Inclusivity in Leader Selection: An 8-Step Process to Promote Representation of Women and Racial/Ethnic Minorities in Leadership.

At a systemic level, organizations need to take intentional steps to build inclusion, equity, and diversity at all levels. In accordance with this need, organizations have been catalyzed by national conversations surrounding gender and racial/ethnic discrimination to generate sustainable change that addresses the disenfranchisement of women and racial/ethnic minorities. Although progress toward addressing the systemic issues that perpetuate these inequities has been made in recent years, research indicates that underrepresentation at the leadership level persists in academic medicine. Further, those in more senior roles are more likely to select, sponsor, and/or mentor individuals like themselves, thereby depriving minority populations of experiences directly correlated with career development and advancement. Hence, the authors posit a focus on the characteristics and competencies of a leader along with a structured selection process is an effective intervention to reduce bias and support inclusion by recalibrating the representation of leadership within academic medical centers. To this end, the authors developed a sequential 8-step leader selection process informed by their model of leadership characteristics and competencies. This process includes a policy update, selection of interview panels, training of panelists, screening the candidate pool, structured interview guides, final candidate slates, assessments of final candidates, and development of newly selected leaders. By following this process, the authors' organization has seen an increase in the representation of women and racial/ethnic minority leaders, an increase in employees' favorable perceptions specific to representation, and data indicative of developing and maintaining an internal diverse leadership candidate pipeline. Ultimately, inclusion makes stronger and more resilient organizations. By following a standardized process grounded in leadership characteristics and competencies, academic medical centers can see changes in their leadership that mirror the populations they lead and serve. Using such processes can lead to the kind of systemic change needed to create inclusive environments.

The Role of Work Environment in Training Sustainment: A Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this meta-analytic review is to examine the role of three work environment support variables (i.e., peer, supervisor, and organizational support) in training transfer and sustainment or long-term use of learned knowledge, skills, and attitudes (KSAs). BACKGROUND: Estimates demonstrate that little training is transferred to the job, wasting billions in organizational spending each year and resulting in significant loss to safety and individual and team performance. Prior research shows the importance of a supportive work environment to facilitating transfer; however, we know little of the relative importance of specific support variables. This study seeks to examine the unique roles of distinct support variables in training transfer. METHOD: A meta-analysis was conducted with multiple regressions to answer three primary research questions. RESULTS: All work environment support variables demonstrate moderate and positive correlations with transfer of training. Furthermore, multiple regressions demonstrate that each factor of the work environment explains unique variance as a predictor, with the model accounting for 32% of transfer and peer support accounting for most of R2. Motivation to transfer mediates the relationship between all three work environment support variables and transfer. Furthermore, three support variables are positively related to sustainment, with peer and supervisor support showing the strongest relationships. CONCLUSION: Findings illuminate the relative contribution of peer, supervisor, and organizational support to transfer and sustainment of training. As transfer continues to be an important yet understudied measure of the effectiveness of workplace training, these findings hold implications for both research and practice.

A Systematic Review of Team Training in Health Care: Ten Questions.

BACKGROUND: As a result of the recent proliferation of health care team training (HTT), there was a need to update previous systematic reviews examining the underlying structure driving team training initiatives. METHODS: This investigation was guided by 10 research questions. A literature search identified 197 empirical samples detailing the evaluation of team training programs within the health care context; 1,764 measures of HTT effectiveness were identified within these samples. Trained coders extracted information related to study design and training development, implementation, and evaluation to calculate percentages detailing the prevalence of certain training features. RESULTS: HTT was rarely informed by a training needs analysis (k = 47, 23.9%) and most commonly addressed communication strategies (k = 167, 84.8%). HTT programs that incorporated practice (k = 163, 82.7%) often employed high-fidelity patient simulators (k = 38, 25.2%) and provided participants with feedback opportunities (k = 107, 65.6%). Participants were typically practicing clinicians (k = 154, 78.2%) with a lower prevalence of health care students (k = 35, 17.8). Evaluations primarily relied on repeated measures designs (k = 123, 62.4%) and self-reported data (k = 1,257, 71.3%). Additional trends were identified and are discussed. CONCLUSIONS: Many trends in HTT practice and evaluation were identified. The results of this review suggested that, in the literature, HTT programs are more frequently following recommendations for training design and implementation (for example, providing feedback) in comparison to findings from previous reviews. However, there were still many areas in which improvement could be achieved to improve patient care.