Catalyzing “Cohortness” in Leadership Programs Pivoting to a Virtual Environment 

Figures & data

Table 1. Comparison of Structural elements of CS and FSLI programs.

Clinical Scholars Specific Structural Elements	FSLI Specific Structural Elements
Seven sessions over three years	Three sessions over two years
Funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation	Self-funded (seed funding from WKKF in 2004)
Team-based	Individual-based
Implementation Science Leadership Project focused on a Community-Based Wicked Problem to Advance Health Equity	Implementation Science Leadership Project focused on a relevant organizational or professional issue
Mid-to-Senior Career Health Care Providers	Mid-to-Senior Career Academic, Industry and Government Leaders
Teams are funded to support participation and project-based work	Individual home institutions support Fellow’s program tuition and project-based work
Shared Structural Elements
Synchronous, interactive, intensive training Ongoing executive coaching Online Just-In-Time Leadership Library for Self-Directed Training (FastTrack 2022) Mentoring Distance-based platform hosting regular webinars  An incorporated battery of valid and reliable psychological assessment tools Peer coaching practice sessions

Table 2. Methods to foster cohortness among virtually convened members of CS Cohort 5 and FSLI Cohort 16.

	CS Cohort  5	FSLI Cohort 16
Pre-convening activities
Virtual orientation	✓	✓
Virtual “Get to Know the Team” sessions with staff	✓	–
Virtual technology training session	✓	✓
Virtual “Get to Know the Team Coach” Session	✓	N/A
Team Wicked Problem Impact Project Videos	✓	N/A
Online discussion board (CS) or online Flipgrid (FSLI) “Get to know the Cohort” strategies	✓	✓
Convening non-educational activities
Virtual fireside chats/Virtual “hang out” times	✓	✓
“Big Buddy” Networking Session across cohorts	✓	N/A
Small group icebreakers	✓	✓
Non-curricular “hang out” times	✓	✓
Structured Team Time during retreat	✓	N/A
Educational activity format
Frequent small-group exercises in educational sessions	✓	✓
Intentional “mixing” of break-out sessions so that participants worked with each cohort member at least once during the retreat	✓	✓
Within session brief check-in small group activities	✓	✓
Virtual collaborative documents (Google Docs)	✓	–
Virtual collaborative exercise infinite space (Miro)	✓	✓
Materials and resources
Retreat Materials (shipped to each participant), [CS: iPad, books, handouts, and interactive support materials; FSLI: notebooks, handouts, books, support materials]	✓	✓
Program identity materials tied to session themes and context	✓	✓

Table 3. Factors that affected connection building in the virtual environment.

Theme	frequency	Exemplar quote (n = 49)
Small breakout groups throughout retreat	17	In a large group (of 25+) sometimes it is hard to share within the group – you don’t know who is going to start talking when, etc. The small group breakouts and their frequency is why I feel as connected as I do with the other fellows. It wasn’t until a small group breakout that [Fellow] and I realized that we were in [another program] together a few years ago. Those break outs were invaluable!! (FSLI)
Lack of organic and informal social interactions	12	Hard to organically hang out over dinner, drinks and other spaces that usually help to build connection even after the meeting is over for the day. (CS)
Challenges with technology/navigating the virtual meeting platform	8	Sometimes the technology (Miro) got in the way in that people were spending energy trying to use the technology instead of communicating together. (CS)
Comfort in virtual environments/positive response to virtual setting	7	I think being virtual makes introverts more comfortable (they are at home) so they may be willing to share more. That is positive! (CS)
Insufficient time in sessions	7	I think time. It is hard in a virtual session to feel like you have enough time to settle into conversations. (CS)
Specific session-based facilitated activities	5	It is great seeing everyone, discussing assessment/types is very helpful and fun to “compare and contrast.” (CS)
General issues inherent to virtual meetings	5	At the end of each day, I am exhausted from looking at a computer. I think in person is so much better, but I understand the circumstances. (FSLI)
Skilled facilitators	2	Virtual skills of facilitators. (FSLI)

Figure 1. Expected vs Experienced Connectedness among FSLI and CS participants post-retreat (n = 53).

Figure 2. CS and FSLI participants’ combined perceptions of connections formed.

Table 4. Ways Fellows intend to stay connected with each other after attending the virtual retreat.

Method of connection	CS Cohort 5 (n = 31)	FSLI Cohort 16 (n = 20)
Share contacts	20	8
I do not have plans at this point	10	8
Gather information together	10	7
Be in a peer coaching relationship	7	3
Partner on new projects	4	3
Be in a mentoring relationship	2	5
Other
Connect by e-mail and potentially phone	-	1
Refer relevant contacts and connections	1	-
Connect through the learning management      system platform	1	-
Weekly in-person meetings	1	-

*Participants were able to report multiple ways they planned to connect with other cohort members. 

Table 5. Recommendations and feedback to improve connections during future virtual retreats.

Theme	Frequency	Exemplar quote (n = 36)
More time in breakout/small groups (within teams and across cohort)	13	I think we might benefit from more small group time – even if it extended the total conference time. (CS)
Additional facilitated group activities/positive feedback on existing activities	8	Active facilitated interactions in break out rooms are important. A factoid scavenger hunt where you chat with groups of folks to “find” the person with a given trait of truism is an example. (CS)
No suggestions/general positive feedback	8	I think you all did a great job. No specific suggestions at this time. (CS)
Additional opportunities for less structured, informal social time outside of sessions	5	Just a chance to talk about us, and where we are in addition to completing the tasks in small groups. I also think that one 12–12:30 slot where we could just ask questions and listening was a great way to connect. Maybe more of those less formal times to just get to talk would be helpful at building connections. (FSLI)
Mix up breakout groups to maximize cross-cohort interaction	4	I would also suggest more concentration on mixing the small groups so that we are continuing to connect with members of the cohort we may not have had the opportunity to connect with so far. I and others found ourselves in small groups with the same people most of the time. (FSLI)
Create opportunities for one-on-one interactions	2	Use selected blocks of time for 2 individuals (per group) to interact for a few minutes at a time and rotate using some predetermined formula. I suggest 2 per group as this will ensure deeper levels of conversations. Cohort 16 is nicely culturally and racially diverse so create rotating groups of two individuals from varying backgrounds to converse for small blocks of time … May use a predetermined formula to do selections and may even determine focal topics for discussions in some cases. (FSLI)

FastTrack Leadership, Inc. http://wetrainleaders.com/, Chapel Hill, NC. Accessed March 29, 2022.

 Google Scholar