You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Brief report
South West England leadership training survey (2019)
  1. Samuel Hayward1,2,
  2. Sophie McGlade2,3,
  3. Samantha Cockburn2,4,
  4. Ben Ballisat2,5,
  5. Freya Smith-Jack2,6,
  6. Carla Fleming2,7,
  7. Mark Everleigh2,8,
  8. Jane Thurlow9
  1. 1 Department of Public Health, North Somerset Council, Weston-super-Mare, UK
  2. 2 Health Education England South West, Bristol, UK
  3. 3 Peninsula Radiology Academy, University Hospitals Plymouth NHS Trust, Plymouth, UK
  4. 4 Respiratory Department, North Devon District Hospital, Barnstaple, UK
  5. 5 Department of Anaesthetics, Southmead Hospital, Bristol, UK
  6. 6 Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK
  7. 7 Department of Oral Surgery, University of Bristol Dental Hospital, Bristol, UK
  8. 8 Department of Anaesthetics, Gloucestershire Health and Care NHS Foundation Trust, Brockworth, UK
  9. 9 Department of Faculty Development, Health Education England South West, Bristol, UK
  1. Correspondence to Samuel Hayward, Public Health, North Somerset Council, Weston-super-Mare TA1 4DY, UK; samuel.hayward{at}nhs.net

Abstract

Introduction The National Health Service Long Term Plan recognises that excellent quality care requires great leadership. Understanding junior doctor experiences of leadership development can inform organisations to improve trainee leadership skills.

Methods A survey of South West (SW) England trainees was conducted to capture views on leadership and management training.

Results Results came from 190 trainees across both SW deaneries, areas of practice and all training stages. Respondents agreed that leadership skills are important for doctors (n=186; 99%). Lack of time was indicated as a barrier to developing leadership skills (n=139; 75.5%). Audits and quality improvement projects were used for developing leadership skills. Colleagues were the main source of support.

Discussion SW trainees recognise the importance of developing leadership skills, underlining the need to prioritise opportunities for leadership development. Respondents had ideas to improve areas of practice, where ideas were supported, they were implemented.

Conclusion Compared with national findings SW trainee experiences are positive, with more ideas implemented, more time for developing skills and more resources used. Activities engaged in closely aligned to the 70:20:10 model of leadership. Trainees should be encouraged to access support from peers and create networks of opportunity. Additional research in this area is needed.

  • clinical leadership
  • trainees
  • feedback
  • learning

https://doi.org/10.1136/leader-2020-000308

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • Contributors SH contributed to the design of study protocol, survey design, literature review, analysis of results and was the main author of the manuscript. SM contributed to the design of the study protocol, survey design and conducted the administration of the survey. SC contributed to the design of the study protocol, survey design, survey distribution, data collection and collation. BB contributed to the design of study protocol, survey design, analysis of results and was an editor of the manuscript. FS-J, contributed to the design of the study protocol, survey design, literature review, development of figures and was an editor of the manuscript. CF and ME contributed to the design of the study protocol and survey design. JT provided project supervision. All authors approved the final version to be published.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.