The authors first indicate the core role of leadership in implementation and the extensive research done, particularly the development of Full Range Leadership Model (FRLM) that focuses on three leadership styles: transformational, transactional and passive methods (Avolio, 2011). However, despite its solid establishment the model lacks in specificity on relating measure taken with outcome as it adopts a generic approach. To handle this shortcoming, the authors suggest complimenting transformational leadership with contingent reward in order to achieve a worthy leadership style in context of implementation leadership and its training thereof.
Although the intervention research maintains factor structure as per FRLM, its salient feature is the specificity involved where individual and varied cases are studied. I’m particularly impressed by this analytical approach as different parts play significant role towards the whole contrasted to a holistic one. The study captures the healthcare system well as primary, psychiatric, rehabilitation and acute care sectors are covered, increasing my confidence on accuracy of the findings.
Diversification of leadership skills
The mainstream research seems to focus on the scientific (evidence based) leadership skills while neglecting the generic object-independent training in leadership whose significant value is recognized by the authors. I wholly agree with this stance as the more rigid scientific skills tend to be infeasible for use in daily management scenes due to great flexibility of the working environment. The use also appears in cases where an organization is conducting simultaneous implementations and managers are needed to oversee the whole process.
Training is also given quite some weight in this research with organizations being required not only to hail it but recognize how to perform it. In line with aforementioned details, they recommend complementation of training scientific skills with generic ones due to their overall effectiveness in application.
Data collection and limitations of the research
The healthcare managers who partook the study were trained then worked on real issues for their particular area with data being gathered from their employees. Data was divide twofold, the primary outcomes being employee rating on implementation leadership and secondary including productivity and work related well-being. I approve this as it captures both quantitative and qualitative data providing a good description of the state of affairs in an organization. The problem however occurred in selection stage as managers interested could be very willing to apply the skills at work altering the outcome.
Application of the leadership skills in work
Regarding application to my work, I cannot only for the scientific strategies that have demonstrated merit at leadership enhancement for data driven practices but also for generic implementation recommended in this study. This I deem reasonable since although implementation science is concrete in aforementioned strategies, it is infeasible for employment in new challenges which arise more often. (Andrew et al., 2020) argues that many change oriented practices are not scientific in nature but boils down to queries of position and influence, the mind versus heart.
I would also pay attention to employees well-being and personal productivity as change can last only when management earmark resources and incentives that work towards supporting the intervention measure taken by creating a conducive environment (Birken et al., 2015).
References
Andrew, A. F., Alexander, A., F., Carlos, F. H. (2020). Neural-assessment of leadership training. Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice 13(2), 107-145.
Avolio, B., J. (2011). Full Range Leadership Development. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications
Birken, S., Lee, S. Weiner, B., et al. (2015). From strategy to action: how top managers’ support increase middle mangers’ commitment to innovation implementation in health care organizations. Health Care Manage Rev. 40(2) 159-168.