Programme leaders in graduate medical education (GME) are responsible for the final stage of physician training, guiding the transition from supervised to independent practice. The influence of GME programme leaders extends beyond clinical practice, affecting trainees’ relationship with and attitudes towards the healthcare system, future leadership behaviours, work–life prioritisations and professional identity among others. Given the potential magnitude of GME programme leaders’ impact, both positive and negative, on GME trainees, we reflected on our shared leadership model that developed iteratively as a leadership team. We draw on our experiences to emphasise practical leadership behaviours and provide a summary of our observations, leading to nine recommendations for effective GME programme leadership and associated suggestions for implementation. We divide our recommendations into four leadership recommendations and five management recommendations. Throughout, we highlight the process of developing our shared leadership model, recognising that our process and observations will aid leadership teams in evaluating and, potentially, adapting our recommendations to meet their needs. We anticipate that leaders and leadership teams at every level will find value in our recommendations, even if our intended audience is GME leaders from chief residents to programme directors.
- emotional intelligence
Data availability statement
Data sharing not applicable. No datasets were generated and/or analysed for this article.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
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.
Contributors All authors contributed to the content development. WRJ wrote the first draft of the manuscript, tables and figures. All authors contributed to substantive revisions the manuscript, tables and figures.
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.