The Military Medicine Leadership Life Cycle: A Model for Longitudinal Leadership Development in...

Physicians must be leaders more than ever with innumerable challenges. Despite this need, there is a paucity of consistent leadership development (LD) from medical student to staff physician. Military medicine has additional challenges-working within a large health care organization, constant turnover, working in a variety of contexts-that make the need for LD even more pressing. The purpose of this paper is to describe the LD life cycle for military undergraduate and graduate medical education (UME and GME), providing examples for other organizations while identifying steps to meet the future needs in military medicine. The Health Professions Scholarship Program produces over 75% of graduates for military medicine each year. Yet, since learners are dispersed throughout civilian medical schools any LD results in a heterogeneous experience. Uniformed Services University has a 4-year LD program required for all students as well as other opportunities for leadership professional growth. Military GME programs are unique, requiring a military unique curriculum to prepare graduates for their initial assignments. Military unique curriculum vary, but include clinical topics relevant to military medicine as well as leadership. There is no Military Healthcare System-wide leadership curriculum used by everyone at this time. Based on these UME and GME approaches to LD, there have been multiple lessons learned formed on the authors experience and published literature: learners do not typically see themselves as leaders; learners want applicable curriculum with less lecturing and more application and discussion; programs are often siloed from one another and sharing curriculum content does not typically occur; no one-size-fits-all model. On the basis of the lessons learned and the current state of UME and GME leadership education, there are 5 recommendations to enhance UME and GME leadership programs: (1) develop a Health Professions Scholarship Program Leadership Curriculum; (2) develop a MHS GME Leadership Curriculum; (3) integrate UME and GME Leadership Curricula; (4) develop faculty to teach leadership; and (5) conduct research on UME and GME in military and share lessons learned. We suggest a roadmap for strengthening LD within military medicine and civilian institutions.