↓ Skip to main content

The Being of Leadership

Overview of attention for article published in Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine, February 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
148 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
connotea
1 Connotea
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Being of Leadership
Published in
Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine, February 2011
DOI 10.1186/1747-5341-6-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wiley W Souba

Abstract

The ethical foundation of the medical profession, which values service above reward and holds the doctor-patient relationship as inviolable, continues to be challenged by the commercialization of health care. This article contends that a realigned leadership framework - one that distinguishes being a leader as the ontological basis for what leaders know, have, and do - is central to safeguarding medicine's ethical foundation. Four ontological pillars of leadership - awareness, commitment, integrity, and authenticity - are proposed as fundamental elements that anchor this foundation and the basic tenets of professionalism. Ontological leadership is shaped by and accessible through language; what health care leaders create in language "uses" them by providing a point of view (a context) within and from which they orient their conversations, decisions, and conduct such that they are ethically aligned and grounded. This contextual leadership framework exposes for us the limitations imposed by our mental maps, creating new opportunity sets for being and action (previously unavailable) that embody medicine's charter on professionalism. While this leadership methodology contrasts with the conventional results-oriented model where leading is generally equated with a successful clinical practice, a distinguished research program, or a promotion, it is not a replacement for it; indeed, results are essential for performance. Rather, being and action are interrelated and their correlated nature equips leaders with a framework for tackling health care's most complex problems in a manner that preserves medicine's venerable ethical heritage.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 148 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Malaysia 1 <1%
Turkey 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 144 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 28 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 14%
Student > Postgraduate 16 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 7%
Researcher 9 6%
Other 30 20%
Unknown 34 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 19%
Social Sciences 27 18%
Business, Management and Accounting 25 17%
Philosophy 5 3%
Arts and Humanities 5 3%
Other 22 15%
Unknown 36 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 July 2018.
All research outputs
#8,533,995
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine
#161
of 234 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,533
of 117,700 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine
#6
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 234 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.1. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 117,700 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.