From leadership research to district action: Importance of managerial roles in physician leaders’ work evaluated by medical students: a mixed methods approach

AI-assisted editorial implementation guide. Proposed district actions are separate from the original authors’ findings and recommendations. Independent peer review of this guide is not asserted.

Read source Search paper agent CC BY 4.0

Evidence and transfer

Education-related source: verify which participants, institutions and outcomes were actually studied before district adoption. Source publication type: research-article. License and identity checks do not establish study quality or causality.

Original authors’ abstract, reproduced under the source license:

Purpose This study aims to investigate final-year medical students’ perceptions regarding the significance of different managerial roles in fulfilling physician leaders’ work. Design/methodology/approach In 2020, an electronic questionnaire was distributed to all final-year medical students at the University of Oulu, Finland. A quantitative analysis of managerial roles, based on Mintzberg’s model, utilized statements rated on a five-point Likert scale. Statistical assessments examined differences in role importance relative to students’ age, gender, and educational background. The free-text responses underwent qualitative deductive content analysis and quantification. Findings In total, 110 participants (68%) responded. Both quantitative and qualitative analyses underscored the high importance of different managerial roles in leadership work. Female respondents attributed greater importance to the monitoring role (mean Likert scale score of 4.6 vs. 4.1, p < 0.0001). Age exhibited a slight negative correlation with the disseminator role (rs = −0.2, p = 0.04), while previous higher education did not significantly influence the importance of Mintzberg’s roles. Practical implications This study underscores the necessity for physicians to embody different managerial roles, emphasizing the need for comprehensive leadership education to manage operations and lead subordinates. The heightened importance assigned to the monitoring role by female students is significant, considering the increasing number of female physicians. Mintzberg’s framework could offer an additional tool for leadership education in medical curricula. Originality/value This study marks the first exploration of final-year medical students’ perspectives on the importance of managerial roles in the physician leaders’ work through Mintzberg’s model.

Study methods

To ensure the content validity of the study, the survey instrument underwent careful development, drawing upon a comprehensive review of the literature on physician leadership, combined with insights from medical students regarding physician leadership and its integration into medical curricula (Ruel and Ruel, 2019). Before full implementation, the survey was pretested by the authors to assess the reliability and clarity of the survey elements and to identify any possible ambiguities or difficulties in interpretation (Ruel and Ruel, 2019). Feedback obtained during this pretesting phase ensured that the questionnaire was both relevant to the study population and easy to understand, while maintaining alignment with the study objectives (Ruel and Ruel, 2019).

Limitations

The key strengths of the study lie in the high response rate of 68% (110 out of 162), its methodologically rigorous approach, the use of several forms of triangulation, and the inclusion of diverse research methods to ensure validity and reliability (Eriksson and Kovalainen, 2008). However, the study also has limitations, including the limited sample size and the focus exclusively on final-year medical students from a single university. This study utilized Mintzberg’s framework as a foundation; however, further validation of its application within medical education is necessary to enhance its contextual relevance. Although the instrument was designed to ensure content validity and demonstrated satisfactory reliability, the absence of extensive validation specifically within medical education settings represents a limitation. Future research could address this limitation by conducting additional validation of Mintzberg’s framework in healthcare and medical education environments. Additionally, exploring larger sample sizes and diverse leadership models could deepen our understanding. Comprehensive surveys probing the relationship between management and leadership roles and success could yield richer insights. Comparative studies across universities and countries could also shed light on variations in perceptions and practices.

A 90-day district inquiry

Days 1–15 · Appraise. Read the source methods, recruitment, comparator, outcomes and limitations. Record how the study setting differs from your district and which claim the design can support.
Days 16–30 · Design. Choose one recurring leadership practice described in the source. Map its participants, incentives and constraints to a district setting, then design a small reversible staff pilot with an accountable owner. Agree participation, privacy protections, baseline and stopping rules before starting.
Days 31–60 · Observe. Collect the pre-agreed measures, keep a log of implementation changes and invite confidential voluntary feedback. Preserve existing support for staff and learners.
Days 61–90 · Decide. Record implementation fidelity, staff review time, task quality and unintended burdens against a baseline. Use a comparison team where feasible and document alternative explanations before expanding. Make a dated decision to stop, revise or extend the inquiry.

Board decision brief

Present the local problem, source setting, evidence limits, intervention, responsible owner, total cost, measured changes and uncertainty. Separate staff perceptions, implementation measures and student learning outcomes.

Attribution and reuse

Sari Huikko-Tarvainen; Timo Tuovinen; Petri Kulmala. Importance of managerial roles in physician leaders’ work evaluated by medical students: a mixed methods approach. Journal of Health Organization and Management (2025-04-04). https://doi.org/10.1108/jhom-02-2024-0034

Prepared 2026-11-07. Source authorship and DOI are preserved. The abstract and source passages are attributed extracts; this editorial guide is offered under the same CC BY 4.0 license.