scholarly journals Academic medical centers and graduate medical education

1975 ◽  
Vol 50 (4) ◽  
pp. 409-11
Author(s):  
M H Littlemeyer
2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Bharat Kumar ◽  
Melissa L. Swee ◽  
Manish Suneja

Abstract Background Program directors are often perceived as strong and independent leaders within the academic medical environment. However, they are not as omnipotent as they initially appear. Indeed, PDs are beholden to a variety of different agents, including trainees (current residents, residency applicants, residency alumni), internal influencers (departmental faculty, hospital administration, institutional graduate medical education), and external influencers (the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME), medical education community, and society-at-large). Altogether, these agents form a complex ecosystem whose dynamics and relationships shape the effectiveness of program directors. Main body This perspective uses management theory to examine the characteristics of effective PD leadership. We underline the importance of authority, accessibility, adaptability, authenticity, accountability, and autonomy as core features of successful program directors. Additionally, we review how program directors can use the six power bases (legitimacy, referent, informational, expert, reward, and coercive) to achieve positive and constructive change within the complexity of the academic medical ecosystem. Lastly, we describe how local and national institutions can better structure power relationships within the ecosystem so that PD leadership can be most effective. Conclusion Keen leadership skills are required by program directors to face a variety of challenges within their educational environments. Understanding power structures and relationships may aid program directors to exercise leadership judiciously towards fulfilling the educational missions of their departments.


2010 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 633-637 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan E. Kirk ◽  
R. Edward Howell

Abstract Background In 2006, the University of Virginia became one of the first academic medical institutions to be placed on probation, after the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Institutional Review Committee implemented a new classification system for institutional reviews. Intervention After University of Virginia reviewed its practices and implemented needed changes, the institution was able to have probation removed and full accreditation restored. Whereas graduate medical education committees and designated institutional officials are required to conduct internal reviews of each ACGME–accredited program midway through its accreditation cycle, no similar requirement exists for institutions. Learning As we designed corrective measures at the University of Virginia, we realized that regularly scheduled audits of the entire institution would have prevented the accumulation of deficiencies. We suggest that institutional internal reviews be implemented to ensure that the ACGME institutional requirements for graduate medical education are met. This process represents practice-based learning and improvement at the institutional level and may prevent other institutions from receiving unfavorable accreditation decisions.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document