4.5 Article

Leadership Styles of Nursing Home Administrators and Their Association With Staff Turnover

Journal

GERONTOLOGIST
Volume 49, Issue 2, Pages 166-174

Publisher

GERONTOLOGICAL SOC AMER
DOI: 10.1093/geront/gnp021

Keywords

Management style; Consensus management; Organizational characteristics; Local economic characteristics; Staffing

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to examine the associations between nursing home administrator (NHA) leadership style and staff turnover. Design and Methods: We analyzed primary data from a survey of 2,900 NHAs conducted in 2005. The Online Survey Certification and Reporting database and the Area Resource File were utilized to extract organizational and local economic characteristics of the facilities. A general linear model (GLM) was used to estimate the effects of NHA leadership style, organizational characteristics, and local economic characteristics on nursing home staff turnover for registered nurses (RNs), licensed practical nurses (LPNs), and nurse's aides (NAs). Results: The complete model estimates indicate that NHAs who are consensus managers (leaders who solicit, and act upon, the most input from their staff) are associated with the lowest turnover levels, 7% for RNs, 3% for LPNs, and 44% for NAs. Shareholder managers (leaders who neither solicit input when making a decision nor provide their staffs with relevant information for making decisions on their own) are associated with the highest turnover levels, 32% for RNs, 56% for LPNs, and 168% for NAs. Implications: The findings indicate that NHA leadership style is associated with staff turnover, even when the effects of organizational and local economic conditions are held constant. Because leadership strategies are amenable to change, the findings of this study may be used to develop policies for lowering staff turnover.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available