Strategic Approaches for the Health Science Educator: Understanding Strategic Planning, Strategic Thinking, and Continuous Process Improvement and Their Impact.

ABSTRACT: With continued demand for health science institutions to find solutions to deliver on heightened student expectations despite smaller budgets and fewer resources, the utilization of organizational improvement techniques is pervasive. Academic health care leaders are seeking effective modalities to overcome obstacles, modernize, and become more efficient. Three of the commonly used approaches for improvement are strategic planning, strategic thinking, and continuous process improvement (CPI), and these concepts have been used in a variety of forms throughout industry, higher education, and health care. However, their definitions are often not well understood, and their processes are misconstrued in practice. With the increased expectation of health care institutions with undergraduate, graduate, and continuing education to consider strategic processes in organizational improvement, it is important for leadership to understand the differences in these three approaches. In this article, we explain the concepts of strategic planning, strategic thinking, and CPI through an overview of their history, definitions, and the benefits and pitfalls as observed by researchers. Furthermore, we reduce the noise in the existing literature into three concise definitions for each approach. And finally, for those seeking where to begin, we explain one tool in each category recommended for the novice strategist: the Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats (SWOT) analysis for strategic planning, the Goals, Objectives, Strategies, and Tactics (GOST) framework for strategic thinking, and the Pareto Chart for CPI.

Examining the Intersection of Strategic Thinking and Continuous Process Improvement Through the Lens of Military Medical Education to Build a Novel Model.

In 2020, the U.S. Air Force School of Aerospace Medicine hired its first civilian dean since its founding in 1918, tasked with building the school's first strategic plan to modernize and improve the institution. Using a combination of military continuous process improvement and academic strategic thinking, the dean produced a highly successful strategic plan. However, its resource-heavy and time-consuming methodology made it difficult to replicate. This study aimed to create a novel and streamlined strategic planning model that combined best practices from continuous process improvement and strategic thinking without redundancy. A qualitative descriptive case study was used to analyze the detailed efforts through content analysis of 150 pages of documentation. A hybrid approach to coding uncovered 44 deductive codes and 5 inductive codes from 10 strategic tools. Results indicated a converging relationship between all strategic processes tested-strategic planning, strategic thinking, and continuous process improvement and their associated tools. A five-step model called the Triple "O" OODA Loop was created, combining best practice tools from strategic planning (purpose trident and SWOT analysis or strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats), strategic thinking (Hot Spots scale and GOST framework or goals, objectives, strategies, and tactics) and continuous process improvement (phases 6-8).

Template for a program tailored ACS/APDS phase 1 curriculum: From needs assessment to implementation.

BACKGROUND: The Phase 1 ACS/APDS skills curriculum standardizes intern training. Despite this, institutional implementation varies and is nationally low. We aimed to use Kern's six-steps to tailor this to our program, providing a framework to improve implementation. METHODS: Problem identification and general needs assessment were performed. Targeted needs assessment (TNA) of incoming interns ('interns'), current residents, and attendings determined perceived importance of skills and intern's previous experience and confidence. Educational strategies were developed. Learner knowledge was assessed before and after modules, deficiencies identified enabled employment of active learning strategies. Modular and curricular evaluations were completed. RESULTS: TNA determined all interns had been taught knot tying and suturing, and were most confident with suturing, knot tying, and urethral catheterization. Educational strategies included simulation and lectures. Evaluations demonstrated improvement in test scores (pre-v post-) and skills confidence on curricula completion. CONCLUSION: Our framework utilizes institutional resources and expertise while focusing on determining existing knowledge, skill, and technical deficiencies of learners. This approach demonstrated improvement in knowledge and confidence, and could improve implementation rates of the Phase 1 curriculum.

Institution-specific utilization of the American College of Surgeons/Association of Program Directors operative skills curriculum: From needs assessment to implementation.

BACKGROUND: The American College of Surgeons/Association of Program Directors in Surgery operative skills curriculum standardizes training. However, simulation resources are variable with curriculum implementation institution dependent. Our aim was to use Kern's six steps of curricular development to demonstrate how to tailor the American College of Surgeons/Association of Program Directors in Surgery Phase 2 curriculum to program specific needs. METHODS: Problem identification and general needs assessment was performed. Targeted needs assessment of general surgery residents and attendings was conducted to determine perceived importance of operative skills and residents' confidence with these skills and attendings perceptions of deficiencies in technical skills using the Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills criteria. Educational strategies were developed dependent on program resources. The program was piloted between 2018 to 2019 and implemented in the 2019 to 2020 academic year. Assessment of resident technical skills and resident or faculty teaching skills was performed for each session. Resident confidence with procedures was assessed using the Zwisch scale before and after modules. Curricular evaluations were completed by residents after each module. RESULTS: The previous curriculum did not comprehensively cover Phase 2 modules and was not tailored to the needs of residents. Targeted needs assessment revealed differences in prioritization of learning for techniques by seniority (most important operation for faculty: laparoscopic cholecystectomy, postgraduate year 4 and 5: laparoscopic partial colectomy, interns: open inguinal/femoral hernia repair). Faculty identified technical skills on which to focus (ie, interns' knowledge of a specific procedure, postgraduate year 4 and 5 flow of the operation and forward planning). Educational strategies employed included wet and dry lab simulations and online materials. Residents reported increased procedural confidence after curriculum completion. CONCLUSION: This comprehensive implementation of the American College of Surgeons/Association of Program Directors in Surgery Phase 2 skills curriculum effectively used resources and expertise of an institution and focused on the knowledge and technical deficiencies of the target learners. Improvement in learner confidence was demonstrated by this approach.

Preparing for the changing role of instructional technologies in medical education.

As part of an international faculty development conference in February 2010, a working group of medical educators and physicians discussed the changing role of instructional technologies and made recommendations for supporting faculty in using these technologies in medical education. The resulting discussion highlighted ways technology is transforming the entire process of medical education and identified several converging trends that have implications for how medical educators might prepare for the next decade. These trends include the explosion of new information; all information, including both health knowledge and medical records, becoming digital; a new generation of learners; the emergence of new instructional technologies; and the accelerating rate of change, especially related to technology. The working group developed five recommendations that academic health leaders and policy makers may use as a starting point for dealing with the instructional technology challenges facing medical education over the next decade. These recommendations are (1) using technology to provide/support experiences for learners that are not otherwise possible-not as a replacement for, but as a supplement to, face-to-face experiences, (2) focusing on fundamental principles of teaching and learning rather than learning specific technologies in isolation, (3) allocating a variety of resources to support the appropriate use of instructional technologies, (4) supporting faculty members as they adopt new technologies, and (5) providing funding and leadership to enhance electronic infrastructure to facilitate sharing of resources and instructional ideas.