At this time of the year children all around the world are advising their parents (via Santa Claus, elves, the chimney, heavy hints, Argos catalogues and letters sent to the north Pole) of their desires for Christmas. What they receive on the Day is not always what they asked for. The returns desk at major department stores bears further witness to this. The difference comes about for many reasons not least unrealistic expectations, limitations of the family purse and different understandings of what we actually mean by something scrawled on a list. So it is with Clinical Leadership.
The unitarist view is that management requires clinicians in posts of leadership to lead clinicians along the path prescribed by the strategic apex. Clinicians however adopt a pluralist approach and desire their leaders to express these multiple views and directions to management such that compromise can be mediated. The difficulty is that these two views are disparate and as such agreement is difficult to reach with those in the posts frequently failing to satisy either camp, the philosophy and goals being so different. This stress is highlighted in many reviews and the rejection of clinical leadership as a viable career option by many clinicians, including, sadly, those who also undertook such positions with high hopes of making a difference.
Does this sound familiar, “Thank you…yes, it’s lovely…but not really what I wanted.” So it is with clinical leadership.
