A partnership approach to leadership development for Directors of Nursing in Older People’s services in Ireland – articulating the impact
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper outlines the approach undertaken by the Royal College of Nursing to design, deliver and evaluate a programme of leadership development for Directors of Nursing in Older People's services commissioned by the Nursing and Midwifery Planning Development Unit Dublin, Kildare and Wicklow. The programme was developed to support Nurse Directors of these services to enhance their leadership capabilities at a time of significant health service reform and investment. The programme was underpinned by the Office of Health Management's Nursing Competency Framework (Rush et al. 2000). The key influences for the programme were the significant contemporary policy and organizational developments directly experienced by Directors of Nursing. This paper will focus on the benefits for participants, commissioners and service users alike in adopting this kind of partnership approach to the design, delivery and evaluation of a bespoke RCN leadership development programme which combined the experience of RCN Gerontology alongside Leadership. Specifically, the paper focuses on the context of the commissioned work and the ways of working between the members of the delivery team and the commissioners, their roles and responsibilities and the importance of these interrelationships in the delivery of a development programme which would meet the specific needs of this key group of nurse leaders. The key learning and experiences of the Directors of Nursing are highlighted.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".