--- Adrian Fogarty <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> Fascinating, although not hugely surprising, I
> suppose. But you must be
> careful of how you define leadership skills.
> Hands-off time is a very rough
> proxy for leadership; many good leaders are often
> hands-on as well, while
> there are many poor leaders who also happen to be
> hands-off.
I can't remember the full set of criteria off hand,
but hands off was only one of them.
> But there must
> be some advantage to these courses; I believe they
> encourage better "team
> working", more consensus at provider level, and the
> latter is perhaps a
> better mark of good leadership. Put another way, if
> the team is equally
> well-trained, for example to ALS standard, then very
> little visible
> "leadership" is required, as the team will smoothly
> run itself according to
> the protocols. Surely this must be our objective but
> it is difficult to
> measure and analyse this sort of endpoint.
Very true. Working with a team that have all done the
course is much easier. In my experience probably more
so with ATLS training where the team is likely to
comprise members from more specialities than for ALS.
> I would
> be interested in seeing
> his work when published.
>
I'll let you have the details.
Cheers Fred.
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More
http://faith.yahoo.com
|