should be utilized and instruction in basic interpersonal skills may prove useful. The development of a detailed leadership assessment and development process for public health practitioners is indicated.

Background 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. Purpose 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. Methods 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. Findings 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. Implications 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.

There is a lack of research in the for-profit sector of higher education in the United States. Likewise, there is a lack of research on the factors that affect the job satisfaction of adjunct faculty. To address these gaps in knowledge, a quantitative correlational study was performed to investigate the effect of administrative leadership on the job satisfaction of adjunct faculty who teach online classes at a for-profit university in the United States. The Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire, which measures perceived leadership behaviors, and Spector’s Job Satisfaction Survey, which measures job satisfaction, were used to anonymously collect data from a sample of 77 adjunct faculty. The Full-Range Leadership, which is composed of transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership behaviors, was the theoretical model for leadership. Pearson’s product moment correlational analyses were performed to investigate the bi-variate relationships between the variables. The dependent variable of total satisfaction had a statistically significant, direct and strong correlation with the independent variable of transformational leadership (r = .536, p < .0005). The strength and direction of the relationship indicated that increases in the scores of total satisfaction are associated with increases in scores in transformational leadership. Total satisfaction had a statistically significant, indirect and moderate correlation with the independent variable of laissez-faire leadership (r = -.372, p = .001). The strength and direction of the relationship indicated that lower total satisfaction scores are associated with higher laissez-faire leadership scores. There was no statistically significant relationship between transactional leadership and overall job satisfaction.