Leadership has become an increasingly important issue in medicine as leadership skills, job satisfaction and patient outcomes correlate positively. Various leadership training and physician psychological well-being programmes have been developed internationally, yet no standard is established in primary care. The IMPROVEjob leadership program was developed to improve job satisfaction among German general practitioners and practice personnel. Its acceptance and effectiveness were evaluated. The IMPROVEjob intervention is a participatory, interdisciplinary and multimodal leadership intervention that targets leadership, workflows and communication in general practices using three elements: (1) two leadership workshops with skills training; (2) a toolbox with printed and online material, and (3) a 9-month implementation phase supported by facilitators. A cluster-randomised trial with a waiting-list control evaluated the effectiveness on the primary outcome job satisfaction assessed by the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire (range 0–100). A mixed-methods approach with questionnaires and participant interviews evaluated the acceptance of the intervention and factors influencing the implementation of intervention content. Statistical analyses respected the clustered data structure. The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated intervention adjustments: online instead of on-site workshops, online material instead of facilitator practice visits. Overall, 52 of 60 practices completed the study, with altogether 70 practice leaders, 16 employed physicians, and 182 practice assistants. According to an intention-to-treat analysis, job satisfaction decreased between baseline and follow-up (not significantly) in the total study population and in both study arms, while the subgroup of practice leaders showed a non-significant increase. A mixed multilevel regression model showed no effect of the intervention on job satisfaction (b = − 0.36, p > 0.86), which was influenced significantly by a greater sense of community (b = 0.14, p < 0.05). The acceptance of the IMPROVEjob workshops was high, especially among practice leaders compared to assistants (1 = best to 5 = worst): skills training 1.78 vs. 2.46, discussions within the practice team 1.87 vs. 2.28, group discussions 1.96 vs. 2.21. The process evaluation revealed that the COVID-19 pandemic complicated change processes and delayed the implementation of intervention content in practice routines. The workshops within the participatory IMPROVEjob intervention were rated very positively but the multimodal intervention did not improve job satisfaction 9 months into the pandemic. Qualitative data showed an impairment of implementation processes by the unforeseeable COVID pandemic.Trial registration Registration number: DRKS00012677 on 16/10/2019.

ObjectivesStrong primary care leaders are needed to assure high quality services for patient populations. This study analysed general practitioners’ (GP) leadership skills comparing practice-level self and staff assessments based on the full range of leadership model and the leader-member exchange (LMX).SettingThe questionnaire survey was conducted among German general practice leaders and their staff participating in the IMPROVEjobtrial.ParticipantsThe study population comprised 60 German general practices with 366 participants: 84 GP practice leaders and 282 employees (28 physicians and 254 practice assistants).Primary and secondary outcome measuresLeadership skills of the practice leaders were measured using the Integrative Leadership Questionnaire (German Fragebogen für integrative Führung) and the LMX-7 questionnaire. Leaders rated themselves and practice staff rated their leaders. The data was analysed by paired mean comparisons on the practice level.ResultsFor most leadership dimensions, practice leaders rated themselves higher than their employees rated them. Differences were found for transformational leadership (p<0.001, d=0.41), especially for the dimensions ‘innovation’ (p<0.001, d=0.69) and ‘individuality focus’ (p<0.001, d=0.50). For transactional leadership, the dimension ‘goal setting’ differed significantly (p<0.01, d=0.30) but not the other dimensions. Scores for negative leadership were low and showed no differences between leaders and employees. Interestingly, employed physicians’ rated their practice leaders higher on the two transformational (‘performance development’, ‘providing a vision’) and all transactional dimensions. The LMX-7 scale showed high quality relationships between leaders and employees.ConclusionsThis 180° analysis of GPs’ leadership skills with self and employee ratings indicated good relationships. There is a potential to improve leadership regarding goal-setting, innovation and focusing on individual team members. These results allow for the development of targeted interventions.Trial registration numberGerman Clinical Trials Register, DRKS00012677. Registered 16 October 2019.