Purpose The purpose of this paper is to provide a systematic review of the current state of physician leadership. Theory of expert leadership (TEL) was applied to explore the effects of physician inherent knowledge, industry experience and leadership capabilities on leader behaviors and outcomes. Design/methodology/approach This review (August 2011–February 2022) applied the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis strategy. Our search began with 3,537 studies and a final sample of 12 articles. Findings The findings offer a number of studies that note the relationship between physician leadership and the three dimensions of TEL. How influential these are on leadership behaviors and health-related outcomes varies. We also found a number of studies that described general physician leadership behaviors that were not directly linked to factors of TEL, as well as two additional themes: leader identity and trust. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first systematic review that has applied a highly cited theory (i.e. TEL) to the data and the first that has focused solely on a U.S. population. These findings offer healthcare organizations insight into the potential strengths and challenges of physician leadership.

BackgroundThe healthcare industry is currently facing unprecedented challenges, and the need for effective leadership has never been higher. One way organisations might address the need for healthcare leadership is through tailored leadership development programmes, which are designed to maximise impact. This research sought to examine potential differences between physician and administrative leaders’ unique needs and to use this information to inform the design of future leadership development programmes.MethodsSurvey data from a sample of international leaders who participated in cohort-based leadership development programmes at the Mandel Global Leadership and Learning Institute at Cleveland Clinic were examined to explore potential differences between physician and administrative leaders in order to cultivate future training outcomes.ResultsFindings demonstrate that there are significant differences in personality, motivation to lead and leadership self-efficacy between the two populations at Cleveland Clinic.ConclusionsThese results indicate how understanding specific traits, motivations and developmental needs of the target audience may guide the development of more effective leadership development programming. Future directions for addressing leadership development in the healthcare industry are also discussed.

No abstract

No abstract