Cargando…

Measuring for Success: Evaluating Leadership Training Programs for Sustainable Impact

BACKGROUND: In an era of global health security challenges such as the COVID-19 pandemic, there is greater need for strong leadership. Over the past decades, significant investments have been made in global health leadership development programs by governments and philanthropic organizations to addr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Njah, Joel, Hansoti, Bhakti, Adeyami, Adebusuyi, Bruce, Kerry, O’Malley, Gabrielle, Gugerty, Mary Kay, Chi, Benjamin H., Lubimbi, Nanyombi, Steen, Elizabeth, Stampfly, Sonora, Berman, Eva, Kimball, Ann Marie
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Ubiquity Press 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8284530/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34307066
http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/aogh.3221
_version_ 1783723408935092224
author Njah, Joel
Hansoti, Bhakti
Adeyami, Adebusuyi
Bruce, Kerry
O’Malley, Gabrielle
Gugerty, Mary Kay
Chi, Benjamin H.
Lubimbi, Nanyombi
Steen, Elizabeth
Stampfly, Sonora
Berman, Eva
Kimball, Ann Marie
author_facet Njah, Joel
Hansoti, Bhakti
Adeyami, Adebusuyi
Bruce, Kerry
O’Malley, Gabrielle
Gugerty, Mary Kay
Chi, Benjamin H.
Lubimbi, Nanyombi
Steen, Elizabeth
Stampfly, Sonora
Berman, Eva
Kimball, Ann Marie
author_sort Njah, Joel
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In an era of global health security challenges such as the COVID-19 pandemic, there is greater need for strong leadership. Over the past decades, significant investments have been made in global health leadership development programs by governments and philanthropic organizations to address this need. Evaluating the societal impact of these programs remains challenging, despite consensus on the importance of public health leadership. OBJECTIVE: This article identifies the gaps and highlights the critical role of monitoring and evaluation approaches in assessing the impact of global health leadership programs. Importantly, we also propose the theory of change (TOC) as a common framework and identify a set of tools and indicators that leadership programs can adapt and use. METHODS: We carried out an informal review of major global health leadership programs, including a literature review on leadership program evaluation approaches. Current practices in assessing the short- to long-term outcomes of leadership training programs were explored and synthesized. We also examined use of program theory frameworks, such as theory of change to guide the evaluation strategy. We find the TOC approach can be enhanced by integrating evaluation-specific frameworks and establishing broad stakeholder buy-in. We highlight measurement challenges, proposed outcome indicators and evaluation methodologies, and outline the future direction for such efforts. FINDINGS: Most evaluation of current leadership programs is focused on short-term individual-level outcomes, while reports on long-term societal impact were limited. Reciprocal impacts on and benefits for the “host” organizations were not included in evaluation metrics. Most programs had program logic or result chains, but with no well-articulated program theories. CONCLUSION: Key stakeholders involved in leadership training programs benefit from the evidence of rigorous program evaluations to inform decisions that address barriers in fostering global health leadership and improving population health outcomes. Insight into reciprocal change in host organizations is important. Evaluation of global health leadership training must go beyond the individual trainee and encompass organizational and community-level impacts. Documentation of long-lasting organizational and societal impacts is essential for donors to appreciate the return on their investment. KEY TAKEAWAYS: Evaluation plays an important role in understanding how leadership development takes place and how it contributes to improving public health outcomes. Making the case for investments in leadership development programs requires robust evidence from monitoring and evaluation strategies that link investments beyond the individual-level to longer-term societal impacts. The first critical step towards a strategy for success is for leadership programs to clearly build, articulate, share, and use their program theories or theories of change. Theories of change help identify the pathways (and potential tensions) through which leadership development programs effect change at the individual, organizational and community levels. Evaluation methods that examine outcomes of leadership programs should be multi-method, multi-level, and where possible include counterfactual outcomes. Allocation of funds to evaluate on-going and long-lasting societal impact of leadership programs should be a routine practice.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8284530
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Ubiquity Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82845302021-07-23 Measuring for Success: Evaluating Leadership Training Programs for Sustainable Impact Njah, Joel Hansoti, Bhakti Adeyami, Adebusuyi Bruce, Kerry O’Malley, Gabrielle Gugerty, Mary Kay Chi, Benjamin H. Lubimbi, Nanyombi Steen, Elizabeth Stampfly, Sonora Berman, Eva Kimball, Ann Marie Ann Glob Health Expert Consensus Document BACKGROUND: In an era of global health security challenges such as the COVID-19 pandemic, there is greater need for strong leadership. Over the past decades, significant investments have been made in global health leadership development programs by governments and philanthropic organizations to address this need. Evaluating the societal impact of these programs remains challenging, despite consensus on the importance of public health leadership. OBJECTIVE: This article identifies the gaps and highlights the critical role of monitoring and evaluation approaches in assessing the impact of global health leadership programs. Importantly, we also propose the theory of change (TOC) as a common framework and identify a set of tools and indicators that leadership programs can adapt and use. METHODS: We carried out an informal review of major global health leadership programs, including a literature review on leadership program evaluation approaches. Current practices in assessing the short- to long-term outcomes of leadership training programs were explored and synthesized. We also examined use of program theory frameworks, such as theory of change to guide the evaluation strategy. We find the TOC approach can be enhanced by integrating evaluation-specific frameworks and establishing broad stakeholder buy-in. We highlight measurement challenges, proposed outcome indicators and evaluation methodologies, and outline the future direction for such efforts. FINDINGS: Most evaluation of current leadership programs is focused on short-term individual-level outcomes, while reports on long-term societal impact were limited. Reciprocal impacts on and benefits for the “host” organizations were not included in evaluation metrics. Most programs had program logic or result chains, but with no well-articulated program theories. CONCLUSION: Key stakeholders involved in leadership training programs benefit from the evidence of rigorous program evaluations to inform decisions that address barriers in fostering global health leadership and improving population health outcomes. Insight into reciprocal change in host organizations is important. Evaluation of global health leadership training must go beyond the individual trainee and encompass organizational and community-level impacts. Documentation of long-lasting organizational and societal impacts is essential for donors to appreciate the return on their investment. KEY TAKEAWAYS: Evaluation plays an important role in understanding how leadership development takes place and how it contributes to improving public health outcomes. Making the case for investments in leadership development programs requires robust evidence from monitoring and evaluation strategies that link investments beyond the individual-level to longer-term societal impacts. The first critical step towards a strategy for success is for leadership programs to clearly build, articulate, share, and use their program theories or theories of change. Theories of change help identify the pathways (and potential tensions) through which leadership development programs effect change at the individual, organizational and community levels. Evaluation methods that examine outcomes of leadership programs should be multi-method, multi-level, and where possible include counterfactual outcomes. Allocation of funds to evaluate on-going and long-lasting societal impact of leadership programs should be a routine practice. Ubiquity Press 2021-07-12 /pmc/articles/PMC8284530/ /pubmed/34307066 http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/aogh.3221 Text en Copyright: © 2021 The Author(s) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Expert Consensus Document
Njah, Joel
Hansoti, Bhakti
Adeyami, Adebusuyi
Bruce, Kerry
O’Malley, Gabrielle
Gugerty, Mary Kay
Chi, Benjamin H.
Lubimbi, Nanyombi
Steen, Elizabeth
Stampfly, Sonora
Berman, Eva
Kimball, Ann Marie
Measuring for Success: Evaluating Leadership Training Programs for Sustainable Impact
title Measuring for Success: Evaluating Leadership Training Programs for Sustainable Impact
title_full Measuring for Success: Evaluating Leadership Training Programs for Sustainable Impact
title_fullStr Measuring for Success: Evaluating Leadership Training Programs for Sustainable Impact
title_full_unstemmed Measuring for Success: Evaluating Leadership Training Programs for Sustainable Impact
title_short Measuring for Success: Evaluating Leadership Training Programs for Sustainable Impact
title_sort measuring for success: evaluating leadership training programs for sustainable impact
topic Expert Consensus Document
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8284530/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34307066
http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/aogh.3221
work_keys_str_mv AT njahjoel measuringforsuccessevaluatingleadershiptrainingprogramsforsustainableimpact
AT hansotibhakti measuringforsuccessevaluatingleadershiptrainingprogramsforsustainableimpact
AT adeyamiadebusuyi measuringforsuccessevaluatingleadershiptrainingprogramsforsustainableimpact
AT brucekerry measuringforsuccessevaluatingleadershiptrainingprogramsforsustainableimpact
AT omalleygabrielle measuringforsuccessevaluatingleadershiptrainingprogramsforsustainableimpact
AT gugertymarykay measuringforsuccessevaluatingleadershiptrainingprogramsforsustainableimpact
AT chibenjaminh measuringforsuccessevaluatingleadershiptrainingprogramsforsustainableimpact
AT lubimbinanyombi measuringforsuccessevaluatingleadershiptrainingprogramsforsustainableimpact
AT steenelizabeth measuringforsuccessevaluatingleadershiptrainingprogramsforsustainableimpact
AT stampflysonora measuringforsuccessevaluatingleadershiptrainingprogramsforsustainableimpact
AT bermaneva measuringforsuccessevaluatingleadershiptrainingprogramsforsustainableimpact
AT kimballannmarie measuringforsuccessevaluatingleadershiptrainingprogramsforsustainableimpact