Background The Future Leaders Programme (FLP) was a leadership and organisational change training programme for newly appointed consultants at the Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (OUH). It aimed to equip new consultants with skills, knowledge and experience to lead sustainable change, and was centred around quality improvement projects as a vehicle for skill development and a metric of outcomes.

The FLP was developed with blended learning techniques. It consisted of a series of monthly full-day workshops over 12 months with discussions, lectures, workshops, experiential learning, simulation, and mentoring.

Evaluation Evaluation was conducted with a mixed-methods approach based on Kirkpatrick’s framework for evaluation of educational outcomes: (Harden, Grant and Buck, 1999; Hammick, Dornan and Steinert, 2010)

• Levels 1 and 2 (Reaction/Learning)

  • Questionnaire based on Pendleton and Furnham’s Primary Colours model (Pendleton and Furnham, 2016)

• Level 3 (Behavioural Change)

  • Post-course questionnaire; interviews

• Level 4 (System)

  • QI project outcomes

Results 24 participants completed FLP2, in 6 project teams. 85% reported working over the allocated 4 hours per week (68% worked more than 4 hours over) Despite this, 100% of respondents reported an increase in motivation, 95% reported an increase in confidence, and 84% reported an increase in job satisfaction and resilience. 88% of individual average scores across the Pendleton and Furnham questionnaire reduced over the course. A change in reference frame was indicated by questions regarding knowledge of strategy. 3/6 (50%) QIP’s showed clear improvement and 5/6 (83%) showed some improvement. Independent financial analysis showed a clear return on investment (ROI) for the course.

Conclusions Despite increased workload associated with a leadership course, these results show that it is possible to generate positive individual, organisational and patient outcomes, with positive ROI.

Further study is needed to investigate factors that influence the success of such programmes, and to investigate reference frame changes that might explain the overall decrease in self-assessed scores shown.

References

1. Hammick M, Dornan T, Steinert Y. Conducting a best evidence systematic review. Part 1: From idea to data coding. BEME Guide No. 13. Medical Teacher 2010;32(1):3–15. doi:10.3109/01421590903414245

2. Harden R, Grant J, Buck G. BEME Guide No. 1: Best evidence medical education. Medical Teacher 1999;21(6):553–562. doi:10.1080/01421599978960

3. Pendleton D, Furnham A. Leadership?: All You Need To Know 2016.