Contexts and complexities: a realist evaluation of integrated care system leadership.

IF 1.7 Q3 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Lisa Knight, Rafaela Neiva Ganga, Matthew Tucker, Adam P Shore, Steve Nolan
{"title":"Contexts and complexities: a realist evaluation of integrated care system leadership.","authors":"Lisa Knight, Rafaela Neiva Ganga, Matthew Tucker, Adam P Shore, Steve Nolan","doi":"10.1108/LHS-06-2024-0051","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This paper presents a realist evaluation of leadership within an integrated care system (ICS) in England. This paper aims to examine which aspects of leadership are effective, for whom, how and under what circumstances.</p><p><strong>Design/methodology/approach: </strong>Realist evaluation methodology was used, adopting prior realist review findings as the theoretical framework to refine explanations of how and why leadership within an ICS is effective. Between January and November 2023, 23 interviews with ICS leaders took place, alongside 7 meeting observations and documentary analysis. The Realist And Metanarrative Evidence Syntheses: Evolving Standards (RAMESES) guidance informed the study design, conduct and reporting.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>The findings highlight two overarching infrastructural contexts influencing leadership in ICSs: the impact of the post-COVID-19 pandemic legacy and the differences between health and social care regulatory and financial environments. Findings demonstrate that ICS leaders identified a strong sense of purpose as crucial for guiding decisions and creating a psychologically safe environment for open, honest discussions, fostering calculated risk-taking. Whilst a shared vision directed priority setting, financial pressures led to siloed thinking. Leadership visibility was linked to workforce morale, with supportive leadership boosting morale amidst evolving ICS landscapes and confidence in data-driven decisions supported prevention activities. However, financial constraints hindered responsiveness and innovation in addressing health inequalities.</p><p><strong>Originality/value: </strong>By examining ICS leadership post-COVID-19 pandemic and amidst varying regulatory and financial environments, this study contributes to the emerging literature on systems leadership and offers practical guidance for leaders navigating the complexities of integrated care.</p>","PeriodicalId":46165,"journal":{"name":"Leadership in Health Services","volume":"ahead-of-print ahead-of-print","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Leadership in Health Services","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/LHS-06-2024-0051","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: This paper presents a realist evaluation of leadership within an integrated care system (ICS) in England. This paper aims to examine which aspects of leadership are effective, for whom, how and under what circumstances.

Design/methodology/approach: Realist evaluation methodology was used, adopting prior realist review findings as the theoretical framework to refine explanations of how and why leadership within an ICS is effective. Between January and November 2023, 23 interviews with ICS leaders took place, alongside 7 meeting observations and documentary analysis. The Realist And Metanarrative Evidence Syntheses: Evolving Standards (RAMESES) guidance informed the study design, conduct and reporting.

Findings: The findings highlight two overarching infrastructural contexts influencing leadership in ICSs: the impact of the post-COVID-19 pandemic legacy and the differences between health and social care regulatory and financial environments. Findings demonstrate that ICS leaders identified a strong sense of purpose as crucial for guiding decisions and creating a psychologically safe environment for open, honest discussions, fostering calculated risk-taking. Whilst a shared vision directed priority setting, financial pressures led to siloed thinking. Leadership visibility was linked to workforce morale, with supportive leadership boosting morale amidst evolving ICS landscapes and confidence in data-driven decisions supported prevention activities. However, financial constraints hindered responsiveness and innovation in addressing health inequalities.

Originality/value: By examining ICS leadership post-COVID-19 pandemic and amidst varying regulatory and financial environments, this study contributes to the emerging literature on systems leadership and offers practical guidance for leaders navigating the complexities of integrated care.

背景与复杂性:对综合护理系统领导力的现实主义评估。
目的:本文对英格兰一个综合护理系统(ICS)中的领导力进行了现实主义评估。本文旨在研究领导力的哪些方面是有效的、对谁有效、如何有效以及在什么情况下有效:本文采用了现实主义评估方法,将先前的现实主义审查结果作为理论框架,以完善对综合护理系统中领导力如何以及为何有效的解释。在 2023 年 1 月至 11 月期间,对综合服务社领导人进行了 23 次访谈,同时还观察了 7 次会议,并进行了文件分析。现实主义和元叙事证据综述:研究结果:研究结果强调了影响综合服务社领导力的两大基础设施背景:COVID-19 大流行后遗留问题的影响,以及医疗与社会医疗监管和财务环境之间的差异。研究结果表明,综合服务社的领导者认为,强烈的使命感对于指导决策、为公开、坦诚的讨论创造一个心理安全的环境、促进审慎的风险承担至关重要。虽然共同的愿景指导着优先事项的确定,但财务压力导致了各自为政的思维方式。领导的能见度与员工的士气有关,在不断变化的综合监控系统环境中,领导的支持鼓舞了士气,对数据驱动决策的信心支持了预防活动。然而,财政拮据阻碍了在解决健康不平等问题方面的反应能力和创新能力:本研究通过考察科维德-19 大流行后以及不同监管和财政环境下综合科的领导力,为有关系统领导力的新兴文献做出了贡献,并为领导者驾驭复杂的综合医疗提供了实用指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Leadership in Health Services
Leadership in Health Services HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES-
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
17.60%
发文量
51
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信