Training Surgery Residents to be Leaders: Construction of a Resident Leadership Curriculum.

SUMMARY: Historically, the traditional pathways into plastic surgery required board eligibility in a surgical specialty such as general surgery, orthopedics, urology, neurosurgery, otolaryngology, or ophthalmology. This requirement resulted in plastic surgery residents who had served as chief residents before plastic surgery training. Their maturity emotionally and surgically allowed them to immediately concentrate on the new language and principles of plastic surgery. They had led others and were capable of leading themselves in a new surgical discipline. Today, medical students typically match into surgical specialties directly out of medical school and need to spend their time learning basic surgical skills and patient care because of the contracted time afforded to them. Formal leadership training has historically been limited in surgical training. The authors set out to delineate the creation, implementation, and perceptions of a leadership program within a surgical residency and provide guideposts for the development of engaged, conscious, and dedicated leaders within the residencies they lead.

Four lessons in adaptive leadership.

The armed services have been in the business of leadership development much longer than the corporate world has. Today's military leaders need tools and techniques to face a fast-changing and unpredictable type of enemy--so the armed services train their officers in ways that build a culture of readiness and commitment. Business leaders need to foster an adaptive culture to survive and succeed, given that they, too, face unprecedented uncertainty--and new types of competitors. Michael Useem and his colleagues at the Wharton School incorporate exposure to military leadership into MBA and executive MBA programs. Highlights include direct contact in the classroom with leaders in the U.S. Army, the U.S. Marine Corps, and the Department of Defense, along with field-training exercises and battlefield visits. The programs are designed to help students connect viscerally to essential leadership lessons. Four are featured in the article: Meet the troops. Creating a personal link is crucial to leading people in challenging times. Make decisions. Making good and timely calls is the crux of leadership. Mission first. Focus on common purpose and eschew personal gain. Convey strategic intent. Make the objectives clear, but give people the freedom to execute on them in their own way.

How well-run boards make decisions.

In the aftermath of seismic debacles like those that toppled Enron and WorldCom, corporate boards have been shaken up and made over. More directors are independent these days, for instance, and corporations now disclose directors' salaries and committee members' names. Research shows that most of the changes are having a positive effect on companies' performance. They are primarily structural, though, and don't go to the heart of a board's work: making the choices that shape a firm's future. Which decisions boards own and how those calls are made are largely hidden from the public. As a result, boards are often unable to learn from the best governance practices of their counterparts at other companies. This article pulls back the curtain and provides an inside look. Drawing on interviews with board members and executives at 31 companies, along with a close examination of three boardroom decisions, the author identifies several formal processes that can help companies improve their decision making: creating calendars that specify when the board and the standing committees will consider key items; drafting charters that define the decisions committees are responsible for; and developing decision protocols that divvy up responsibilities between directors and executives. The author also identifies a number of informal decision-making principles: Items that are strategically significant and touch on the firm's core values should go to the board. Large decisions should be divided into small pieces, so the board can devote sufficient attention to each one. Directors must remain vigilant to ensure that their decisions are effectively implemented. The CEO and either the nonexecutive chair or the lead director should engage in ongoing dialogue regarding which decisions to take to the full board and when. And directors should challenge assumptions before making yes-or-no decisions on management proposals.