Is leadership turnover healthy or hazardous?
The factors that compel administrators to move on are many and complex. Bad survey outcomes may be a catalyst for such a movement but I believe the reasons are more intricate and demand more research. Investment in a leader is necessary for organizations to face the challenges of the future with confidence. Perhaps the length of tenure will be less important than what the leader can achieve during his or her tenure. Finally, it is important to note that leadership, as Gilmour (1988) points out, "is not an exclusive property at the top of the organization; it is critically necessary at all levels." The leader acts as a sort of boundary rider mediating, translating and articulating the goals and aspirations of the organizations. Gilmour sees leaders "as shock absorbers mediating between the wider environment and the organization, buffeting and transforming external pressures into workable challenges for the internal divisions of the organization." It becomes a matter of how long leaders can cope with the buffeting and still experience satisfaction that they are making a difference.
Johns
A
A
D001315:Australia; D006270:Health Facility Administrators / Q000600:supply & distribution*; D006801:Humans; D007588:Job Satisfaction; D007857:Leadership; D009735:Nursing Homes / Q000458:organization & administration / Q000592:standards; D010563:Personnel Turnover; D011785:Quality Assurance, Health Care; D000078329:Workforce