KAROLINSKA INSTITUTET EVALUATION
Medical Management Centre
5 April 2006
EUROPEAN OPHTHALMOLOGY LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME
Did the programme meet your needs and expectations?
If yes, tell how. If no, tell why.
” Yes, innovative approach.
” Yes, lots of diverse topics. Extremely well organised.
” Yes, gave me the opportunity to approach some problems with different style.
” Yes, it gave an insight into problems usually not addressed in daily routine-work.
” Yes, everything was very useful for me. Discussions were excellent.
” Yes, I have got good explanations about the topics which were covered by the “home-reading”.
” In 70 % YES, it’s really hard to organise a “leadership programme”. I would rather call it a management programme.
” A detailed and professional overview of leadership and its impact in our activity.
” Yes, I came with an open mind and will take home several key points and issues to think about.
” Yes, both specific and broad.
What did you value most in the programme?
” The efficiency and structure of the talks
” Excellent moderated discussions
” Introduction to ??? law. Social programme.
” The evaluation/analysis of the strategies to lead
” The opportunity to interact
” The discussions (with and) to the politicians.
” To have the insight of decision making.
” Introduction sections, excellently ???
” The active interaction between us all.
” Concrete topics, high quality discussions, professionally guided.
What did disappoint you?
” Some of the lectures were very theoretical
” Too much “leadership” talks. Lots of overlap.
” The weather.
” Sincerely nothing.
” The visit to the Diabetes Association.
” First talk by Prof. Busse too long.
Were you satisfied with the balance between lectures and interactive sessions?
” Yes, I think that was kindly balanced.
” I think at this stage it was enough. (The participants did not know well each other).
What would you have preferred done differently?
” More interaction between the speakers and our group
” (Even) more social programme
” Access to the room.
” The programme should be less packed, perhaps.
” More open discussions.
Did you find the pre-reading useful?
” No. Extremely detailed.
” It is useful.
” Yes, many thanks for that.
” Not all suggested papers.
” Of limited use.
What are your views on the prior information of the module and module arrangements?
” Very informative.
” Very good.
” Good, sufficient
” Very good.
” Good introduction. Helped a lot to understand a little bit different topic and language than what we use in professional communication.
” It was perfect.
” I didn’t have a lot of prior information but I was more than satisfied with the ???
” Information should be more detailed.
Could you rate the usefulness of the different parts of the programme (please tick):
|1=not useful||2=some-what useful||3=useful||4=highly|
|Busse: EU health legislation and policy||1||5||7|
|Ovretveit, Patient empowerment and consumerism||2||6||5|
|Gregor, Challenges of leadership||3||4||6|
|Hawlina, Future leaders||2||7||4|
|Prause, The professor as leader||1||4||7|
|Van Rij, Running a department||2||4||6|
|Brommels, Summary of the day||1||1||11|
|Brommels, Introduction to advocacy||1||12|
|Visit to Diabetes Association||3||8||2|
|Exercise and discussion with politicians||1||1||12|
|Philipson, Leadership in the private sector||6||4||3|
|Brennan, How to influence decision makers||2||6||5|
|Bermudez Svankvist, Management by love||5||2||2|
|Visit to SBU||2||7||4|
|Brommels, Implementing guidelines||1||4||8|
|Nilsson Bågenholm, Physician leadership||7||3|