Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41533678›Full record

ArticleHealth care management review

Dust in the wind? How leadership transitions unfold in purpose-oriented networks.

Robin Peeters, Daan Westra, Rachel Gifford, Dirk Ruwaard

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health care management review. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Daan Westra
Rachel Gifford
Dirk Ruwaard

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealth care is increasingly organized in networks in which organizations collaborate to address health care's grand challenges. While leadership is key to network effectiveness but can be disrupted by turnovers, little is known about how leadership transitions unfold. PURPOSE: This study aimed to understand how such leadership transitions unfold in purpose-oriented networks. METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: We explored this through an in-depth case study of a network prior and during a leadership transition (5 years), performing 34 interviews, 46 hours of observations, and collecting documents.

resultsOur results show that an unexpected leadership transition can take time and affect dynamics such as trust and the network's composition. A lead organization can be established based on either its organizational characteristics or the characteristics of its individuals. In the latter case, the network's governance structure may be less stable. Covert conversations and decision-making occurred outside formal network meetings, showing that the influence of formal leaders, though lacking formal hierarchy, may be larger than previous research suggests.

findingsLeadership transitions can affect dynamics in networks negatively and the influence of formal leaders, though they lack formal hierarchy, may be larger than previously suggested. Lead organization can emerge through different ways, including personal characteristics, organizational resources, and organizational-network goal alignment. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Networks benefit from consciously designing their governance and leadership structure in a way that diminishes the effects of an unexpected transition, such as dual leadership from two organizations. Furthermore, networks should consider the three pathways for lead organizations to emerge in choosing their lead organization during each life-cycle phase.

Indexed as

LeadershipGroup DynamicsHumansInterviews as TopicOrganizational Case Studiesinter-organizationalleadershipleadership transitionsnetworkspurpose-oriented

Identifiers

PMID41533678
PMCPMC12922687

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.