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 trainin...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2020-01-01
|
| Series: | BMJ Open |
| Online Access: | https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/10/1/e033227.full |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | 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. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2044-6055 |