Leadership Model for Successful Healthcare Executive Leaders: Direct Healthcare Providers Perspectives

INSTRUCTIONS

Complete the following steps to request scientific merit approval (SMR) for your dissertation:
Topic Approval
1.     Develop topic and methodological approach:
•    Talk with your mentor about your ideas for your dissertation topic and a possible methodological approach.
•    Collaborate with your mentor to refine your topic into a specific educational research project that will add to the existing literature on your topic.
2.     Complete Section 1 of the RP form.
•    Complete Section 1 addressing the topic and basic methodology and e-mail the form to your mentor for approval. Follow the instructions carefully.
•    Collaborate with your mentor until you have mentor approval for the topic. After you have received mentor approval for Section 1, your mentor will submit these sections to your specialization chair for topic approval via [email protected].
•    The specialization chair will notify you and your mentor of their approval and will send a copy of the approval to [email protected].
•    The SMR team will also review and provide high-level feedback of your RP, which will be communicated to you and your mentor.
Milestones 3 and 4
3.     Complete Remaining RP Sections.
•    After your specialization chair approves the topic and basic methodology, and the SMR team has provided high-level feedback about your research plan, continue to collaborate with your mentor to plan the details of your methodological approach, incorporating feedback from the SMR team.
•    Once you and your mentor have agreed on clear plans for the details of the methodology, complete the remainder of the RP form and submit the completed RP form to your mentor for approval.
•    Expect that you will go through several revisions. Collaborate with your mentor until you have their approval of your RP plan.
•    After you have a polished version, you and your mentor should both review the SMR criteria for each section, to ensure you have provided the requisite information to demonstrate you have met each of the scientific merit criteria.
4.  After your mentor has approved your RP (Milestone 3), s/he will forward your RP to your Committee for their approval (Milestone 4).
•    After you have obtained mentor (Milestone 3) AND committee (Milestone 4) approvals of the completed RP form, your mentor will submit the completed RP via [email protected]  to have your form reviewed for Scientific Merit.
•    Mentor and committee approval does not guarantee SMR approval. Each review is independent and serves to ensure your research plan demonstrates research competency.
Milestone 5
5    (a). RP form in review: The scientific merit reviewer will review each item to determine whether you have met each of the criteria. You must meet all the criteria to obtain reviewer approval. The reviewer will designate your RP as one of the following:
•    Approved
•    Deferred for minor or major revisions
•    Not approved
•    Not ready for review
•    Other
5    (b). If the RP has been deferred:
•    The SMR reviewer will provide feedback on any criteria that you have not met.
•    You are required to make the necessary revisions and obtain approval for the revisions from your mentor.
•    Once you have mentor approval for your revisions, your mentor will submit your RP for a second review.
•    You will be notified if your RP has been approved, deferred for major or minor revisions, or not approved.
•    Up to three attempts to obtain scientific merit approval (SMR) are allowed. Researchers, mentors, and reviewers should make every possible attempt to resolve issues before the RP is failed for the third time. If a researcher does not pass the scientific merit review on the third attempt, then the case will be referred to the research specialists in the School of Business and Technology for review, evaluation, and intervention.
•    While you await approval of your RP, you should be working to complete your IRB application and supporting documents.
•    Once you have gained SMR approval (Milestone 5), you are ready to submit your IRB application and supporting documents for review by the IRB team.
Milestone 6
6.     Submit the Approved RP to the IRB:
•    Once you obtain SMR approval, write your IRB application and accompanying materials.
•    Consult the Research and Scholarship area within iGuide for IRB forms and detailed process directions.
•    You are required to obtain scientific merit approval (SMR) before you may receive IRB approval. Obtaining SMR does not guarantee that IRB approval will follow.
Milestone 7
7. Complete the Research Plan Conference call:
•    Once you have gained approval by the IRB, you are ready to schedule your Proposed Research Conference Call. You may not proceed to data collection until you have completed this call.
•    Work with your mentor and committee to set a date for the conference call.
•    Upon successful completion of the Proposed Research Conference Call, your mentor will complete the corresponding Milestone Report and you are ready for data collection.

Researchers, please insert your answers directly into the expandable boxes that have been provided!

A.  Learner and Program Information
(to be completed by Researcher)
Researcher Name    Crystal Miller
Researcher Email    [email protected]
Researcher ID Number    1217674
Mentor Name    Dr. Mark Minelli
Mentor Email    [email protected]    Health Care Administration
Spec Chair Email    [email protected]
Committee member
Committee Member

B.  Specialization Chair Approval Title / Topic Approval
(To be completed by Specialization Chair when Section 1 ia approved)
Chairs
Please insert your electronic signature to certify that topic and title are appropriate to your specialization and return to [email protected].

RESEARCHERS:  Review carefully the Research Plan Instructions, v. 2.41, before you complete this form.
The Instructions are available on iGuide for your use.

Section 1.  Research Problem, Significance, Question(s), Title

1.1 Research Problem
State the research problem your study will investigate, including its background. See Instructions.    The prevalent norm within healthcare organizations is change, and managers should be willing to adopt change for success to be realized (Caldwell et al., 2008). Current healthcare leaders and executives must have sophisticated management talent to enable them to match the increasing healthcare environment complexity and demands. Healthcare executives have to traverse a landscape influenced by sophisticated political and social forces including persistent health professional shortages, shrinking reimbursements, the unending necessity of using safety and performance indicators, and the need for transparency. Similarly, healthcare leaders and executives should demonstrate measurable effectiveness and outcomes in practicing evidence-based management (Stefl, 2008).
Leadership research and literature have shifted from emphasizing on leaders’ competence in managing change to their ability to transform organizations (Benson, 2012). The ability to transform an organization successfully calls for varied attitudes and skills. In the current volatile healthcare environment, successful healthcare leaders need to find innovative ways of transforming the values, behaviors and beliefs of their organizations to meet future demands (Craig, 2011). The current healthcare environment is endowed with heightened public demands making it essentially logical to question the competence of healthcare managers and leaders (Stefl, 2008). Similarly, the escalated difficulties in running healthcare organizations demands managers of sophisticated skills and talents (Stefl, 2008). Growing evidence reveals that healthcare executive leaders can transform the quality and safety of healthcare when they lead the organization with the realization of the problems of the organization and become open to change. In addition, they can achieve the same by instilling willingness to measure, by basing their practices on evidence and by creating organizational agility for confronting results with integrity and speed (Zimring et al., 2008).
The current challenges facing healthcare leaders and healthcare organizations are neither one-dimensional nor easily characterized (Souba, 2007). Healthcare organizations and systems face varied sophisticated challenges including staff shortages, inadequate supplies and poor leadership.  It is widely agreed that the current healthcare organizations are not working effectively and that there is need for a more functional model of leadership performance if meaningful reforms are to be realized (Hanson & Randal, 2011). Effective leadership never stems from knowing what leaders do or from emulating their styles. Similarly, theories alone cannot impart what is needed for one to be an effective leader.  Instead, the current issues facing the healthcare system require the addressing of both the content and the context (Souba, 2011b).  Generally, leadership entails changing the situations we deal with. Mastering new conventional leadership domains would enable healthcare leaders to become more action focused on effective leadership (Souba, 2011a).
Several leadership models are currently available, including charismatic model, transactional theory, and transformational model among others. Nonetheless, the leadership model or style an executive chooses to follow depends on the foundational structure of the organization and the objectives the leader intends to achieve (Benson, 2012). Healthcare executive leaders cannot afford to ignore the perverse incentives in medicine any longer. They have to confront the asymmetries and inefficiencies of delivery models, the focus on individualism and autonomy, and the disparity in reimbursement for services rendered, as these are likely to hinder team behavior and societal accountability. They need to be able to make decisions beyond numeric, bottom-line estimates and understand the worldview of direct patient care. They have a primary responsibility of creating a healthy work environment. To restore medicine’s ethical foundation, a new leadership model is imperative (Lin, 2012; Souba, 2011a).
1.2 Purpose of the Study
State the purpose of the study. Typically, the purpose is to contribute to knowledge and solve the research problem. See Instructions.    The purpose of this study is to explore the perceptions of direct patient care providers regarding the essential qualities of a successful executive healthcare leader.
1.3 Significance of the Study.
Describe the significance of your study’s investigation of the research problem.  Include a statement of the study’s particular significance to the field of Organization and Management or Technology. See Instructions.    The rapid and constant healthcare industry change necessitates that healthcare institutions have strong leadership (McAlearney, 2008).  Even though core competencies in leadership have been acknowledged and various models on competency-based training and education identified (Swanson, 2010), literature on leadership models and theories has focused on experience of individuals in major leadership positions (Curry et al., 2012; Souba, 2011a).). In addition, the current leadership competencies have been questioned with regard to their relevance in the forthcoming era of enhanced leadership development in all levels of healthcare systems (Storey & Holti, 2013).  As such, there is a gap in the availability of an applicable model of an ideal healthcare executive leader based on the perceptions of direct patient care providers (McAlearney, 2005, p. H1). This is the gap that this study is intended to bridge.
1.    If your research questions are studied, how could your findings affect your field of interest—“So what?”
The findings of this study would provide vital information on the qualities that successful executive healthcare leaders should possess based on the perceptions of direct patient care providers. In addition, the study would recommend strategies to improve leadership in healthcare organizations.
2.    What possible practical implications do you predict the results of your research will have?  For instance, what will be the impact of these results on your sample, your site location, or your workplace—“Who Cares?”
The findings of this study would instill open mindedness regarding leadership qualities in the sample and would facilitate effective collaboration between the healthcare leaders and the rest of the workforce. The aim of improving leadership outcomes would be the goal.  Improved healthcare leadership will enhance healthcare delivery to the overall populous by developing the infrastructure of those providing services within the healthcare industry. Additionally, it will lead the way for a productive, positive environment to provide healthcare services.
1.4 Research Question
Write out your research question. A Qualitative study should be led by one open-ended question for a phenomenology; other approaches differ. See Instructions.    The study is intended to answer the following research questions:
•    What do direct patient care providers perceive as essential qualities of a successful healthcare executive leader?
•    What do direct patient care providers perceive as a hindrances or negative qualities of hopeful successful healthcare executive leaders?
1.5 Method overview
Briefly describe the methodologies and methods (data collection and analysis) that will be used to conduct the study.    The research design chosen for this study is qualitative case study. Data collection will be carried out using a questionnaire. All 14 eligible questionnaires will be organized for thematic analysis by the researcher. . In case of a discrepancy in interpretation during data analysis, then the data will be reviewed until an agreement is achieved (Marshall & Rossman, 2010).
1.6 Dissertation Title
Do not write the title until Items 1.1-1.5 are complete. See Instructions.    Leadership Model for Successful Healthcare Executive Leaders: Direct Healthcare Providers’ Perspectives