You are here

  • Home
  • Archive
  • Volume 6, Issue 3
  • Evaluating the impact of a national strategic leader development programme for UK doctors: myth-busting, mind-changing, mood-enhancing

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Original research
Evaluating the impact of a national strategic leader development programme for UK doctors: myth-busting, mind-changing, mood-enhancing
  1. Judy McKimm1,
  2. Peter Lees2,
  3. Kirsten Armit2,
  4. Chloe Mills1
  1. 1 Swansea University, Swansea, UK
  2. 2 Faculty of Medical Leadership and Management, London, UK
  1. Correspondence to Kirsten Armit, Faculty of Medical Leadership and Management, London WC1R 4SG, UK; Kirsten.Armit{at}fmlm.ac.uk

Abstract

Background The drive towards engaging UK doctors in clinical leadership and management has involved many initiatives at various levels.

Methods This paper reports on the findings of an in-depth evaluation of a national medical leadership programme for doctors in the late stages of specialty or general practitioner (GP) training or have just become consultants or GPs.

Results The evaluation clearly demonstrates the impact of this programme and the benefits for the individuals and organisations involved, particularly around stimulating a shift in mood and a major mindset shift in what medical leadership is (and is not) and what they can achieve as medical leaders. The programme structure and activities allowed participants to learn from a range of senior decision-makers about policy and strategic developments and processes. However, the evaluation also highlighted that some pervasive myths still exist around medical leadership and management which, if not addressed, will hamper efforts to fully engage doctors in taking on strategic leadership roles.

Conclusion Clinical leadership programmes are valuable, but must be carefully managed to extract the full value from them.

  • medical leadership
  • leadership assessment
  • consultant
  • GP
  • career development

Data availability statement

No data are available. Qualitative evaluation and action logic measurement of participants has been used to inform this paper. The evaluation data are owned by FMLM and the action logic measurements by Harthill Consulting.

https://doi.org/10.1136/leader-2021-000464

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.

Data availability statement

No data are available. Qualitative evaluation and action logic measurement of participants has been used to inform this paper. The evaluation data are owned by FMLM and the action logic measurements by Harthill Consulting.

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • Contributors JM led the evaluation and drafted the paper. All authors are responsible for the overall content of the paper and edited the final version. The guarantor for this work is KA.

  • Funding Funding confirmed as follows: Dinwoodie Charitable Company letter dated 28 June 2017; Royal College of Surgeons of England email dated 8 May 2017.

  • Competing interests None declared.

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