Physicians' leadership styles in rural primary medical care: How are they perceived by staff?

Aim. This study investigates which leadership styles can be identified among general practice lead physicians and how they are associated with and predicted by staff and context characteristics like profession, gender, age, work experience, and team size. Method/material. In a cross-sectional study self-administered questionnaires were distributed to staff physicians (42% females) and support staff (98% females) at 101 primary health care centres in North Norway. A total of 127 and 222, respectively, responded (response rate 59%). Items were ranked on Likert scales (range 1-5). Results. Analysis revealed three significantly different styles (mean scores/Cronbach's alpha): change style (3.36/0.898), task style (3.17/0.885), and relation style (2.88/0.900). The lead physicians were perceived as practising change style the most and relation style the least. Males experienced significantly more of all three styles. Support staff scored lowest for all styles. Age was negatively correlated with relation style and change style, while work experience was negatively correlated with change style. No significant association was found between styles and team size. Conclusion. Leadership in rural general practice can be identified in terms of task, relation, and change styles. Change style is the most perceived style. Males seem to be most attentive to leadership styles. However, within the staff physician group, there is less difference between genders. Support staff scores lowest for all styles; this might indicate either less need for leadership or dissatisfaction with leadership. Age and work experience seem to reduce employees' attention to relation and change styles, indicating that maturity reduces needs for these leadership styles. Due to growing demands for leaders to take care of efficiency and change in general practice, more young female physicians, and more diverse staff groups, these findings may be useful to understand leadership and leadership training for general practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]