《回到未来:从COVID-19大流行中吸取的长期领导力教训》

Q2 Social Sciences
Richard Frankel, Jordan Brogley Webb, John Bowen, Neil Mehta, J Harry Isaacson
{"title":"《回到未来:从COVID-19大流行中吸取的长期领导力教训》","authors":"Richard Frankel, Jordan Brogley Webb, John Bowen, Neil Mehta, J Harry Isaacson","doi":"10.7812/TPP/25.030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The loss of 50,000,000 people during the 1918 influenza pandemic was blamed on war, unsanitary conditions, and lack of vaccines and preparation. Nine decades later, a similar virus (H1N1) killed 285,000 people, and again, the response was that preparation was ineffective, inefficient, and inequitable. Less than a decade later, preparedness for the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak revealed the United States was not prepared. This study's objectives were: 1) to develop a deeper understanding of leadership practices that led to successful responses to the COVID-19 pandemic, and 2) to learn about the underlying principles and practices that may help in preparing for the next pandemic.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Senior leaders (14/23 or 61%) from across a multisite, multicountry integrated health system were recruited using maximum variation sampling. Individual recorded interviews (averaging 20 minutes) were based on principles of Appreciative Inquiry and critical incident reporting. Iterative consensus coding produced 6 major themes: self- and situation awareness, teamwork, readiness, inspirational leadership, internal communication, and external communication.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Beyond individual leadership decisions, organizational culture, shared cognition, and history may play a major role in shaping system-wide responses to catastrophic events like the COVID-19 pandemic.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Lack of preparation for dealing with novel events and one-way communication may be risk factors for chaotic and ineffective responses.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Senior leaders must balance clinical necessity with humanistic values and purpose. Situation awareness and attention to organizational culture may improve the quality, timeliness, and effectiveness of responses to the next pandemic threat.</p>","PeriodicalId":23037,"journal":{"name":"The Permanente journal","volume":" ","pages":"1-9"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Back to the Future: Long-Term Leadership Lessons From the COVID-19 Pandemic.\",\"authors\":\"Richard Frankel, Jordan Brogley Webb, John Bowen, Neil Mehta, J Harry Isaacson\",\"doi\":\"10.7812/TPP/25.030\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The loss of 50,000,000 people during the 1918 influenza pandemic was blamed on war, unsanitary conditions, and lack of vaccines and preparation. Nine decades later, a similar virus (H1N1) killed 285,000 people, and again, the response was that preparation was ineffective, inefficient, and inequitable. Less than a decade later, preparedness for the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak revealed the United States was not prepared. This study's objectives were: 1) to develop a deeper understanding of leadership practices that led to successful responses to the COVID-19 pandemic, and 2) to learn about the underlying principles and practices that may help in preparing for the next pandemic.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Senior leaders (14/23 or 61%) from across a multisite, multicountry integrated health system were recruited using maximum variation sampling. Individual recorded interviews (averaging 20 minutes) were based on principles of Appreciative Inquiry and critical incident reporting. Iterative consensus coding produced 6 major themes: self- and situation awareness, teamwork, readiness, inspirational leadership, internal communication, and external communication.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Beyond individual leadership decisions, organizational culture, shared cognition, and history may play a major role in shaping system-wide responses to catastrophic events like the COVID-19 pandemic.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Lack of preparation for dealing with novel events and one-way communication may be risk factors for chaotic and ineffective responses.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Senior leaders must balance clinical necessity with humanistic values and purpose. Situation awareness and attention to organizational culture may improve the quality, timeliness, and effectiveness of responses to the next pandemic threat.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23037,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Permanente journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-9\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Permanente journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7812/TPP/25.030\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Permanente journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7812/TPP/25.030","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言:在1918年流感大流行期间,5000万人的死亡被归咎于战争、不卫生的条件以及缺乏疫苗和准备。90年后,一种类似的病毒(H1N1)导致28.5万人死亡,人们的反应再次是防备工作无效、低效和不公平。不到十年后,对2019冠状病毒病(COVID-19)爆发的准备表明,美国没有做好准备。本研究的目标是:1)深入了解成功应对COVID-19大流行的领导实践,以及2)了解可能有助于为下一次大流行做准备的基本原则和实践。方法:采用最大变异抽样法从多地点、多国综合卫生系统中招募高级领导(14/23或61%)。个人访谈记录(平均20分钟)基于赞赏式询问和关键事件报告的原则。迭代共识编码产生了6个主要主题:自我和情境意识、团队合作、准备、鼓舞人心的领导、内部沟通和外部沟通。结果:除了个人领导决策之外,组织文化、共同认知和历史可能在形成全系统应对COVID-19大流行等灾难性事件的过程中发挥重要作用。讨论:缺乏应对新事件的准备和单向沟通可能是混乱和无效反应的风险因素。结论:高层领导必须平衡临床需要与人文价值和目的。对形势的认识和对组织文化的关注可以提高应对下一次大流行威胁的质量、及时性和有效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Back to the Future: Long-Term Leadership Lessons From the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Introduction: The loss of 50,000,000 people during the 1918 influenza pandemic was blamed on war, unsanitary conditions, and lack of vaccines and preparation. Nine decades later, a similar virus (H1N1) killed 285,000 people, and again, the response was that preparation was ineffective, inefficient, and inequitable. Less than a decade later, preparedness for the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak revealed the United States was not prepared. This study's objectives were: 1) to develop a deeper understanding of leadership practices that led to successful responses to the COVID-19 pandemic, and 2) to learn about the underlying principles and practices that may help in preparing for the next pandemic.

Methods: Senior leaders (14/23 or 61%) from across a multisite, multicountry integrated health system were recruited using maximum variation sampling. Individual recorded interviews (averaging 20 minutes) were based on principles of Appreciative Inquiry and critical incident reporting. Iterative consensus coding produced 6 major themes: self- and situation awareness, teamwork, readiness, inspirational leadership, internal communication, and external communication.

Results: Beyond individual leadership decisions, organizational culture, shared cognition, and history may play a major role in shaping system-wide responses to catastrophic events like the COVID-19 pandemic.

Discussion: Lack of preparation for dealing with novel events and one-way communication may be risk factors for chaotic and ineffective responses.

Conclusion: Senior leaders must balance clinical necessity with humanistic values and purpose. Situation awareness and attention to organizational culture may improve the quality, timeliness, and effectiveness of responses to the next pandemic threat.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
The Permanente journal
The Permanente journal Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
86
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信