Search results

Governments everywhere are implementing reform to improve primary care. However, the existence of a high degree of professional autonomy makes large-scale change difficult to achieve. The purpose of this paper is to elucidate the change dynamics and the involvement of professionals in a primary healthcare reform initiative carried out in the Canadian province of Quebec.

An empirical approach was used to investigate change processes from the inception of a public policy to the execution of changes in professional practices. The data were analysed from a multi-level, combined contextualist-processual perspective. Results are based on a longitudinal multiple-case study of five family medicine groups, which was informed by over 100 interviews, questionnaires, and documentary analysis.

The results illustrate the multiple processes observed with the introduction of planned large-scale change in primary care services. The analysis of change content revealed that similar post-change states concealed variations between groups in the scale of their respective changes. The analysis also demonstrated more precisely how change evolved through the introduction of “intermediate change” and how cycles of prescribed and emergent mechanisms distinctively drove change process and change content, from the emergence of the public policy to the change in primary care service delivery.

This research was conducted among a limited number of early policy adopters. However, given the international interest in turning to the medical profession to improve primary care, the results offer avenues for both policy development and implementation.

The findings offer practical insights for those studying and managing large-scale transformations. They provide a better understanding of how deliberate reforms coexist with professional autonomy through an intertwining of change content and processes.

This research is one of few studies to examine a primary care reform from emergence to implementation using a longitudinal multi-level design.

Our understanding of leadership has undergone a significant shift in the early part of the 21st century. An emerging perspective, dubbed Eco-Leadership, suggests leadership is a collective process involving both leaders and followers co-creating leadership. Because our beliefs and attitudes toward leadership affect how we lead, it becomes crucial to better understand the views youth have towards leadership, as they develop into our future leaders, to improve curricula and instruction. In this study, no relationship was found between youth attitudes and beliefs towards systemic and hierarchical thinking with respect to their preferred problem-solving style. These findings indicate youth may adaptively or innovatively associate leadership equally through systemic and hierarchical thinking. Further, neither being more adaptive nor more innovative implies one to be better at leading.