A vision to advance gender equality within pharmacy leadership: Next steps to take the profession forward

The United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 5 to 'achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls' aims to eliminate all forms of discrimination against women and girls and ensure their full and effective participation in all spheres of life. In alignment with this, several key international initiatives are making progress towards gender equality in the pharmacy profession. The pharmacy profession must support women and accelerate the progress of women in leadership positions in pharmacy. International and national pharmacy professional bodies can play a critical role in fostering the change required to improve gender equality in all regions and countries. The ongoing development, evaluation and implementation of policies and initiatives are critical to a profession that is increasingly becoming feminised. Furthermore, there is an imperative to deeply understand the gender-based barriers and develop evidence-based strategies and solutions to support women in pharmacy leadership. There is extensive literature and research on gender inequality and its impact on leadership outside pharmacy which could be used strategically for the profession to develop its own evidence based strategic position. Robust initiatives are needed to ensure that women at all levels including women in pharmacy leadership are empowered and encouraged to participate in their profession. This commentary seeks to generate and contribute to the debate to ensure the profession is proactive and deliberate in tackling the challenges that have traditionally impeded women reaching leadership positions and several critical actions as next steps are proposed. Action is needed to improve gender equality in pharmacy leadership and a profession-wide discussion on ways to progress the above proposed actions is critically needed.

The evaluation of health care leadership development programmes: a scoping review of reviews

PURPOSE

The purpose of this paper is to report a scoping review of reviews which investigated HLDP evaluations to determine: how the conceptualisation of leadership development programmes (HLDPs), and despite growing calls for robust evaluations of their pedagogic design, delivery and effectiveness, there are concerns regarding the quality of data associated with their evaluation. This scoping review of reviews investigated the reporting of HLDP evaluations to determine: how the conceptualisation of leadership underpinning HLDPs influence their evaluation; how the pedagogical approaches within HLDPs influence their evaluation; and the evaluation designs and measures used to assess HLDPs.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

The scoping review was conducted on reviews of HLDPs. Searches were performed on four databases and on the grey literature. Data were extracted and a narrative synthesis was developed.

FINDINGS

Thirty-one papers were included in the scoping review of reviews. A great deal of heterogeneity in HLDPs was identified. Evaluations of HLDPs were affected by poor data quality, and there were limitations in the evidence about "what works". Leadership was conceptualised in different ways across HLDPs, and consequently, there was a lack of consistency as to what is being evaluated and the methods used to assess HLDPs.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE

This review of reviews summarises the current evidence on the evaluation of HLDPs. Evaluations of HLDPs need to explicitly account for the complexity of health systems, how this complexity impacts on the development and articulation of leadership practice, and how the underlying conceptualisation of leadership and the associated theory of change articulate a set of assumptions about how HLDPs support leaders to affect change within complex systems.

Factors that influence the implementation of organisational interventions for advancing women in healthcare leadership: A meta-ethnographic study

BACKGROUND

Gender inequity in healthcare leadership persists and progress is slow, with the focus firmly on problems, barriers and on requiring women themselves to adapt and compete in a system not designed for them. Women are individually burdened to advance their careers, with little effort given to addressing systemic barriers in the health sector. A recent systematic review prioritised organisational-level approaches and demonstrated effective interventions. In this meta-ethnographic study, we further this work by examining factors in implementation of organisational interventions for advancing women in leadership.

METHODS

The meta-ethnographic framework applied here follows the Noblit and Hare approach for synthesising findings and applying interpretive analysis to original research. We generated a new line-of-argument with insights for the healthcare sector. The protocol is registered (CRD42020162115) on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews. Three academic databases (MEDLINE, PsycINFO, SCOPUS) were searched systematically between 2000 and 2021. Studies were analysed if they included organisational-level interventions that sought to measurably advance women in leadership. Study characteristics were extracted using a standard template for intervention details. Quality appraisal was conducted using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program tool. Data synthesis was conducted across 19 criteria of the Meta-Ethnography Reporting Guide (eMERGe).

FINDINGS

Fifteen qualitative studies were included. Analysis revealed three meta-themes that are central to successful implementation of organisational interventions that advance women in healthcare leadership: (1) leadership commitment and accountability, influenced by internal and external organisational settings, salient for long term outcomes and for developing an inclusive leadership culture; (2) intervention fit with individuals with consideration given to personal beliefs, preferences, experiences, capabilities or life circumstances, including capacity for leadership roles in their broader life context; balanced against maintaining interventional fidelity, and (3) cultural climate and organisational readiness for change, addressing traditional, conservative and constrictive perspectives on gender and leadership in health, highlighting the facilitating role of male colleagues.

INTERPRETATION

This meta-ethnographic research extends past work by integrating empirical evidence from a systematic literature review of effective organisational level interventions, with the identification of pragmatic themes to generate, implement, evaluate and embed evidence-based organisational interventions to advance women in healthcare leadership. This work can inform initiatives and policymakers to generate and implement new knowledge to advance women in healthcare leadership.

FUNDING

Epworth Health and Monash University provided scholarships for MM. HT is funded by an NHMRC / MRFF Practitioner Fellowship, JB by an NHMRC fellowship and HS by a Monash Warwick University Professorship.

Advancing women in healthcare leadership: A systematic review and meta-synthesis of multi-sector evidence on organisational interventions

BACKGROUND

Women are underrepresented in healthcare leadership, yet evidence on impactful organisational strategies, practices and policies that advance women's careers are limited. We aimed to explore these across sectors to gain insight into measurably advancing women in leadership in healthcare.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed across Medline via OVID; Medline in-process and other non-indexed citations via OVID; PsycINFO and SCOPUS from January 2000 to March 2021. Methods are outlined in a published protocol registered a priori on PROSPERO (CRD42020162115). Eligible studies reported on organisational interventions for advancing women in leadership with at least one measurable outcome. Studies were assessed independently by two reviewers. Identified interventions were organised into categories and meta-synthesis was completed following the 'ENhancing Transparency in REporting the synthesis of Qualitative research' (ENTREQ) statement.

FINDINGS

There were 91 eligible studies from 6 continents with 40 quantitative, 38 qualitative and 13 mixed methods studies. These spanned academia, health, government, sports, hospitality, finance and information technology sectors, with around half of studies in health and academia. Sample size, career stage and outcomes ranged broadly. Potentially effective interventions consistently reported that organisational leadership, commitment and accountability were key drivers of organisational change. Organisational intervention categories included i) organisational processes; ii) awareness and engagement; iii) mentoring and networking; iv) leadership development; and v) support tools. A descriptive meta-synthesis of detailed strategies, policies and practices within these categories was completed.

INTERPRETATION

This review provides an evidence base on organisational interventions for advancing women in leadership across diverse settings, with lessons for healthcare. It transcends the focus on the individual to target organisational change, capturing measurable change across intervention categories. This work directly informs a national initiative with international links, to enable women to achieve their career goals in healthcare and moves beyond the focus on barriers to solutions.

Leadership self-perception of clinical nurses at the bedside: A qualitative descriptive study

AIM & OBJECTIVE

Explore leadership self-perception of clinical nurses at the bedside and their perception of leadership on patient care and outcomes.

BACKGROUND

According to Institute of Medicine Future of Nursing Report, nurses are called to exhibit leadership at every level. Published research on nursing leadership is primarily focused on formal leaders. Research examining leadership at the clinical nurse level has either tested application of a particular leadership model or studied nurses who have been identified as informal clinical leaders. We took an inductive approach without any prior knowledge if participating clinical nurses viewed themselves as leaders.

DESIGN

Descriptive qualitative method was used.

METHODS

Four focus groups were conducted with a total of 20 clinical nurses from 2 hospitals within an integrated health system using a convenience sampling method until saturation was reached. The Consolidated criteria for Reporting Qualitative research (COREQ) was used to report findings.

RESULTS

All participants identified qualities they admired in leaders. Fifty percent did not initially view themselves as leaders until they realised that they often demonstrated those same leadership qualities in providing nursing care to patients and families. Participants struggled to make a connection between their leadership at the bedside and patient outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical nurses assume a formal title is required to be a leader. Findings from this study imply that leadership attributes required at point of care are embedded in the nursing practice and look similar to servant leadership.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Leadership is in the nature of nursing practice, and more work is required to increase awareness that every nurse is a leader. Further efforts need to be pursued to help clinical nurses become self-aware they are leaders in order to impact patient outcomes and transform health care from bottom-up and inside-out.

Professional learning, organisational change and clinical leadership development outcomes

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study is to develop a conceptually sound outcome model for clinical leadership (CL) development in healthcare, linking individual professional learning and organisational change. Frontline doctors' CL is often offered as a solution to healthcare challenges worldwide. However, there is a paucity of rigorous evidence of effectiveness of CL development, or theories supporting it. Importantly, the literature currently lacks robust outcome models for CL development, impeding robust impact evaluations.

METHODS

This multi-source, sequential integrated mixed-methods study draws on systematic content analysis of NHS policy documents and empirical data from a CL programme evaluation study: exploratory factor analysis (EFA) of 142 participants' survey responses and thematic qualitative analysis of 30 in-depth participant interviews across six cohorts. Through integrating findings from the three analyses we examine: (a) the expected organisational outcomes of CL, (b) individual learning outcomes of CL development, and (c) the mechanisms linking the two.

RESULTS

The policy analysis identified three desired solutions to key healthcare problems which CL is expected to offer: Speeding up good practice, Inter-professional collaboration and dialogue, and Change and transformation. Triangulating the EFA results with the qualitative analysis produced five individual outcome constructs: Self-efficacy, Engaging stakeholders, Agency, Boundary-crossing expertise, and Willingness to take risks and to learn from risks and failures. Further qualitative analysis uncovered key mechanisms linking the individual outcomes with the desired organisational changes.

DISCUSSION

Despite significant investments into CL development in the UK and worldwide, the absence of conceptually robust and operationally specific outcome models linking individual and organisational impact impedes rigorous evaluations of programme effectiveness. Our study developed a novel individual and organisational outcome model including a theory of change for clinical leadership. Our findings further contribute to professional learning theory in medical settings by conceptualising and operationalising the mechanisms operating between individual and organisational learning outcomes.

Flipping the paradigm: a qualitative exploration of research translation centres in the United Kingdom and Australia

Background

Over the past decade, Research Translation Centres (RTCs) have been established in many countries. These centres (sometimes referred to as Academic Health Science Centres) are designed to bring universities and healthcare providers together in order to accelerate the generation and translation of new evidence that is responsive to health service and community priorities. This has the potential to effectively ‘flip’ the traditional research and education paradigms because it requires active participation and continuous engagement with stakeholders (especially service users, the community and frontline clinicians). Although investment and expectations of RTCs are high, the literature confirms a need to better understand the processes that RTCs use to mobilise knowledge, build workforce capacity, and co-produce research with patients and the public to ensure population impact and drive healthcare improvement.

Methods

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with selected leaders and members from select RTCs in England and Australia. Convenience sampling was utilised to identify RTCs, based on their geography, accessibility and availability. Purposive sampling and a snowballing approach were employed to recruit individual participants for interviews, which were conducted face to face or via videoconferencing. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using a reflexive and inductive approach. This involved two researchers comparing codes and interrogating themes that were analysed inductively against the study aims and through meetings with the research team.

Results

A total of 41 participants, 22 from England and 19 from Australia were interviewed. Five major themes emerged, including (1) dissonant metrics, (2) different models of leadership, (3) public and patient involvement and research co-production, (4) workforce development and (5) barriers to collaboration.

Conclusions

Participants identified the need for performance measures that capture community impact. Better aligned success metrics, enhanced leadership, strategies to partner with patients and the public, enhanced workforce development and strategies to enhance collaboration were all identified as crucial for RTCs to succeed.