Polarity Based Model for Guiding Medical School Strategy During Crisis – A Cross Sectional Qualitative Study

Figures & data

Figure 1 Flow chart showing study design and steps of implementation.

Table 1 The Distribution of the Participants Among 22 Countries

Country	Number of Participants
Egypt	69
UAE	40
Saudi Arabia	20
Pakistan	20
Libya	6
USA	6
Canada	6
Bahrain	6
Sudan	5
Iraq	5
UK	5
Afghanistan	4
Qatar	2
Others	20

Figure 2 Mapping of the tension; University reputation.

Notes: Figure adapted from: Polarity Map^® (https://www.assessmypolarities.com/).⁴⁸ Polarity Map^® is a registered trademark of Barry Johnson & Polarity Partnerships, LLC. Commercial use encouraged with permission.

Figure 3 Mapping of the tension; Teams.

Notes: Figure adapted from: Polarity Map^® (https://www.assessmypolarities.com/).⁴⁸ Polarity Map^® is a registered trademark of Barry Johnson & Polarity Partnerships, LLC. Commercial use encouraged with permission.

Figure 4 Mapping of the tension; University mission.

Notes: Figure adapted from: Polarity Map^® (https://www.assessmypolarities.com/).⁴⁸ Polarity Map^® is a registered trademark of Barry Johnson & Polarity Partnerships, LLC. Commercial use encouraged with permission.

Figure 5 Mapping of the tension; Individuals.

Notes: Figure adapted from: Polarity Map^® (https://www.assessmypolarities.com/).⁴⁸ Polarity Map^® is a registered trademark of Barry Johnson & Polarity Partnerships, LLC. Commercial use encouraged with permission.

Figure 6 Overall mapping of the four tension areas.

Notes: Figure adapted from: Polarity Map^® (https://www.assessmypolarities.com/).⁴⁸ Polarity Map^® is a registered trademark of Barry Johnson & Polarity Partnerships, LLC. Commercial use encouraged with permission.

Table 2 Action Steps Required to Maintain Upside of Each Pole in the Tested Polarity (Tactical and Strategic Response)

Theme	Action Steps Needed to Maintain the Upside of Tactical (Crisis) Response	Action Steps Needed to Maintain the Upside of Strategic Response
Reputation	1. Assign a budget for the deployment of a crisis management plan 2. Develop and manage a communication plan with stakeholders to engage and orient them of how the tactical decisions feed into the strategy. 3. Design long term plans to face similar crises in future 4. Pursue government support for innovative solutions 5. Design and develop Human resource training with CPD/CME points 6. Monitor guidelines/standards during crisis	1. Modify the recruitment policy of faculty and administration. 2. Develop and manage a communication plan with stakeholders. 3. Conduct international events 4. Offer adaptable new services to help in crisis management and improve the long-term plan 5. Document the activities and achievements 6. Design an alumni communication plan 7. Prepare graduates for the licensing exam training 8. Postgraduate training plans to bridge the gap to community and market needs 9. Get feedback (annual survey) from the stakeholders (employers)
Teams	1. Audit on team functions 2. Capacity building of teams (eg, etiquette, soft skills.) 3. Communicate experience and unique solutions to the internal stakeholders regularly 4. Revise team structure (homogenous and complementary) 5. Address grievance through a plan for faculty and student support 6. Publish unique experiences 7. Encourage innovative solutions and projects.	1. Communicate a clear and detailed plan for all the people involved. 2. Audit on team functions 3. Offer appreciation and incentives 4. Facilitate the communication through development of a suitable platform. 5. Use of interactive and integrative activities (eg, team building activities etc.).
Mission	1. Develop multidisciplinary teams 2. Develop and implement a communication strategy 3. Testing and adapting infrastructure and tools (eg, internet, proctoring system, LMS etc.) 4. Reform of bylaws to accommodate innovative teaching and assessment methods 5. HR development of IT department 6. Development of new jobs based on requirements /responsibilities	1. Incorporate the change to the system. 2. Self-audit (evaluation of process and outcomes) 3. Revisit mission regularly for modifications 4. Creating a risk management unit 5. Empower the quality assurance unit 6. Communicate with alumni for the aim of institutional evaluation 7. establish specialized units according to current needs 8. Investing in infrastructure to adapt to emerging needs
Individuals	1. Renovation and update of existing platforms 2. Revise and update infrastructure to suit the requirements of the crisis 3. Establish updated human resource development plans 4. Continuous monitoring of educational practices (teaching and assessment) 5. Establish inter-departmental agreements and partnerships for improved communication and execution of innovative education activities	1. Student and faculty orientation about changes, decisions 2. Student training to adapt to changes 3. Faculty development to adapt to changes 4. Involve students and faculty in strategy implementation 5. Revisit the curriculum regularly considering the lessons learned (new teaching and assessment methods) 6. To ensure graduate competency, institutionalize new alternatives for student competency training 7. Offer psychological support for the students and faculty. 8. Monitor student attendance, engagement, and motivation

Table 3 Warning Signs Indicating Institutions are Getting the Downside of Each Pole in the Tested Polarity (Tactical and Strategic Response)

Theme	Warning Signs Indicating Institutions are Getting the Downside of Tactical (Crisis) Response	Warning Signs Indicating Institutions are Getting the Downside of Strategic Response
Reputation	1. Arrest in collaboration projects that started before the crisis 2. Decreased numbers of citations of publications 3. Decrease in the numbers of publications within the research plan	1. Number of international students applying for the program reduces by 10% 2. Increase the dissatisfaction of enrolled students when asked about the innovative approach of the university 3. Decrease the number of faculty attending strategic management meetings 4. Verbal complaints from people in the local community identifying the school as outdated or detached
Teams	1. Decrease the number of faculty attending meetings* 2. Increase the number of complaints from team members* 3. Delayed submission of assigned teaching tasks*	1. Increase burnout score by 20%* 2. Increase in the number of sick leave* 3. Delay in accomplishment of team deliverables* 4. Decrease in numbers of team meetings by 30%* 5. Stress in department meetings and quarrels arising over minor issues* 6. Increase conflict numbers and frequency. *
Mission	1. Increase the resource consumption by 30%* 2. Inferior quality Reports/conflicting reports* 3. Delay in achieving strategic deliverables* 4. Decrease satisfaction of community members in community service offered by the university* 5. Different conflicting decisions, opinions, or instructions*	1. Increase the resource consumption by 20%* 2. Hearing negative feedback comments from stakeholders: reference to the detachment of the institution from reality 3. Decrease in the number of stakeholders attending conventional meetings* 4. Less students know about the vision* 5. Low academic achievement in module exams 6. Decrease satisfaction among stakeholders with our mission
Individuals	1. Decrease in student engagement by 20% 2. Failure to achieve more than 10% of learning outcomes as compared to the previous academic year 3. Decrease of student academic performance in comparison to the last year by 30% 4. Decrease student attendance by 25% in comparison to before the crisis 5. Decrease percentage of participation of students in extracurricular activities by 30% 6. Increase in numbers of student and faculty medical consultations by 20% 7. More international students miss examinations 8. Decrease student engagement and motivation by 30% 9. Negative verbal Student’s feedback 10. Increase in numbers of student and faculty medical consultations by 20% 11. Decrease staff participation in crisis management activities by 20% 12. Negative faculty feedback 13. Decrease in faculty satisfaction 14. Decrease the number of publications	1. Decrease of student academic performance in comparison to the last year by 20% 2. Decrease of student and faculty satisfaction (school, environment ….) in comparison to the last year by 30% 3. Decrease level of motivation score by 30% 4. Student feedback shows more entries of complaint in the open-ended section 5. Decrease student attendance by 25% in comparison to before the crisis 6. Decrease percentage of participation of students in extracurricular activities by 30% 7. Increase in numbers of student and faculty medical consultations by 20% 8. More international students miss examinations 9. Decrease student engagement and motivation by 30%

Note: *Priority warning signs as per the assessment results.

Table 4 Comparison Between Assessment Scores of Private Universities and Public Universities

Map/ Area	Assessment Item	Public University Score With Degree of Risk (Risky)	Private University Score With Degree of Risk (Good)	Collective Cohort Score and Degree of Risk
Individuals	Students are trained better on emergent (new) skills and Teaching becomes more targeted and less redundant	60	70	66 (Good)
Reputation	Our faculty are satisfied with the education process that incorporates their emergent needs	50	79	65 (Good)
Individuals	Faculty are trained better on emergent (new) skills and Teaching becomes more targeted and less redundant	58	76	64 (Good)
Reputation	We no longer attract sufficient numbers of international students due to failure to find solutions to problems like travel etc.	60	75	63 (Good)
Teams	Our teams demonstrate arrested productivity and loss of direction due to coexistence of parallel teams without clear job descriptions	59	75	63 (Good)
Individuals	We experience lack of progress in areas like conventional faculty development	59	77	63 (Good)
Teams	We increase productivity by saving team resources like time	55	65	62 (Good)
Individuals	Our faculty appreciate how our strategic orientation contributes to the relaxed learning environment	56	73	61 (Good)
Individuals	Our students appreciate how our strategic orientation contributes to the relaxed learning environment	54	74	61 (Good)
Reputation	Our international partnerships and relations thrive built upon new avenues of joint problem solving and increase confidence of the community in the capacity of the university to adapt	55	70	60 (Good)
Mission	Lack of clarity makes results in chaotic ad Hoc decisions and adopting untested educational choices	55	70	57 (Risky)
Teams	Our teams demonstrate fatigue and exhaustion due to depletion of time and effort in non-achieving initiatives	52	66	56 (Risky)
Teams	Our teams struggle to complete assigned tasks due to depletion of team resources	50	67	55 (Risky)

Barry Johnson & Polarity Partnerships, LLC. Polarity Map®; 2021. Available from: https://www.assessmypolarities.com/. Accessed November 24, 2021.

 Google Scholar