Effects of Gender and Race/Ethnicity on Perioperative Team Performance.

We judge each other every day using demographic characteristics (such as gender and race/ethnicity), and these social identities shape our lives in profound ways. The impacts of demographic diversity in perioperative teams are poorly understood, and mixed results are reported in other team-based work settings. Drawing from decades' worth of organizational behavior literature, the authors propose a model of critical factors related to interplays between diversity, communication, and conflict, all which take place in a hierarchical environment influenced by power differences. Evidence-based recommendations are provided, aimed at maximizing benefits of diversity in perioperative teams while minimizing negative consequences.

Challenging gender stereotypes and advancing inclusive leadership in the operating theatre.

Modern healthcare is delivered by interprofessional teams, and good leadership of these teams is integral to safe patient care. Good leadership in the operating theatre has traditionally been considered as authoritative, confident and directive, and stereotypically associated with men. We argue that this may not be the best model for team-based patient care and promote the concept of inclusive leadership as a valid alternative. Inclusive leadership encourages all team members to contribute to decision-making, thus engendering more team cohesion, information sharing and speaking up, and ultimately enhancing team effectiveness. However, the relational behaviours associated with inclusive leadership are stereotypically associated with women and may not in fact be recognised as leadership. In this article we provide evidence on the advantages of inclusive leadership over authoritative leadership and explore gender stereotypes and obstacles that limit the recognition of inclusive leadership. We propose that operating teams rise above gender stereotypes of leadership. Inclusive leadership can elicit maximum performance of every team member, thus realising the full potential of interprofessional healthcare teams to provide the best care for patients.

Helping without harming: the instructor's feedback dilemma in debriefing--a case study.

INTRODUCTION: Simulation instructors often feel caught in a task-versus-relationship dilemma. They must offer clear feedback on learners' task performance without damaging their relationship with those learners, especially in formative simulation settings. Mastering the skills to resolve this dilemma is crucial for simulation faculty development. METHODS: We conducted a case study of a debriefer stuck in this task-versus-relationship dilemma. DATA: The "2-column case" captures debriefing dialogue and instructor's thoughts and feelings or the "subjective experience." ANALYSIS: The "learning pathways grid" guides a peer group of faculty in a step-by-step, retrospective analysis of the debriefing. The method uses vivid language to highlight the debriefer's dilemmas and how to surmount them. RESULTS: The instructor's initial approach to managing the task-versus-relationship dilemma included (1) assuming that honest critiques will damage learners, (2) using vague descriptions of learner actions paired with guess-what-I-am-thinking questions, and (3) creating a context she worried would leave learners feeling neither safe nor clear how they could improve. This case study analysis identified things the instructor could do to be more effective including (1) making generous inferences about the learners' qualities, (2) normalizing the challenges posed by the simulation, (3) assuming there are different understandings of what it means to be a team. CONCLUSIONS: There are key assumptions and ways of interacting that help instructors resolve the task-versus-relationship dilemma. The instructor can then provide honest feedback in a rigorous yet empathic way to help sustain good or improve suboptimal performance in the future.