Article Text
Abstract
Introduction Interprofessional leadership is essential to sustain the National Health Service (NHS) in pressured times, which should include the NHS’s third largest clinical workforce in England: allied health professionals (AHPs) (AHPs as defined by NHS England: Art therapists; Dramatherapists; Music therapists; Dietitians; Occupational therapists; Operating department practitioners; Orthoptists; Osteopaths; Paramedics; Physiotherapists; Podiatrists, Prosthetists and Orthotists; Radiographers; Speech and language therapists). Therefore, a feasibility study was undertaken, to explore the views of AHPs working in early to mid-career positions, regarding the barriers and opportunities they encounter, in both leadership and career development.
Methods Twenty-seven participants, representing 8 of the 14 AHP professions across England, were interviewed across 10 focus groups.
Results Thematic analysis (TA) generated four themes, including the barriers and opportunities for AHP leadership development and career progression. Further TA identified three overarching themes: equitable and interprofessional leadership development; an equitable and structured AHP career pathway; and having AHP leaders at a strategical and/or very senior level. These overarching themes were subsumed under the umbrella category: equity of opportunity and voice. The AHPs, who were interviewed, reported inequitable access to both career and leadership development, compared with other professions, such as nurses, doctors and pharmacists.
Discussion Further work is needed to ensure that interprofessional representation, within senior leadership levels, includes AHPs; which the data suggests would directly benefit all AHPs’ leadership and career development. Recommendations for organisations to facilitate leadership and career development were developed from the TA and at a system-wide level. Further research would be beneficial to gather the views of the six AHP professions not interviewed in this study and from other organisations, such as independent practice. However, this feasibility study does attempt to represent the voices of AHPs, which can be lacking in both organisations and research.
- career development
- clinical leadership
- multi-professional
- strategy
- sucession planning
Data availability statement
Data are available upon reasonable request.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Data availability statement
Data are available upon reasonable request.
Footnotes
X @LauMizzi, @Twitter: @PatrickMUoHull
Contributors LM is the guarantor and was involved in all aspects of this study including acquiring funding, study design, ethics submission, conducting focus groups and data collection, data analysis and wrote the original draft preparation. PM provided academic supervision and manuscript review. The system-wide recommendations resulted from discussions with Dr Susy Stirling and Miss Sarah Kaufmann (the Leadership Faculty, Postgraduate Medical and Dental Education, HEE YH), and Ms Kate Kontou (alumna leadership fellow).
Funding This dissertation was supported by the Leadership Faculty, Postgraduate Medical and Dental Education, HEE YH (no award/grant number); Sheffield Teaching Hospitals, under the HEE CPD funds (no award/grant number); and the Royal College of Speech and Language Therapy, under their minor grant funding (no award/grant number).
Competing interests Leadership Faculty, Postgraduate Medical and Dental Education, HEE YH: Payment towards MSc dissertation module (no award/grant number); HEE continuing professional development funds, via Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust: Payment towards MSc dissertation module (no award/grant number); Minor grant fund, Royal College of Speech and Language Therapy: Payment towards MSc dissertation module (no award/grant number); Personal funding: Payment towards MSc dissertation module.
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.