Purpose - This study aims to describe the use of action-learning projects in 14 regional leadership development programs called public health leadership institutes.Design/methodology/approach - During the period of April through August 2009, directors of the public health leadership institutes were interviewed about the action-learning project requirement in each of their programs. Notes from these interviews, as well as relevant program materials were reviewed and summarized.Findings - Action-learning projects are commonly used by the public health leadership institutes to build leadership skills. However, this component of these programs varies considerably across the institutes. Frequently mentioned challenges to using action-learning projects include lack of time for participants to meet for project work, lack of resources available for team coaching and a perceived higher value of taking action over making time for learning by many participants.Practical implications - Research shows that most people develop leadership skills from actual work experiences. Action-learning which focuses on solving complex, real-world challenges is a common component of leadership development programs. In this paper, the authors describe how this methodology is being carried out in public health leadership institutes and recommend ways to increase the developmental return on these work experiences in public health settings.Originality/value - These public health leadership programs, partially funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, reach health care practitioners in 46 states and the District of Columbia. The application of best practices from these initiatives could lead to increased understanding of how to maximize the return from experiential learning initiatives designed to promote life-long learning.

CONTEXT:Public health leadership development programs are widely employed to strengthen leaders and leadership networks and ultimately agencies and systems. The year-long National Public Health Leadership Institute's (PHLI) goals are to develop the capacity of individual leaders and networks of leaders so that both can lead improvement in public health systems, infrastructure, and population health.OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the impact of PHLI on individual graduates using data collected from the first 15 cohorts.PARTICIPANTS:Between 1992 and 2006, PHLI graduated 806 senior leaders from governmental agencies, academia, health care, associations, nonprofit organizations, foundations, and other organizations. Of 646 graduates located, 393 (61%) responded to a survey, for an overall response rate of 49% (393/806).INTERVENTION:PHLI has included retreats; readings, conference calls, and webinars; assessments, feedback, and coaching; and action learning projects, in which graduates apply concepts to a work challenge aided by peers and a coach.METHODS:A survey of all graduates and interviews of 34 graduates and one other key informant.RESULTS:PHLI improved graduates' understanding, skills, and self-awareness, strengthened many graduates' connections to a network of leaders, and significantly increased graduates' voluntary leadership activities at local, state, and national levels (P < .001). Deeper and wider network connections shaped graduates' sense of "belonging" to the national cadre of public health leaders, provided access to supportive peers and ideas, and bolstered confidence and interest in taking on leadership work. Nearly all graduates remained in public health. Some partially attributed to PHLI their promotions into more senior positions.CONCLUSION:Leadership development programs can strengthen and sustain their impact by cultivating sustained "communities of practice" that provide ongoing support for skill development and innovative practice. Sponsors can fruitfully view leadership development as a long-term investment in individuals and networks within organizations or fields of practice.

PURPOSE:The purpose of this research is to present evaluation findings from the National Public Health Leadership Institute (PHLI) regarding how the curriculum's learning methods work singly and together to produce outcomes for learners and their organizations.DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH:Six months after graduation from PHLI, four recent cohorts of PHLI graduates were asked to report overall reactions to PHLI by using an online survey. The survey consisted of quantitative questions about key leadership behaviors taught in the program and the usefulness of PHLI's five learning methods as well as qualitative questions about changes in understanding, skill, practices, and outcomes.FINDINGS:The evaluation survey yielded a 66 percent response rate (n=133). PHLI's learning methods are interrelated and lead to such outcomes as changed leadership understanding, knowledge and skill development, increased confidence, increased self-awareness, leadership practice changes, and organizational results. The learning project was strongly associated with development of collaborations, whereas assessment tools and coaching were most often associated with increased self-awareness.RESEARCH LIMITATIONS/IMPLICATIONS:These preliminary findings support the idea that particular learning methods are related to specific outcomes. However, graduates often integrate information and skills from multiple methods to achieve outcomes. Future research should investigate whether the associations identified in this evaluation are present in other leadership development programs.ORIGINALITY/VALUE:This is the first published evaluation that has attempted to link specific learning methods with outcomes for participants of a public health leadership development program.

To address the need for management development in public health, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) established three independent workforce development initiatives aimed primarily at strengthening management and leadership capacity: the Sustainable Management Development Program, the Management Academy for Public Health, and the CDC Leadership and Management Institute. Though independently designed and implemented, the programs share similar guiding principles in their approach to management development: interactive (adult) learning, management tools that reinforce evidence-based decision making, individual feedback, continuous improvement of the learning process, posttraining support for networking and life-long learning, and teamwork. This article will discuss important lessons learned regarding best practices in management and leadership development.