Abstract
PURPOSE: To analyze self and 360-evaluation scores of the professionalism intelligence model domains within an academic Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Department. METHODS: A leadership course was introduced within the Department of Head and Neck Surgery & Communication Sciences at Duke University Medical Center. A 360 evaluation assessing domains of the professional intelligence model was recorded for all participants. Participant demographics included gender (male vs female), generation group (generation Y vs older generations) and physician status of participants (physician vs non-physician). Differences in mean self-scores were modeled using linear regression. When analyzing the evaluator scores, gaps were defined as self-score minus evaluator-score for each member of a participant's evaluator groupings (supervisor, peer, and direct report). Two types of linear mixed models were fit with a random intercept to account for the correlated gaps in the same participant. RESULTS: Scores of 50 participants and 394 evaluators were analyzed. The average age was 40.6 (standard deviation 9.3) years, and 50% (N=25) of participants were females. Physicians accounted for 36% (N=18) of the cohort, and 61% (N=11) of physicians were residents. Physicians scored themselves lower than non-physicians when assessing leadership intelligence, interpersonal relations, empathy, and focused thinking. On average, participants under-rated themselves compared to their evaluators with direct reports giving higher scores than managers and peers. When compared with generation Y, older generations tended to rate themselves lower than their peers and managers in cognitive intelligence. No significant association was observed between gender and any scores. CONCLUSION: Participants rate themselves lower on average than their evaluators. This work is important in understanding how perceived leadership qualities are assessed and developed within an academic surgical department. Finally, the results presented could serve as a model to address the gap between self- and other-perceptions of defined leadership virtues in future leadership development activities.