BackgroundThe spread of COVID-19 has disrupted the lifestyles of the world’s population. In the workplace, the pandemic has affected all sectors and has changed the way work is organized and carried out. The health sector has been severely impacted by the pandemic and has faced enormous challenges in maintaining healthcare services while providing care to those infected by the virus. At the heart of this battle, healthcare managers were key players in ensuring the orchestration of operations and the physical and (...) mental availability of employees during the crisis. Although few studies have been conducted to identify organizational practices or leadership skills to be adopted in a crisis context, the concrete behaviors of managers have not been documented yet. Therefore, this study aims at filling this gap by studying middle managers’ behaviors facing COVID-19 crisis in the healthcare sector.MethodsUsing a qualitative approach, eight focus groups were conducted online during the pandemic with 37 middle managers from the healthcare community of a Quebec health establishment from April to June 2020. Thematic analyses were conducted, and a mixed-methods approach was used to analyse the data based on Viitala’s hierarchical model of management skills.ResultsBased on the six managerial skills proposed in the model of Viitala, 21 specific management behaviors were identified as having been deployed by middle managers at the beginning of the pandemic. Considering that the health sector has been profoundly shaken by this health crisis, in addition to being an environment likely to experience other crises, managers need to develop practical skills in various crisis management situations. Thus, the results guide practitioners by highlighting the importance of team-oriented management behaviors, especially in a crisis context. (shrink)

My note on McShane's “Implementation” article indicates what I have learned from it (a) about its author, (b) about Lonergan, and (c) about implementation of Lonergan’s transcendental method. My sheaf of quotations from the article may offer a focus – not distorting, I hope – different from the reader’s own.

La formation - le mot et la chose - envahit le champ des discours et des pratiques éducatives. Elle s'étale dans la durée : formation initiale, continue, bref permanente. Elle se répand dans l'espace d'une société que l'on n'hésite plus à qualifier de " pédagogique ". L'idée de formation brouille également les distinctions conceptuelles et obscurcit le discours pédagogique en s'insinuant quelque part entre " instruction ", " éducation ", " enseignement ", " apprentissage ". Savons-nous bien désormais ce que (...) nous sommes : enseignants, éducateurs, formateurs ou rien de tout cela, ou encore tout cela à la fois? On tente ici de clarifier le problème et d'esquisser quelques réponses : - peut-on isoler dans le champ des pratiques éducatives (école, formation professionnelle, formation psycho-sociologique...) les caractéristiques d'une problématique de formation? Comment développer alors cette problématique sur " le triangle de la formation "? ; - Quelles ressources la réflexion peut-elle tirer de la tradition philosophique qui, d'Aristote à Heidegger, en passant par Rousseau ou Bachelard, pense la forme et la formation? ; - Comment la philosophie contemporaine de l'éducation questionne-t-elle cet héritage et interpelle-t-elle nos pratiques de formation? Poser ces questions, c'est chercher le sens de ce que nous faisons, ici et maintenant, en formation. (shrink)