Developmental readiness and leadership development in medicine
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose Leadership is a key competency for physicians. Based on the premise that not everyone benefits equally from leadership development programmes, the leader developmental readiness (LDR; ability and motivation to develop) construct has been proposed to account for the differences. The purpose of this project was to explore the relationship between LDR, leadership experience, leader behaviours and leader efficacy in medical learners. Method Survey data from 46 medical learners were collected in 2015–2016. Separate one-way analysis of variances, with between-group factors of leadership experience ( < 12 months, >12 months, 0 month), were carried out on LDR constructs of ability and motivation using five validated measures: motivation to lead, goal orientation, developmental efficacy, self-awareness and metacognitive ability. Spearman’s rank-order correlations were used to examine the relationship between LDR and experience with leader efficacy and leadership behaviours (transformational and transactional). Statistical significance was determined at p<0.05. Bonferroni corrections were applied for any multiple comparisons. Results Significant main effects were observed for both ability and motivation to develop, showing lower scores on these variables for individuals with less leadership experience. Both experience and LDR constructs (motivation and ability) were shown to be significantly positively associated with transformational leadership behaviour (and not transactional leadership behaviour). The LDR constructs, but not leadership experience, were significantly positively associated with leader efficacy. Conclusions The positive correlation between LDR, experience, and transformational leadership behaviours and between LDR and leader efficacy is of value in leadership development. Understanding the developmental readiness of learners and how this affects leadership development is paramount to better inform personal leadership development and structure leadership development programmes for medical learners and physicians.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 it