Bowler, Carrie

Abstract Coaching is considered the next generation of professional development in academic medicine, building on the historically important roles of advisor, mentor, and sponsor. A growing number of organizations are exploring or currently using coaching to support their employees and/or learners. Positive impressions of coaching have contributed to its ubiquitous use. However, to avoid confusion about the aim, approach, and outcomes of coaching, a thorough stakeholder analysis, an intentional organizational design, and a sustainable execution plan are necessary. Faculty and workforce coaching programs are distinct from learner coaching. Workplace coaching has pivoted from a disciplinary, problem-based reaction to a proactive investment in top performers. Coaching has also broadened beyond the C-suite, as a meaningful investment across all workforce layers. A coaching relationship helps high-achieving faculty elevate or sustain performance by having a thinking partner to reflect on situations, values, or vision; analyze and build awareness of needs or gaps; investigate impact factors of actions or inactions; strategize goals, priorities, and timelines; and evaluate decisions and options. Offering coaching as part of contemporary benefits packages signals career-long organizational interest in supporting talent. Coaching for faculty is a versatile and personalized approach to professional development and can be achieved through individualized, group, online, and in-person interactions. Key considerations for planning, launching, redesigning or evaluating a faculty coaching program are outlined, including expected faculty consumers, stakeholder concerns, access, benefits, goals, and outcomes of coaching within an academic medicine environment.

AbstractOver the past several decades, molecular genetic testing volumes have grown and testing has expanded from single‐gene assays to multigene panels, exome sequencing, and genome sequencing. The number of molecular genetic variants that require manual interpretation has grown simultaneously, resulting in an increased demand for education on molecular variant evaluation (MVE). To meet this growing need, a team of genetic counselors and educational experts undertook a quality improvement (QI) initiative with the objectives of assessing, standardizing, and scaling access to MVE education, without increasing instructor time to deliver the education. Using the Six Sigma define–measure–analyze–improve–control (DMAIC) framework, a flipped learning course with a series of standardized online modules was developed to deliver MVE education in an enduring and accessible format for a diverse group of learners. Outcome measures included the number of online modules developed, the number of individual learners and unique learner groups accessing MVE education, and direct instruction time required to deliver MVE education. Countermeasures to ensure maintenance of educational quality included post‐course learner satisfaction scores and performance on competency assessments. Both the total number of learners and the number of unique learner groups accessing MVE education increased, while instructor time required to deliver content per learner decreased. Learner satisfaction scores remained constant and performance on competency assessments improved. The QI initiative successfully scaled MVE education to a diverse group of learners without decreasing learner outcomes or satisfaction. The flipped learning format provides a scalable and flexible educational model for instructors and learners in a rapidly changing environment that often includes remote work and education.