Not Everyone Can be a Chief

Abstract

Introduction:

In 2014, the residency program adopted a new chief resident model. Multiple other programs had adopted a similar style of having all final-year residents have a “chief” role. Chief residents are meant to be leaders in the residency, have a direct influence on the program, and serve as liaisons with other department chiefs.

Method:

Prior to 2014, the program had three chief residents a year: one Admin, one Academic, and one Recruitment. They were chosen using a vote amongst residents/faculty, with the ultimate decision made by the residency leadership. Many other residents were interested, and often qualified, but were ultimately not chosen. In 2014, the all-chief model was adopted. Each PGY-3 would have a responsibility. The goal was to give each a leadership opportunity, and a tangible product as they transition to fellowships or new jobs. The residents were allowed to pick their position, with some influence by residency leadership. Residents were encouraged to create new roles which aligned with their personal interests or career goals. Examples included Medical Director Chief, U/S chief, PEM chief and Wellness Chief.

Results:

Some residents thrived when given responsibility, while others did not. Some could not manage more responsibility: there was a clear disparity in the effort. At the start of this, all residents’ total shifts/month decreased equally. This created some controversy when the workload was not equal. The alteration of details, requirements, and expectations occurred every year in an attempt to correct the failures.

Conclusion:

Ultimately, the all-chief model was a failure. The program reverted to a traditional chief model, allowing only those the residency leadership felt could manage chief responsibilities to have a role. Those not doing a chief role were given additional shifts and those with less added work were given only a partial shift reduction.