Characteristics of transformational leadership development programs: A scoping review.

The effectiveness of transformational leadership (TFL) on various outcomes is well known. Accordingly, researchers have developed training programs to enhance TFL behaviours of leaders. Yet, no reviews summarizing the characteristics of TFL training programs exist. The purpose of this review was to examine the characteristics, reporting, and application of TFL-informed programs. A search of six databases yielded 4032 articles, 31 of which met the inclusion criteria. Program characteristics were analyzed using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist tool, while outcomes were analyzed according to the Kirkpatrick model of evaluation. The most common context for TFL program implementation was healthcare (n = 9). Programs were tailored and often delivered using group workshops and individual feedback. Studies reported variation in the dose of programs, rarely evaluated outcomes multiple times post-baseline, and typically employed Level 3a (subjective ratings of behaviour) evaluation measures. Reporting on program location, modifications, and fidelity was poor. Varying conceptualizations of TFL in different contexts lead to disparities in programs and protocols. Evaluation specialists should consider using tools like the TIDiER checklist to ensure that program characteristics are reported appropriately. Program planners should develop common approaches for planning and evaluating TFL programs to improve transparency and replicability of programs.

Evaluation of iLead, a generic implementation leadership intervention: mixed-method preintervention-postintervention design.

OBJECTIVES: The present study aimed to evaluate the iLead intervention and to investigate whether or not transfer of training can be supported by contextualising the intervention (recruiting all managers from one branch of the organisation while focusing on one implementation case, as well as training senior management). DESIGN: A pre-evaluation-postevaluation design was applied using mixed methods with process and effect surveys and interviews to measure the effects on three levels. SETTING: Healthcare managers from Stockholm's regional healthcare organisation were invited to the training. PARTICIPANTS: 52 managers participated in the iLead intervention. Group 1 consisted of 21 managers from different organisations and with different implementation cases. Group 2, representing the contextualised group, consisted of 31 managers from the same organisation, working on the same implementation case, where senior management also received training. INTERVENTION: iLead is an intervention where healthcare managers are trained in implementation leadership based on the full-range leadership model. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Reactions, knowledge and implementation leadership are measured. RESULTS: Quantitative and qualitative analyses indicate that iLead was perceived to be of high quality and capable of increasing participants' knowledge. Mixed effects were found regarding changes in behaviours. The contextualisation did not have a boosting effect on behaviour change. Hence, group 2 did not increase its active implementation leadership in comparison with group 1. CONCLUSIONS: iLead introduces a new approach to how implementation leadership can be trained when knowledge of effective leadership for implementations is combined with findings on the importance of environmental factors for the transfer of training. Even though managers reported general positive effects, transfer was not facilitated through the contextualisation of the intervention. There is a need to further develop approaches to help participants subsequently apply the learnt skills in their work environment.

How do iLead? Validation of a scale measuring active and passive implementation leadership in Swedish healthcare.

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to describe the creation of a scale-the iLead scale-through adaptations of existing domain-specific scales that measure active and passive implementation leadership, and to describe the psychometric properties of this scale. METHODS: Data collected from a leadership intervention were used in this validation study. Respondents were 336 healthcare professionals (90% female and 10% male; mean age 47 years) whose first-line and second-line managers participated in the intervention. The data were collected in the Stockholm regional healthcare organisation that offer primary, psychiatric, rehabilitation and acute hospital care, among other areas. The items for measuring implementation leadership were based on existent research and the full-range leadership model. Confirmatory factor analysis was performed to evaluate the dimensionality of the scale, followed by tests for reliability and convergent, discriminant and criterion-related validity using correlations and multilevel regression analyses. RESULTS: The final scale consists of 16 items clustered into four subscales representing active implementation leadership, and one scale signifying passive implementation leadership. Findings showed that the hypothesised model had an acceptable model fit (χ2(99)=382.864**, Comparative Fit Index=0.935, Tucker-Lewis Index=0.911, root mean square error of approximation=0.059). The internal consistency and convergent, discriminant and criterion-related validity were all satisfactory. CONCLUSIONS: The iLead scale is a valid measure of implementation leadership and is a tool for understanding how active and passive leader behaviours influence an implementation process. This brief scale may be particularly valuable to apply in training focusing on facilitating implementation, and in evaluating leader training. Moreover, the scale can be useful in evaluating various leader behaviours associated with implementation success or failure.

iLead-a transformational leadership intervention to train healthcare managers' implementation leadership.

BACKGROUND: Leadership is a key feature in implementation efforts, which is highlighted in most implementation frameworks. However, in studying leadership and implementation, only few studies rely on established leadership theory, which makes it difficult to draw conclusions regarding what kinds of leadership managers should perform and under what circumstances. In industrial and organizational psychology, transformational leadership and contingent reward have been identified as effective leadership styles for facilitating change processes, and these styles map well onto the behaviors identified in implementation research. However, it has been questioned whether these general leadership styles are sufficient to foster specific results; it has therefore been suggested that the leadership should be specific to the domain of interest, e.g., implementation. To this end, an intervention specifically involving leadership, which we call implementation leadership, is developed and tested in this project. The aim of the intervention is to increase healthcare managers' generic implementation leadership skills, which they can use for any implementation efforts in the future. METHODS/DESIGN: The intervention is conducted in healthcare in Stockholm County, Sweden, where first- and second-line managers were invited to participate. Two intervention groups are included, including 52 managers. Intervention group 1 consists of individual managers, and group 2 of managers from one division. A control group of 39 managers is additionally included. The intervention consists of five half-day workshops aiming at increasing the managers' implementation leadership, which is the primary outcome of this intervention. The intervention will be evaluated through a mixed-methods approach. A pre- and post-design applying questionnaires at three time points (pre-, directly after the intervention, and 6 months post-intervention) will be used, in addition to process evaluation questionnaires related to each workshop. In addition, interviews will be conducted over time to evaluate the intervention. DISCUSSION: The proposed intervention represents a novel contribution to the implementation literature, being the first to focus on strengthening healthcare managers' generic skills in implementation leadership.

Prácticas de liderazgo y su relación con la cultura en un grupo de países latinoamericanos / Leadership practices and its relationship with the culture in a group of latin american countries

El propósito de este estudio fue analizar, a través del MLQ 5X, los perfiles de liderazgo de 167 directivos de cuatro países latinoamericanos (Perú, Venezuela, Ecuador y Colombia), para observar si a pesar de la similitud cultural se presentan diferencias en los patrones de liderazgo. Se compararon estos perfiles con los obtenidos por otros autores en regiones culturalmente distintas, para finalmente confrontar los resultados con los de otra muestra colombiana. Se evidenciaron diferencias significativas en liderazgo, tanto entre países culturalmente distintos, como entre los mismos países latinoamericanos, a pesar de su similitud cultural. Finalmente, la muestra de directivos de este estudio difiere significativamente de la otra muestra colombiana, respecto a algunas variables del MLQ. Se discuten esos hallazgos.

The aim of this study was to analyze, by using the MLQ5X, the leadership profiles of 167 managers from four Latin American countries (Peru, Venezuela, Ecuador and Colombia), to see if there are different patterns of leadership despite cultural similarities. Likewise, these profiles were compared with results obtained by other authors from different regions. Finally, these results were compared with another Colombian sample. Significant differences in leadership were found, both in culturally different countries and in Latin American countries, despite their cultural similarities. Finally, the sample of managers in this study differs significantly from the other Colombian sample, in some variables of the MLQ. These findings are discussed.