leadership in public health essay

• Frontiers in Public Health
• Public Health Education and Promotion
• Research Topics

Leading people – managing organizations: contemporary public health leadership

Total Downloads

Total Views and Downloads

About this Research Topic

In this Research Topic, we wish to provide a comprehensive overview of current public health leadership research, focusing on understanding the impact of leadership on the delivery of public health services. By bringing together ground-breaking research studies detailing the development and validation of ...

Important Note : All contributions to this Research Topic must be within the scope of the section and journal to which they are submitted, as defined in their mission statements. Frontiers reserves the right to guide an out-of-scope manuscript to a more suitable section or journal at any stage of peer review.

Topic Editors

Topic coordinators, recent articles, submission deadlines.

Submission closed.

Participating Journals

Total views.

• Demographics

No records found

total views article views downloads topic views

Top countries

Top referring sites, about frontiers research topics.

With their unique mixes of varied contributions from Original Research to Review Articles, Research Topics unify the most influential researchers, the latest key findings and historical advances in a hot research area! Find out more on how to host your own Frontiers Research Topic or contribute to one as an author.

Putting the public (back) into public health: leadership, evidence and action

Affiliations.

• 1 Public Health England, London, UK.
• 2 Leeds Beckett University, Leeds, UK.
• 3 Health and Wellbeing, Southwark Council, London, UK.
• PMID: 29546426
• DOI: 10.1093/pubmed/fdy041

There is a strong evidence-based rationale for community capacity building and community empowerment as part of a strategic response to reduce health inequalities. Within the current UK policy context, there are calls for increased public engagement in prevention and local decision-making in order to give people greater control over the conditions that determine health. With reference to the challenges and opportunities within the English public health system, this essay seeks to open debate about what is required to mainstream community-centred approaches and ensure that the public is central to public health. The essay sets out the case for a reorientation of public health practice in order to build impactful action with communities at scale leading to a reduction in the health gap. National frameworks that support local practice are described. Four areas of challenge that could potentially drive an implementation gap are discussed: (i) achieving integration and scale, (ii) effective community mobilization, (iii) evidencing impact and (iv) achieving a shift in power. The essay concludes with a call to action for developing a contemporary public health practice that is rooted in communities and offers local leadership to strengthen local assets, increase community control and reduce health inequalities.

Keywords: community engagement; empowerment; health inequalities; policy; public health practice.

© The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Faculty of Public Health. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: [email protected].

• Community Participation*
• Health Status Disparities
• Leadership*
• Public Health
• Public Health Practice*
• United Kingdom

Public Health Leadership: Emotional Intelligence Deductive Essay

Introduction, emotional intelligence components in public health leadership, reflection on personal emotional intelligence traits: strengths and weaknesses, personal experience with emotional intelligence leader.

Emotional intelligence (EI) skills are among the most demanded features of a professional from various spheres and occupations. Numerous studies indicate a profound impact of EI on the development of leadership qualities (Caruso, Fleming, & Spector, 2014; Czabanowska, Malho, Schröder-Bäck, Popa, & Burazeri, 2014; McCleskey, 2014). The primary rationale behind writing this paper comprises the demand for a more profound understanding of public health-specific competencies since emotional intelligence plays an immense role in public health (PH) leadership (Czabanowska et al., 2014; Yphantides, Escoboza, & Macchione, 2015). For this study, it is of high importance to discuss four primary elements of EI in the context of their connection to PH leadership. Additionally, this paper aims to provide a personal reflection on both effective and insufficient EI traits along with the discussion of the personal experience of working with a leader with highly developed EI skills.

First of all, it is essential to state four components of emotional intelligence, which are the following: self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, and public management. These elements could be categorized into two primary concepts of (1) ability to understand oneself and (2) the ability to understand other people and interact with them adequately. Self-awareness refers to an internal ability to understand one’s emotions and reactions, which is immensely important for public health leadership. Also, as it is noted by Caruso et al. (2014), the adequate expression of the true self is the key ingredient of establishing trust between leaders and their followers. Self-management comprises control over one’s emotional reactions and the ability to maintain one’s reliability and accountability in different situations. For example, the research by Ramchunder and Martins (2014) reveals that there is a significant positive correlation between EI and self-efficacy (which is a skill related to self-management) on the development of effective leadership, which can be applied to the public health sphere.

Further, it is possible to discuss two elements of emotional intelligence that refer to social skills. First of all, social awareness comprises a strong sense of other’s emotions, developed emphatic skills, and an understanding of other people’s needs and concerns. This component, as well as self-awareness, is essential for a public health leader to invoke trust and compassion in his or her followers, which is shown in the research by Knight et al. (2015). Secondly, relationship management should be mentioned since it comprises the leader’s capability of guiding and developing other people, inspiring them for self-improvement, and building a strong team. The research by Negandhi et al. (2015) indicates the necessity of an interdisciplinary approach to relationship management to develop effective leadership among health practitioners.

In this section, it is necessary to reflect on personal emotional intelligence traits to retrieve my strengths and weaknesses related to EI. In the discussion thread for Module 1, I described the situation in which I am put into the position of a new leader of public health organization. I prepared a summary, discussing several policies and actions which I would implement, including team meetings, brainstorm sessions, and gathering data for further analysis. I learned that I could find proper solutions for the situation in which social activity and providing guidance is needed. Therefore, I consider myself to have significantly developed social components of EI, namely relationship management and social awareness. However, after studying the scholarly literature on the topic, I found out that there is an opportunity for me to improve my self-awareness and self-management because in several situations I could perform better regarding control over my thoughts and emotional reactions.

Furthermore, the question of my experience of working with a leader with highly developed EI skills should be discussed. In the period of my internship, I worked with a nurse staffing manager, whose name I’ll change to Kate for confidentiality. It is possible to claim that Kate is among the most influential people that I worked with. Her EI skill was developed to a considerably great extent, especially the aspects of relationship management and social awareness. Her primary responsibility was to schedule the shifts for the clinical staff, and it is evident that such jobs are related to interpersonal conflicts of interests and other difficult decisions. However, Kate was always able to encourage the ones who felt disadvantaged and to establish her position as an efficient public health leader.

Finally, it is possible to retrieve this paper’s main ideas to conclude. First of all, it is evident from this and numerous other studies that EI is of immense importance in developing successful leadership qualities. Secondly, it is particularly apparent that a leader in the public health sphere has a specific set of concerns and responsibilities (Czabanowska et al., 2014). Thirdly, the reflection on personal EI’s strengths and weaknesses along with the personal experience of working for a strong EI leader was given. In conclusion, it is possible to observe that emotional intelligence comprises a significant part of public health leadership.

Caruso, D. R., Fleming, K., & Spector, E. D. (2014). Emotional intelligence and leadership. In Allison S. T. et al. (Eds.), Conceptions of leadership (pp. 93-110). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

Czabanowska, K., Malho, A., Schröder-Bäck, P., Popa, D., & Burazeri, G. (2014). Do we develop public health leaders? – Association between public health competencies and emotional intelligence: A cross-sectional study. BMC Medical Education , 14 (1), 83-90.

Knight, J. R., Bush, H. M., Mase, W. A., Riddell, M. C., Liu, M., & Holsinger, J. W. (2015). The impact of emotional intelligence on conditions of trust among leaders at the Kentucky Department for public health. Frontiers in Public Health , 3 , 1-8. Web.

McCleskey, J. (2014). Emotional intelligence and leadership: A review of the progress, controversy, and criticism. International Journal of Organizational Analysis , 22 (1), 76-93.

Negandhi, P., Negandhi, H., Tiwari, R., Sharma, K., Zodpey, S. P., Quazi, Z., & Gaidhane, A. (2015). Building interdisciplinary leadership skills among health practitioners in the twenty-first century: An innovative training model. Frontiers in Public Health , 3 , 1-7. Web.

Ramchunder, Y., & Martins, N. (2014). The role of self-efficacy, emotional intelligence and leadership style as attributes of leadership effectiveness. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology , 40 (1), 01-11. Web.

Yphantides, N., Escoboza, S., & Macchione, N. (2015). Leadership in public health: New competencies for the future. Frontiers in Public Health , 3 , 1-3. Web.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2024, April 20). Public Health Leadership: Emotional Intelligence. https://ivypanda.com/essays/public-health-leadership-emotional-intelligence/

"Public Health Leadership: Emotional Intelligence." IvyPanda , 20 Apr. 2024, ivypanda.com/essays/public-health-leadership-emotional-intelligence/.

IvyPanda . (2024) 'Public Health Leadership: Emotional Intelligence'. 20 April.

IvyPanda . 2024. "Public Health Leadership: Emotional Intelligence." April 20, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/public-health-leadership-emotional-intelligence/.

1. IvyPanda . "Public Health Leadership: Emotional Intelligence." April 20, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/public-health-leadership-emotional-intelligence/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Public Health Leadership: Emotional Intelligence." April 20, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/public-health-leadership-emotional-intelligence/.

• Concept of Emotional Intelligence: Arguments
• Emotional Intelligence and Effective Leadership in the Healthcare Environment
• Emotionally Intelligent Leadership
• Loss Aversion in Unemployed People
• Workplace Stress and Mitigating Measures
• Biopsychosocial History and Other Psychological Tests
• Bender Visual-Motor Gestalt Test II in Counseling
• Pre-Mental Health Counseling Assessment for Child

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Sage Choice

Public Health and Health Sector Crisis Leadership During Pandemics: A Review of the Medical and Business Literature

Abi sriharan.

1 University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Attila J. Hertelendy

2 Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA

Jane Banaszak-Holl

3 Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Michelle M. Fleig-Palmer

4 University of Saint Francis, Fort Wayne, IN, USA

Cheryl Mitchell

5 University of Victoria, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada

6 City University of London, London, UK

Jennifer Gutberg

Devin j. rapp.

7 University of Utah, Salt Lake City, USA

Sara J. Singer

8 Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA

The global scale and unpredictable nature of the current COVID-19 pandemic have put a significant burden on health care and public health leaders, for whom preparedness plans and evidence-based guidelines have proven insufficient to guide actions. This article presents a review of empirical articles on the topics of “crisis leadership” and “pandemic” across medical and business databases between 2003 (since SARS) and—December 2020 and has identified 35 articles for detailed analyses. We use the articles’ evidence on leadership behaviors and skills that have been key to pandemic responses to characterize the types of leadership competencies commonly exhibited in a pandemic context. Task-oriented competencies, including preparing and planning, establishing collaborations, and conducting crisis communication, received the most attention. However, people-oriented and adaptive-oriented competencies were as fundamental in overcoming the structural, political, and cultural contexts unique to pandemics.

Introduction

The current COVID-19 crisis has had an unprecedented global impact: it has destabilized political regimes, depressed economic markets, and led to massive casualty rates ( Barrios & Hochberg, 2020 ; Caballero-Anthony et al., 2020 ; Fernandes, 2020 ; Marmot & Allen, 2020 ; W. Shih, 2020 ; West et al., 2020 ). The pandemic has also necessitated transnational cooperation, population-level behavioral change, and disruptive innovations to develop vaccines and control infection rates. Leaders who have successfully handled crises and emergency management events in the past are finding themselves repeatedly in uncharted territory when called on to lead during this current crisis ( Hertelendy, 2020 ). For example, the leadership and policy failures of the current pandemic are expected to add $125 to $200 billion in incremental costs to annual health care expenditures in the United States alone ( Coe et al., 2020 ). The current dynamic and global nature of the pandemic, structural chaos, media attention, and misinformation endemic to the crisis calls for a special set of leadership competencies to rapidly evolve pandemic response strategies to prevent, mitigate, and recover from the crisis and return to normalcy ( Harter, 2020 ; Hatami et al., 2020 ).

There is an increasing focus on crisis leadership in the health care and public health sectors because of the daunting set of challenges the current pandemic has presented. In news media and internet outlets, an overwhelming number of opinions and social media posts discuss how leaders should respond. Recommendations have included advice to “always lead in the same way, crisis or not” ( Kraaijenbrink, 2020 ), calls for leaders to maintain “deliberate calm” ( D’Auria & De Smet, 2020 ), and assertions that women are better leaders during a crisis ( Zenger & Folkman, 2020 ). Indeed, popular media reports a broad array of discussions about the competencies required to lead successfully during a crisis, and it can be helpful to consider the evidence for these competencies and the potential links to past crisis leadership research.

Past research has addressed the need for integrated models of leadership for crisis situations ( Kurz & Carter Haddock, 1989 ) and has identified specific crisis management and emergency management competencies ( Boin et al., 2013 ). The crisis and emergency management literature primarily focus on overseeing planning and executing predefined tasks and processes in response to crises ( Klann, 2003 ; Mitroff et al., 1987 ). This focus has led to a narrow emphasis in the crisis leadership research on oversight functions. Crisis leadership, broadly defined by Klann (2003) , also involves addressing human aspects of crisis in ways that account for the dynamic nature of the crisis and its context—the needs, emotions, and behaviors of people implementing strategies to address, prevent, mitigate, and recover from crises. The current pandemic crisis has raised the important question of which crisis leadership competencies are needed by public health and health system leaders to implement public health measures, mitigate the spread of the pandemic, and address the pandemic’s health and economic consequences ( Armstrong et al., 2021 ).

New Contributions

Our study makes three new contributions to the discussion of crisis leadership. First, to our knowledge, no review of crisis leadership competencies exists, and research on leadership during pandemics is nascent. Scoping reviews are widely used in health care and management literature to collate disparate information from various sources and types of literature ( Arksey & O’Malley, 2005 ; Munn et al., 2018 ). To address the gap in information about comprehensive competencies needed for crisis leadership, we use a scoping review methodology to map the competencies that public health and health sector leaders commonly exhibit during pandemics.

Second, these scoping review results contribute to the literature on crisis leadership and to leadership theory in general. Behavioral leadership theories have emphasized the bilateral nature of task- and people-oriented leadership competencies ( Stogdill, 1948 ; Yukl, 2013 ). In contrast, contingency leadership theories have been focused on adaptive competencies ( Heifetz & Linsky, 2017 ). Derived from the empirical findings reviewed in this study, our framework for crisis leadership during a pandemic suggests that crisis leadership encompasses not just competencies in motivating people and enabling task completion, but also in adaptive capabilities that encompass the ability to have a systems perspective while addressing local issues. To our knowledge, no research exists that explicates crisis leadership as a threefold interaction between task, people, and adaptive competencies, effectively combining behavioral and contingency leadership theories, and connecting the interaction of competencies with contextual factors.

Third, our study has systematically reviewed the literature to identify how competencies are used within health care, public health sector organizations, and academic institutions to address the context of pandemics. Given the unique characteristics of pandemics that we have noted in the introduction, these findings provide a preliminary evidence base of the experience of these leaders in the current pandemic that can be used to inform how training programs and curriculum prepare leaders for future pandemics.

Conceptual Model

This review is focused on crisis leadership during pandemics. A pandemic is an epidemic that transcends geographical boundaries and affects large numbers of people ( Last, 1993 ). Leadership is a social process occurring in a group where an individual demonstrates the ability to guide a group toward achieving a common goal ( Gilmartin & D’Aunno, 2007 ; Tubbs & Schulz, 2006 ; Yukl, 2013 ). Leadership models and theories have evolved over time and moved from the belief that leaders “are born” to an understanding that leadership comprises personalities, values, and competencies ( Alban-Metcalfe & Alimo-Metcalfe, 2013 ; Yukl, 2013 ).

Leadership scholars have found that individual personalities and values remain relatively stable throughout the life span. Competencies are individuals’ abilities to perform a task or role ( Boyatzis & Boyatzis, 2008 ) and are characterized by individuals’ knowledge, skills, attitude, and behaviors ( Krathwohl et al., 1971 ). Competencies are learned and developed through an iterative, lifelong process based on individuals’ professional roles and life experiences ( Tubbs & Schulz, 2006 ).

Competency theorists commonly group leadership behaviors into task-related competencies, relational competencies, and change and adaptive competencies ( Heifetz & Linsky, 2017 ; Stogdill, 1974 ; Yukl, 2012 ). Crisis leadership scholars suggest in addition to the above leadership competencies that are formed and developed outside of crisis situations, collaboration is an important element in the crisis situation ( Bavik et al., 2021 ; Caringal-Go et al., 2021 ; Kapucu & Ustun, 2018 ). Figure 1 shows the integrated framework for pandemic leadership that guided our work. This review focused on analyzing the evidence on leading during pandemics to characterize the crisis leadership behavioral competencies commonly demonstrated during a pandemic. Ultimately, our discussion of how crisis leadership competencies apply within the current and potentially future pandemics will be key to developing future health care and public health sector leadership.

A conceptual framework for crisis leadership during pandemics based on behavioral and contingency theory models of competencies.

Our study followed the WHO Rapid Review Guide and the Joanna Briggs Institute 2020 guide for scoping reviews ( Peters et al., 2020 ; Tricco et al., 2017 ), and we report results following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for scoping reviews. Based on our research objectives, we developed the following guiding research questions:

• What is known and understood about crisis leadership during a pandemic in the health and public health sector?
• What are the contextual enablers and barriers that shape the health and public health sector crisis leadership during a pandemic?

Our inclusion and exclusion criteria for the study are presented in Table 1 , which presents our eligibility criteria developed within a SPICE framework (i.e., criteria around setting, phenomena of interest, comparison, and evaluation).

Application of a SPICE Framework to Pandemic Leadership Literature.

Note . SPICE = criteria around setting, phenomena of interest, comparison, and evaluation.

Search Strategy

We adopted comprehensive search strategies for the following electronic databases focused on the health care and business literature: MEDLINE (via Ovid), PsycINFO (via Ovid), CINAHL (via EBSCO), Business Source Premier (via EBSCO), and Canadian Business & Current Affairs (via ProQuest). An academic health sciences librarian from the University of Toronto developed search strategies with input from the research team. We initially conducted the search in Ovid MEDLINE. We reviewed our search results using the Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies tool ( McGowan et al., 2016 ), a checklist for comparing, among other things, the types of errors in articles found and the relative fit of articles to the research question, before translating the search strategy into other databases using their command language. We limited searches by date from the SARS pandemic (2003) to the start of vaccine rollout period for the COVID-19 pandemic (December, 2020). Then, we ran searches in four databases, and exported the final search results into Covidence, a review management software in which duplicates were identified and removed. To capture any papers that may have been missed, we conducted targeted journal hand searches.

Data Charting

To minimize selection bias, two independent screeners reviewed a sample of 20 articles identified from the search against inclusion and exclusion criteria to fine-tune the criteria. We considered the following final inclusion and exclusion criteria for article selection. Articles were included if they (1) focused on a pandemic since and including SARS, (2) contained an evaluation of leadership, (3) were written in English, (4) were published in a peer-reviewed journal, (5) used objective evaluation methods (qualitative or quantitative), and (6) met our SPICE criteria.

Reviewer teams used the fine-tuned inclusion and exclusion criteria to complete title and abstract screening for the remaining articles. We retrieved publications that met the inclusion and exclusion criteria for a full-text review. We used a predefined data extraction form based on our research objectives and guiding research questions. Data extraction categories included citation, research aims, research type, data collection methods, methodological quality, pandemic type, country, type of leader, leadership competencies discussed, enablers and barriers to leadership success, the focus of the main results, author conclusions, and space for an open-ended reviewer note. To ensure the assessment’s integrity, we piloted data extraction from a sample of eight publications with two to three researchers coding each publication. We then held a group discussion to resolve inconsistencies and refine the data extraction tool. Once we refined the tool, extractors moved ahead with the full data extraction.

Risk of Bias Reduction

Scoping reviews are conducted to provide an overview of the existing evidence regardless of methodological quality or risk of bias. As a standard, included sources of evidence are not critically appraised for scoping reviews ( Peters et al., 2020 ; Tricco et al., 2017 ). However, given the variability in the literature, we adapted a modified version of the CASP Qualitative Studies Checklist as a screening tool to assess the potential risk of bias ( Ma et al., 2020 ). We assessed full texts selected for data extraction against the following criteria: assessment of clear research aims, objective research methods, method appropriateness for the research aims, and appropriate data collection. We rated whether each study met the criteria or did not meet the criteria. Studies that met all the requirements were rated 1 ( excellent ) and studies that did not meet all the criteria were rated 5 ( very poor ). We excluded studies that did not meet any of the criteria.

Data Analysis and Synthesis

We used NVivo qualitative software to synthesize the data on the included articles into codes inductively and deductively. We then analyzed the data using an iterative process rooted in grounded theory to compare and develop emergent themes ( Strauss & Corbin, 1997 ). The team linked the emergent themes using a concept map after considering the number of times each theme was discussed as a factor of leadership during a crisis or after considering a contextual element that shaped the leadership. The research team collectively reviewed the emergent themes from the concept map to identify and reconcile discrepancies.

Study Selection

The searches generated 8,282 unique articles published from January 2003 to December, 2020. After reviewing the articles’ titles and abstracts, we determined that 803 articles met the criteria for a full-text review. Most of these articles were opinion articles or commentaries without objective data. After the full-text review was conducted, 35 articles were found to meet the final inclusion criteria (see Figure 2 ).

Crisis leadership PRISMA 2009 flow diagram.

Note . PRISMA = Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.

Study Characteristics

Of the 35 studies identified for final inclusion in our review, 20 involved qualitative methods such as interviews and case studies. Four studies were systematic or literature reviews. Six studies used quantitative methods, such as surveys; two studies used mixed methods; and three studies were interventional studies with before-and-after measures. However, 17 of the 35 articles focused on COVID-19-related experience; four focused on Ebola; and another four focused on SARS. The remaining 10 focused on Influenza, H1N1, H5N1, and pandemics in general. The researchers in these studies focused on multiple leadership areas in both governments and nonprofits, including health policy, clinical medicine, public health, and pharmaceutical leadership. These studies came from the Canada, the United States, Europe, China, Taiwan, West Africa, Malaysia, Norway, the United Kingdom, and South Korea. Table 2 provides a summary of the study characteristics.

Study Characteristics of Reviewed Literature.

Crisis Leadership Competencies

We identified and grouped crisis leadership competencies into task, people, and adaptive competencies through a thematic analysis approach. Contextual enablers and barriers were distinguished as political, structural and cultural factors. Table 3 outlines the specific competencies related to these groupings as well as the enablers and barriers.

Crisis Leadership Competencies.

Task Competencies

Task competencies focus on the knowledge, skills, and behaviors required to manage pandemic responses. During a pandemic crisis, leaders are called on to perform tasks such as preparation and planning, communication, and collaboration based on their content knowledge expertise. Preparing and planning emerged as a core leadership competency in 57% of the included studies. Preparing and planning ranged from identifying a crisis early to developing emergency preparedness protocols, managing the implementation of such protocols, allocating resources, monitoring the crisis, and developing contingency plans. A segment of the included studies (51%) discussed communication as an essential task competency during a crisis. In the precrisis phase, leaders were expected to use effective communication skills to form functional partnerships and engage in collaborative planning exercises. During the crisis event, leaders were expected to use effective communication skills to engage others in preparing risk responses, sharing emergency risk communication with the public, and communicating a clear vision for cultivating a shared sense of purpose. Additionally, public-facing leaders faced both negative and positive media attention during a public health crisis. As such, communication skills related to media communication were considered an essential capability.

Finally, leaders’ ability to build collaboration emerged as an instrumental task competency in 37% of the included studies. Given pandemics’ transboundary nature, collaboration was considered essential for effectively coordinating pandemic responses and minimizing resource wastage. In a crisis, leaders needed to develop networks with other organizations and cultivate interpersonal relationships grounded in mutual trust and understanding among their team and others. Collaboration was essential for facilitating exchanges of information and creating consensus on crucial decisions. The three task competencies were interrelated in many of the studies reviewed; for example, communication and/or collaboration being important to enable effective planning, or effective planning enabling better collaboration.

People Competencies

People competencies focus on the skills and behaviors required to manage the interpersonal relationships necessary to lead pandemic responses. Leaders’ ability to engage others for collective actions was presented as essential in leading during a pandemic. It required attributes such as demonstrating empathy and awareness (34.3%), being physically and emotionally present for others (presence) and caring about the well-being of self and others (well-being; 25.7%), and the ability to inspire and influence others (22.9%). For example, leaders who were able to empathize with team members, respect others’ values and demonstrate an inclusive approach to engage others were able to build interpersonal relationships, increase trust and improve morale, decrease occupational stress, and increase engagement for their teams and others.

Adaptive Competencies

Adaptive competencies focus on the skills and behaviors required to respond to the dynamic nature of pandemic responses. Leaders’ ability to rapidly adapt to the changing context was essential in successful crisis leadership. Of the included studies, 42.9% discussed the importance of adaptive decision-making abilities. For example, during dynamic crises, leaders were often called on to make crucial decisions with minimal evidence or rapidly evolving evidence. This decision-making required tacit knowledge of the problem (20%) and systems thinking and sensemaking abilities (17.1%) to have a broad perspective of the decisions’ impact, predominantly when the decisions relied on incomplete evidence and ethical dilemmas.

Contextual Factors That Shape Crisis Leadership During a Pandemic

Contextual factors shape how leadership competencies are demonstrated. However, the literature reviewed on pandemic-related crises provided minimal evidence on contextual factors that shape the crisis leadership competencies ( Table 3 ). Furthermore, no causal evidence was provided to support how these factors influence how leaders respond to a crisis. Indeed, 31% of the articles discussed how structural factors such as hierarchy, lack of team cohesiveness, and resource allocation issues played a central role in shaping the ability to demonstrate task competencies related to communication, decision making, and planning. For example. in complex structures with centralized control, decisions often required multiple levels of approval, which delayed decision making. Organizations with distributed leadership structures were able to adapt to pandemic crises more rapidly.

Culture shapes communication approaches, collaboration styles, decision-making processes, and interpersonal relationship ( Dorfman et al., 2012 ). However, 20% of the articles discussed cultural factors played an important role in shaping leaders’ crisis leadership competencies. Despite the cultural difference, transparent communication was a crucial factor for enhancing trust and credibility among stakeholders. This improved trust between leader and the larger stakeholders, and improved leaders’ ability to facilitate collaboration with multiple stakeholders and influence decisions ( Wang et al., 2008 ; You & Ju, 2019 ). Gender roles, particularly within leadership, are a key cultural construction shaped by social norms ( Segal, 2003 ), and one study team explored whether being female served as a potential enabler for improving empathy and communication. ( Sergent & Stajkovic, 2020 ). However, no causal relationship between gender and leadership effectiveness was identified.

Political factors such as power dynamics among local, state, and federal agencies influence a leader’s ability to lead and access the required resources during a crisis were addressed in 22.9% of the articles. For example, the articles discussed how distrust in elected officials influenced people’s willingness to trust communications from public health and health care leaders related to pandemic measures.

Framework for Crisis Leadership During a Pandemic

Crisis leadership during a pandemic is complex and dynamic. The studies reviewed show that leaders work at intersection of task, people, and adaptive competencies to lead during crisis such as pandemics ( Figure 3 ). These results demonstrate how political, structural, and cultural contextual factors shape the competencies. Minimal evidence exists on the causal relationship between the contextual factors and the task, people, and adaptive competencies.

Framework for crisis leadership (CL) during pandemic: Competencies and contextual enablers/barrier.

Discussion and Conclusion

To our knowledge, this is the first review to investigate how leadership has been conceptualized and operationalized in the context of pandemics as crises. Given the lack of standard concepts, frameworks or assessment tools related to crisis leadership, we used a scoping review methodology rather than a systematic review methodology to map the key concepts and contextual factors related to crisis leadership in a pandemic situation. We identified that in a pandemic context, leaders function at the intersection of task, people, and adaptive competencies. Political, structural, and cultural contexts influence the demonstration of these competencies. In general, during a crisis, leaders who demonstrated credibility and clear command of the situation, the ability to make and engage in consistent and responsible decisions and communications, and a transparent communication process were able to inspire and influence change.

Our findings are consistent with the current view of leadership as including administrative, adaptive, and enabling functions ( Heifetz & Laurie, 2001 ; Uhl-Bien et al., 2007 ; Yukl, 2012 ). Although the current leadership theories explore leadership as a complex phenomenon shaped by contextual factors, task leadership and people leadership are often viewed as siloed functions. For example, traditionally in health care, leaders are recruited for their years of experience in a task area to lead an organization or team ( Wolter et al., 2015 ). However, we found across studies that leaders cannot function in a siloed function during pandemics. We derived a framework for pandemic leadership that reflects a threefold interaction among task, people, and adaptive competencies within political, structural, and cultural contexts. For example, in a dynamic crisis, leaders must demonstrate their ability to focus on the task while empathizing with people’s situations and demonstrating nimble adaptability to rapidly changing events. As such, health care and public health leaders should have competencies in people and adaptive competencies, in addition to the more common subject matter mastery, in order to face current and future crises.

We have seen several significant pandemics in the past 20 years. Health systems globally need to strengthen workforce capacity to effectively face pandemics and avoid the case fatality and mortality burden we have witnessed with the COVID-19 pandemic. To effectively achieve this goal, health care organizations must engage in better training to prepare their workforce to lead effectively during rapidly evolving crises, such as the COVID-19 pandemic. At the public policy level, the crisis leadership framework set forth in this study can be a crucial supplement to leadership training offered to public health officials and clinicians by government organizations such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that include competency training in their curriculums ( Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2018 ). Understanding key crisis leadership behaviors helps health care organizations design evidence-informed and competency-based training programs.

The scope of literature published between the SARS crisis in 2003 and the COVID-19 pandemic in December 2020 limits our study findings. The current literature contained few empirical studies from which to draw firm conclusions about specific leadership competencies, temporal factors, and response effectiveness. As such, it was not feasible to explore how contextual factors moderated the effects of the competencies. Furthermore, these studies provided vague conceptual definitions of leadership, and studies did not use standardized instruments that measured leadership competencies in a crisis situation effectively, which caused conceptual inconsistencies. In addition, task competencies were weighted heavily in the current crisis leadership literature; this is unsurprising because emergency management and crisis management literature has focused primarily on crises’ planning and mitigation functions.

Future studies should focus on broadening the leadership focus by examining beyond task competencies and exploring the factors related to people and adaptive competencies. We suggest that authors of future crisis leadership studies expand the methodological approaches and use qualitative and mixed-method approaches to understand the temporal aspects of pandemics and related leadership behaviors.

We noted the empirical studies found on pandemic leadership rarely made explicit references to a clear definition of crisis leadership or to existing leadership theories or models. To understand the dynamic patterns among task, people, and adaptive competencies of crisis leadership and the contextual influences, future authors of crisis leadership studies should define these constructs clearly and situate their research in existing crisis leadership research. In addition, our analysis of crisis leadership is specific to pandemics and future work could further explore the applicability to other crisis situations, such as climate crisis.

In conclusion, the research on pandemic leadership must become more robust if we are to better understand what makes pandemic responses successful. At present, it remains difficult to draw firm conclusions on how leadership competencies impact outcomes or the explicit mechanisms that shape contextual factors. Overall, pandemic leadership is an area that will continue to evolve as more researchers use empirical research designs and assessment methods to study leadership competencies. Until we have a larger body of empirical research on crisis leadership, any conclusions asserted for pandemics or any other crisis require further investigation.

Acknowledgments

Authors acknowledge the contribution by Sabine Caleja and Ana Patricia Ayala, who helped with article search and screening tasks.

Author Contributions: Abi Sriharan (AS), Attila J. Hertelendy (AJH), Jane Banaszak-Holl (JBH), Michelle M. Fleig-Palmer (MMF), Cheryl Mitchell (CM), and Sara J. Singer (SS) conceptualized and designed the review. AS, AJH, JBH, MMF, Devin J. Rapp (DJR), SS, and CM reviewed titles, abstracts, and full-text papers for eligibility. AS, AJH, Amit Nigam (AN), JBH, MMF, DJR, SS, and CM were responsible for extracting data and all data extraction. AS, JBH, and CM were responsible for data synthesis. AS, AJH, JBH, and MMF prepared the initial draft manuscript. AS, AJH, JBH, DJR, JG, AN, SS, and CM reviewed and edited the manuscript.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding: The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Galea appointed inaugural Margaret C. Ryan Dean of planned WashU School of Public Health

Couple endows deanship in honor of late daughter

Washington University in St. Louis announced today that Sandro Galea, MD, DrPH, one of the world’s most influential public health leaders, will become the inaugural Margaret C. Ryan Dean of the university’s planned School of Public Health, effective Jan. 1.

In this critical leadership role, Galea will help shape and launch WashU’s first new school in 100 years. The school is part of WashU’s 10-year strategic plan to make both the university and St. Louis a global hub for solving society’s deepest challenges. “Sandro Galea’s choice to come to WashU is an endorsement of the strengths, opportunities and potential offered by our university and St. Louis,” said Beverly Wendland, provost and executive vice chancellor for academic affairs. “His insights into the complex interplay between social, environmental and health factors will be crucial as we seek to usher in the next era of public health in partnership with our community.” 

With the launch of the new school, WashU will build on its existing public health strengths in research, teaching and clinical practice, and expand its commitment to the field. The school will concentrate on researching and advancing solutions to pressing issues and building partnerships for real-world impact in critical areas such as infectious disease; mental, global and environmental health; and dissemination and implementation science.

Galea currently is dean of Boston University’s School of Public Health and the Robert A. Knox Professor. He also is a professor of family medicine at Boston University’s Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine.

At WashU, he will hold the newly endowed Margaret C. Ryan Deanship at the School of Public Health. Tony and Ann Ryan, of Boston, made a gift to endow the deanship in honor of their late daughter, Maggie Ryan, AB ’16, who demonstrated a strong commitment to leadership and global health. 

“Sandro Galea is a trailblazer in the field of public health, and we’re grateful that the Ryan family’s generosity has allowed us to bring his visionary leadership to WashU as the inaugural dean of our School of Public Health,” said Chancellor Andrew D. Martin. “With Sandro leading the way, we’re poised to elevate community health to new heights in St. Louis and worldwide.”

A physician, epidemiologist and author, Galea is one of the most cited social scientists in the world, having written more than 1,000 scientific journal articles, 75 chapters and 24 books. His books “Epidemiology Matters” and “Public Health: An Introduction to the Science and Practice of Population Health” are widely used as textbooks in public health and epidemiology courses. Thomson Reuters has named Galea among “the world’s most influential scientific minds.”

Galea’s research focuses on the behavioral health ramifications of trauma, including those caused by firearms. He has documented the consequences of trauma and conflict worldwide — examining the massive toll of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Hurricane Katrina, conflicts in sub-Saharan Africa, and the U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. He also is known for his research linking health to social disadvantages such as poverty and lack of education. His research has been funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and philanthropic foundations. 

Kruk to join WashU Medicine faculty

Galea’s wife, Margaret E. Kruk, MD, MPH, also is joining the WashU faculty. Kruk is a professor of health systems at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health and director of the QuEST Centers and Network, a multicountry research consortium generating evidence to build high-quality health systems. Her research focuses on how health systems can produce better outcomes for people living in low- and middle-income countries. Working with global research and policy partners, Kruk develops new measures of health system quality and evaluates the effects of large-scale health-care reforms. 

At WashU, she will serve as a distinguished professor in health systems and medicine in the Department of Medicine and as director of the universitywide QuEST Center. The center will expand the consortium’s work to new areas, including inequities in health-care quality in the U.S. Prior to Harvard, Kruk was an associate professor of health policy and management and director of the Better Health Systems Initiative at Columbia University.

“We are so pleased that Margaret Kruk will be coming to Washington University in this important leadership role,” said Victoria Fraser, MD, the Adolphus Busch Professor of Medicine and chair of the John T. Milliken Department of Medicine at the WashU School of Medicine. “Her emphasis on implementation science and use of novel methods to determine and measure large-scale health-care reforms will be of enormous benefit regionally, as well as globally. Her commitment to equality and access as it pertains to health care is unwavering, and we look forward to welcoming her to St. Louis.”

Ryan, Kahn gifts provide transformative support

In making their generous gift to the university, the Ryans are setting WashU on a trajectory of excellence in the field of public health, and paying a lasting tribute to their daughter.

“Our gift endowing the deanship ties together the two things that Maggie was so passionate about in terms of public health — service to others and leadership. It’s a tremendous way to leverage her vision and honor her legacy,” Tony Ryan said. 

“Dr. Galea’s knowledge, experience, energy and commitment to public health and education, combined with his record as a leader, positions the new school for great success right out of the box,” he added. “This is a huge win for the university to bring in a leader of his caliber.”

The Ryans’ investment will help attract and retain the best academic public health leaders both now and into the future. Additionally, the dean can use annual payouts from the endowment to pursue the highest priorities for the planned school.

Galea also will hold the Eugene S. and Constance D. Kahn Distinguished Professorship in Public Health. The endowed position was recently established by a commitment from Washington University Emeritus Trustee Gene Kahn and his wife, Connie. The distinguished professorship will provide increased support for the dean’s strategic goals.

“As some of Washington University’s earliest champions of public health, Connie and I are honored to support the efforts to create a School of Public Health,” Gene Kahn said. “Our gift celebrates WashU’s transdisciplinary approach to public health and its deep commitment to making an impact locally and globally. Having a distinguished leader of Sandro Galea’s caliber and accomplishment will accelerate our progress and help us catalyze change for population health.”

The next era

Galea’s innovative leadership and deep understanding of public health challenges will shape WashU’s efforts to launch a future-focused school of public health. The planned school is a central component of the university’s “Here and Next” strategic plan, developed through 18 months of listening, outreach and work sessions involving thousands of students, faculty, staff, alumni and community partners.

I can think of no more important time to create a school of public health than today. And I can think of no better place to do so than at Washington University, with this institution’s deep and rich tradition of excellence in scholarship and in thought. Sandro Galea

The planned school, set to launch in fall 2026, was announced in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, which revealed great American distrust in the health-care system. Additionally, people in the U.S. experience the worst health outcomes overall of any high-income nation, according to a Commonwealth Fund 2022 report on U.S. health care. This is due to a combination of factors, including health-care access; social determinants of health such as income inequality and education gaps; unhealthy lifestyle behaviors; a fragmented health-care system; and high health-care costs.  

“I can think of no more important time to create a school of public health than today,” Galea said. “And I can think of no better place to do so than at Washington University, with this institution’s deep and rich tradition of excellence in scholarship and in thought. All of the pieces are in place to do wonderful things, both for WashU, but also for the world. WashU is remarkably positioned to make a strategic contribution to the field of global health.”

About Sandro Galea

Galea was born in Malta and emigrated to Canada with his family at the age of 14.  After earning a medical degree from the University of Toronto, he served as a field physician in Somalia with Doctors Without Borders. He emigrated to the U.S. in his late 20s and went on to earn graduate degrees from Harvard and Columbia universities, and he received an honorary doctorate from the University of Glasgow. 

Prior to his appointment at Boston University, Galea served as the Gelman Professor and chair of the Department of Epidemiology at the Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health. He previously held academic and leadership positions at the University of Michigan and at the New York Academy of Medicine.

Galea is past chair of the board of the Association of Schools and Programs of Public Health and past president of the Society for Epidemiologic Research and of the Interdisciplinary Association for Population Health Science. He served as chair of the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene’s Community Services Board and as a member of its Health Board. He currently serves as chair of the Boston Public Health Commission Board of Health, and he is an elected member of the National Academy of Medicine.

Galea has received several lifetime achievement awards for his research, including the Rema Lapouse Award from the American Public Health Association and the Robert S. Laufer, PhD, Memorial Award from the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies. He is a regular contributor to media outlets, including The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, Harvard Business Review, The Boston Globe and TEDMED.

Galea and Kruk are the parents of two children, Oliver, 20, and Isabel, 18.

A tribute to Maggie Ryan

Tony and Ann Ryan are longtime supporters of Washington University. The endowed deanship is the latest in a series of gifts from the couple inspired by their daughter’s example. Maggie Ryan died in a car accident just two days after earning her bachelor’s degrees in anthropology and in women, gender and sexuality studies, both in Arts & Sciences.

The Ryans previously made gifts to Arts & Sciences and the Maggie Ryan Endowed Memorial Scholarship, which the university established in Maggie’s honor. The scholarship helps talented students follow Maggie’s lead and become agents of positive change.

In 2020, the couple established the Maggie Ryan Endowed Service Leader Scholarship, which is awarded to undergraduate students who demonstrate leadership and commitment to improving the health and well-being of others through their actions at the university or the community in which they live. 

Upon learning of the plans for the new public health school, Tony Ryan said he and his wife realized creating an endowment was the perfect opportunity to carry on their daughter’s energy and dedication to helping others while ensuring the school’s success.  

“We wanted to make the deanship as attractive as possible to encourage the best talent to come in and take on this extraordinary opportunity of leading a new school at WashU,” Tony Ryan said. 

“To solve challenging global issues, you need to bring together many different disciplines,” he continued. “The collaborative vision underlying the school resonates with our operating philosophy as a family and as individuals. We’re very encouraged by how it’s being planned and the leadership that’s being provided by the provost and others.”

The Ryans are members of the William H. Danforth Leadership Society, which acknowledges benefactors whose lifetime contributions to the university total $1 million or more. They previously served as members of the Washington University Parents Council.

Tony Ryan is partner, president and chief executive officer at Arrowstreet Capital, an investment management firm based in Boston. Under former President George W. Bush, he served as assistant secretary of the treasury for financial markets from 2006-08 and acting under secretary of the treasury for domestic finance from 2008-09. 

Ann Ryan has served extensively at Boston Children’s Hospital, including as a member of its Philanthropic Board of Advisors. The Ryan family established the Maggie Ryan Endowed Fellowship in Global Health at the hospital in 2018. 

About Gene and Connie Kahn

The Kahns have provided generous gifts to WashU’s Brown School, where they previously established the Eugene S. and Constance Kahn Family Professorship in Public Health and the Kahn Family Master’s Research Fellowship. The couple also established the Kahn Leadership Program in Public Health and Social Work, which provides a cohort of master’s of social work/master’s of public health dual-degree students with enhanced scholarship support, advanced training and expanded opportunities to prepare them for leadership roles in their careers. They also support the Brown School Annual Fund.

Gene Kahn is former chief executive officer of Claire’s Stores Inc. and a former chairman and CEO of the May Department Stores Co. He joined WashU’s Board of Trustees in 1999 and served on multiple board committees. He is a member of the Brown School National Council and the Institute for Public Health National Council. Additionally, he is a member of the board of Barnes-Jewish Hospital, where he chairs the Washington University School of Medicine Relationship Committee and served on the board of the Goldfarb School of Nursing.

Connie Kahn is active with St. Louis cultural and charitable organizations and is an honorary member of the Women’s Society of Washington University.

The couple are sustaining charter members of the Danforth Circle Chancellor’s Level of the William Greenleaf Eliot Society, with Gene Kahn serving as Danforth Circle chair. They are also members of the William H. Danforth Leadership Society.

Comments and respectful dialogue are encouraged, but content will be moderated. Please, no personal attacks, obscenity or profanity, selling of commercial products, or endorsements of political candidates or positions. We reserve the right to remove any inappropriate comments. We also cannot address individual medical concerns or provide medical advice in this forum.

You Might Also Like

Latest from the Newsroom

Recent stories.

Quantum physics may help lasers see through fog, aid in surveillance

Coolidge shares message of self-acceptance at WashU Commencement

$5 million grant supports innovative immunotherapies against blood cancers

WashU Experts

DeFake tool protects voice recordings from cybercriminals

Tremor a reminder that East Coast, Midwest earthquake threat is real

NASPA chair, WashU vice chancellor on the future of student affairs

WashU in the News

Ultrasound Isn’t Just for Pregnancy. How It’s Helping Treat the Brain.

Opinion: Could these laws fix America’s broken work culture?

TIME 100 health

• Search Menu
• Advance Articles
• Editor's Choice
• Supplements
• E-Collections
• Virtual Roundtables
• Author Videos
• Author Guidelines
• Submission Site
• Open Access Options
• About The European Journal of Public Health
• About the European Public Health Association
• Editorial Board
• Advertising and Corporate Services
• Journals Career Network
• Self-Archiving Policy
• Terms and Conditions
• Explore Publishing with EJPH
• Journals on Oxford Academic
• Books on Oxford Academic

Article Contents

• < Previous

Leadership in public health crisis: a review to summarize lessons learned from COVID-19 pandemic

• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data

A Valz Gris, MR Gualano, T Osti, L Villani, VF Corona, F D'ambrosio, M Lomazzi, Collaborating Group Leadership Coalition, F Cascini, F Favaretti, W Ricciardi, Leadership in public health crisis: a review to summarize lessons learned from COVID-19 pandemic, European Journal of Public Health , Volume 32, Issue Supplement_3, October 2022, ckac129.544, https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckac129.544

• Permissions Icon Permissions

During the COVID-19 pandemic, several public health challenges were faced, requiring worldwide leaders able to direct, guide, and establish appropriate strategies. The aim of this review was to summarize evidence on public health leadership during the COVID-19 era.

The systematic literature review was conducted according to the PRISMA 2020 checklist. A search of relevant articles was performed in the PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. Eligible articles were any type of publication, published between 2020 and 2022, that outlined one or more characteristics of effective public health leadership during the COVID-19 pandemic We excluded all articles that did not explicitly address the COVID-19 pandemic or had a different setting.

A total of 2499 records were screened, and 45 articles were included. We identified 93 characteristics, clustered in six groups, that were reported as fundamental to be an effective leader in public health crises worldwide. Emotional intelligence and human traits (reported by 46.67% of the articles) were considered essential to build trust in the population and ensure cooperation with working groups. Communication skills (47%) are considered necessary to enable people to understand and accept measures. A supportive, multidisciplinary team and accountability mechanisms (33,33%) were highlighted as central elements, especially in the international field, to ensure reliability and consistency in action. Management skills (35,56%), adaptability (44,44%), and evidence-based approach (33,33%) were reported as key capabilities to ensure a prompt and rapid response to the challenges created by the pandemic.

The identification of the attributes of an effective public health leader conducted in this study is useful in choosing the key personalities who must lead public health today and in the training of tomorrow's European and worldwide leaders to be ready to face future threats.

• Effective public health leaders in crisis are empathetic and trustworthy people, who have developed management and communication skills, and are able to make timely and evidence-based decisions.

• In order to create leaders capable of facing future threats, more emphasis in the training of public health workforce on soft skills and management competencies should be recommended.

• intelligence
• patient care team
• personality
• public health medicine
• evidence-based practice
• interdisciplinary treatment approach
• accountability
• adaptability
• communication skills
• coronavirus pandemic

Email alerts

Citing articles via.

• Contact EUPHA
• Recommend to your Library

Affiliations

• Online ISSN 1464-360X
• Print ISSN 1101-1262
• Copyright © 2024 European Public Health Association
• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Institutional account management
• Rights and permissions
• Get help with access
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Guest Essay

Doctors Need a Better Way to Treat Patients Without Their Consent

By Sandeep Jauhar

Dr. Jauhar is a cardiologist in New York who writes frequently about medical care and public health.

Not long ago, I took care of a middle-aged man at my hospital who had severe heart failure requiring life support. When he was disconnected from machines after a few days of treatment, he began to display psychotic symptoms, including delusional thinking, tangential speech and paranoia. He had a long history of untreated schizophrenia, I learned, which had estranged him from family members and friends, with whom he had virtually no contact.

My patient demanded to leave the hospital. However, sending him home was going to be a problem. He could not take care of himself. There was little chance he would take his medications, including a blood thinner to dissolve a clot in his heart before it caused a stroke. He was even less likely to take psychiatric drugs that he did not believe he needed.

My colleagues and I didn’t know what to do, so we called the treating psychiatrist. The psychiatrist immediately declared that our patient lacked the capacity to discharge himself from the hospital. The patient could not grasp the implications of this choice, for instance, or properly weigh its risks and benefits. The psychiatrist said the patient should remain in the hospital to receive psychiatric treatment, even against his will.

The psychiatrist’s opinion made sense to me. Patients with untreated schizophrenia have a higher rate of death than those who undergo treatment. Hopefully treatment would restore my patient’s judgment to the point where he would take his medications when he went home — or even decide not to take them, but to make that risky decision in the full appreciation of the likely consequences. (If autonomy means anything, it means that patients have the right to make bad decisions, too.) Treating him, even over his objections, seemed to be in his best interests.

However, according to New York law — and the law of other states — such involuntary treatment would require a court order. As doctors, we would have to plead our case before a judge. But was a judge without medical or psychiatric expertise the best person to decide this man’s fate?

In this case and also more generally, I think the answer is no. The law ought to be changed to keep such decisions in hospitals — in the hands of doctors, medical ethicists and other relevant experts.

Doctors don’t always have to resort to the courts to treat patients without their consent. There are some notable exceptions, such as during a life-threatening emergency (if a competent patient has not previously refused such treatment) or when there is a pressing societal interest (such as requiring patients with communicable tuberculosis to take antibiotics).

But judicial review has been the cornerstone of “treatment over objection,” as it’s known, for the past four decades or so. Appellate courts in the 1980s ruled that judicial hearings in such cases are needed to safeguard patients’ rights. For example, in 1983, in Rogers v. Commissioner of Department of Mental Health, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court declared that a judge could override medical judgments favoring involuntary psychiatric treatment.

The underlying motivation behind judicial review was and remains laudable: to avoid the sort of paternalistic abuses that have characterized too much of medical history. Doctors often used to withhold bad news from patients, to cite just a small example. Involuntary treatment, even with benevolent intentions, reeks of such paternalism.

But though medical practice is by no means perfect, times have changed. The sort of abuse dramatized in the 1975 movie “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest,” with its harrowing depiction of forced electroconvulsive therapy, is far less common. Doctors today are trained in shared decision-making. Safeguards are now in place to prevent such maltreatment, including multidisciplinary teams in which nurses, social workers and bioethicists have a voice.

In addition to being less necessary to prevent abuse than they once were, courts are by nature poorly suited for making decisions about treatment over objection. For one thing, they are slow: Having to go to court often results in delays, sometimes up to a week or more, which can harm patients who need care urgently.

Moreover, judges have neither the experience nor the expertise to properly evaluate psychological states, assess decision-making capacity or determine whether a proposed treatment’s benefits outweigh its risks. It is no surprise that by some estimates 95 percent or more of requests for treatment over objection are approved by judges, who invariably haven’t met the patient and must rely on information provided by the treating medical team.

A better system for determining whether a patient should be treated over his or her objection would be a hospital hearing in which a committee of doctors, ethicists and other relevant experts — all of whom would be independent of the hospital and not involved in the care of the patient — engaged in conversation with the medical team and the patient and patient’s family. Having hearings on site would expedite decisions and minimize treatment delays. The committee would make the final decision.

Of course, such a committee would have to be granted immunity from legal liability (as with judges in our current system), so that experts would be willing to serve and speak candidly. Patients’ interests could be safeguarded by requiring the committee to publish its reasoning. Periodic audits by a regulatory body could ensure that the committee’s deliberations were meeting medical and ethical standards.

In the event that the committee could not reach a consensus on the best course of action (or if there were allegations of wrongdoing), then the parties involved could appeal to a judge. But that would be the exception rather than the rule.

In the case of my patient with heart failure, the decision ultimately didn’t have to go before a judge. Multiple discussions involving the patient, the hospital ethics and palliative care teams, social workers, nurses, psychiatrists and other doctors — discussions that in many respects served the function of a formal committee of the sort I’m proposing — yielded an agreement with the patient that his interests would be best served by sending him home with hospice care.

Capacity must be judged relative to the decision being made, and it became clear over the course of hospitalization that our patient understood the terminal nature of his condition and had the capacity to choose hospice care. Forced treatment was unlikely to significantly improve his psychiatric symptoms before the natural progression of heart failure caused his death.

So he was discharged home. It was the best decision under the circumstances, one reached by expert deliberation, not legal procedure. He passed away a few weeks later without, fortunately, ever setting foot in court.

Sandeep Jauhar ( @sjauhar ) is a doctor at Northwell Health in New York and the author, most recently, of “ My Father’s Brain : Life in the Shadow of Alzheimer’s.”

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips . And here’s our email: [email protected] .

Follow the New York Times Opinion section on Facebook , Instagram , TikTok , WhatsApp , X and Threads .

Skip to content

• Our Faculty

Educational Programs

News and events, population & family health, congratulations class of 2024.

We are celebrating the Class of 2024 at Mailman’s Heilbrunn Department of Population and Family Health! With eighty-seven graduating master students and 4 DrPHs in Leadership in Global Health and Humanitarian Systems, our department is bursting with pride! Here’s to the bright futures ahead, impacting public health one step at a time! 

Department Award Receipients 

Lynne Loomis-Price Humanitarian Award: Saham Ali and Cecile van Maanen  

Congratulations to the outstanding graduates of the PopFam Class of 2024 who were honored with awards. 

Students Saham Ali and Cecile van Maanen received the Lynne Loomis-Price Humanitarian Award. This award, named in honor of Lynne Loomis-Price, is given to students who best exemplify her positive spirit, commitment to human rights, dedication to the reduction of health disparities, and her actions in pursuit of social justice both domestically and internationally. 

Saham Ali exemplifies dedication to human rights, social justice, and health equity. Through her roles as a teaching assistant, in the faith-community based participatory research program TRIUMPH, and as president of Muslims Students for Health Equity, Saham's vibrant leadership fosters a joyful community, energizing our collective pursuit of social justice. 

 Cecile van Maanen's dedication to public health and service is evident through her volunteerism and impactful work. From her role as a teaching assistant to her contributions to the Program on Forced Migration and Health team, Cecile's professionalism and commitment to displaced populations demonstrates Lynne’s activism and kindness.  

Congratulations, Saham and Cecile, on this well-deserved recognition!