Systems and Complexity Thinking to Master Leadership Challenges in Interprofessional Health Professionals Education
Open accessAbstract
The purpose of this article is to propose that knowledge, understanding, and application of systems and complexity thinking can improve assessment, implementation, and evaluation of interprofessional education (IPE). Using a case story, the authors describe and explain a meta-model of systems and complexity thinking to support leaders in implementing and evaluating IPE initiatives. The meta-model incorporates the use of several important, interrelated frameworks that tackle issues of sense making, systems, and complexity thinking as well as polarity management at different levels of scale in an organization. Combined, these theories and frameworks support recognition and management of cross-scale interactions and help leaders make sense of distinctions among simple, complicated, complex, and chaotic situations among IPE issues associated with healthcare disciplines within institutions. The application and use of Liberating Structures and polarity management practices enable leaders to engage people and gain insight into the complexities involved in successful implementation of IPE programs.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 16 · Cited by 6
- Authors
- Pesut, D. J., Headrick, L. A., Holmboe, E., & Moore, S. M.
- Affiliations
- University of Minnesota (US)
- University of Missouri (US)
- Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (US)
- Case Western Reserve University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Pesut, Daniel J
- Venue
- Journal of Medical Education and Curricular Development
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2023-01
- Volume
- 10
- Pages
- 23821205231175205-23821205231175205
- ISSN
- 2382-1205 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC10192792
- OpenAlex
- W4377563935
- Cited by
- 6
- References
- 16
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1
- FWCI
- 2.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Medical Education and Curricular Development (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Interprofessional Education and Collaboration
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Interdisciplinary Research and Collaboration
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
- Keywords
- systems thinking, complexity thinking, interprofessional education, health professions education, educational leadership, Liberating Structures, polarity management, sensemaking, program implementation, program evaluation, meta-model, cross-scale interactions
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
