Developing Executives Leading in Public Health (DELPH) is a leadership development program that increases and strengthens participants’ visibility and exposure in public health systems, access to key networks, and leadership development opportunities.
Prioritize the mental health and well-being of public health workers who face stress and burnout due to their work; read about practical strategies for improving workplace wellness and the impact of declining workforce well-being on public health initiatives.
Get insight into the successes and challenges of integrating race/ethnicity data in public health and future directions in this field.
PHIG: A Transformative Infrastructure Grant for Health Equity and Inclusive Workforces ASTHO, Association of State and Territorial Health Officials, phig grant, infrastructure grant, public health, health equity, public health grant, inclusive workforce, public health infrastructure grant, health departments, public health funding, public health institutes, data systems, public health workforce, community engagement, federal grants, restrict spending, health disparities, community partnership, underserved populations, diversity equity inclusion, educational institutions, high risk and underserved, ethnic minority, rural communities, overall capacity, minority institutions Amber Williams, Lindsey Myers The Public Health Infrastructure Grant (PHIG) program provides flexible, non-categorical funding to help public health departments across the United States build their infrastructure and capacity to meet their unique needs and address barriers in health equity and workforce development. Following the COVID-19 pandemic, Congress made a historic investment in public health workforce and infrastructure, presenting a game-changing opportunity for public health transformation. In the fall of 2022, CDC rolled out a first of its kind, five-year grant program called the Public Health Infrastructure Grant (PHIG) to address critical governmental public health workforce and system improvement needs. This program is all about supporting health departments across our states, territories, and freely associated states to ensure every community has the people, services, and systems needed to promote and protect optimal health for all. Along with funding 107 health departments, CDC also partnered with three organizations: the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials, the National Network of Public Health Institutes, and the Public Health Accreditation Board to help agencies modernize data systems, recruit and retain a skilled public health workforce, and address longstanding public health infrastructure needs. Challenges in Public Health Funding and the Pivotal Introduction of PHIG The majority of public health department funding comes from topic-specific federal grants, which usually restrict spending to prescribed programmatic activities and do not allow agencies to build foundational capabilities—like improving hiring or procurement processes, communication, and community engagement. For example, while advancing health equity and addressing health disparities is often emphasized as a central goal of public health practice, many jurisdictions face barriers to fully incorporating health equity into their strategies. Additionally, the public health workforce often does not reflect the communities they serve, which can impact their ability to build community partnerships and fully respond to the needs of underserved populations. PHIG is different in that it provides flexible, non-categorical funding that health departments can use to build their infrastructure and capacity to meet their unique needs and address barriers. PHIG Impact: Advancing Health Equity and Promoting Inclusion in Public Health Agencies Many agencies are using their PHIG funding to boost efforts to tackle health disparities in their jurisdictions and promote diversity, equity, and inclusion within their agencies. Internally they are focusing on examining compensation, assessing equitable pay, developing leadership programs for staff of color, streamlining hiring processes, and assuring unbiased hiring practices. Some agencies are creating paid internships, hiring people with lived experience, and building new workforce pipelines through engagements with minority-serving educational institutions. Plus, they are training managers and staff to create more inclusive workplace environments and partner with and serve diverse communities better. Other approaches include: Taking lessons learned from other funded programs, such as the National Initiative to Address COVID-19 Health Disparities Among Populations at High-Risk and Underserved, Including Racial and Ethnic Minority Populations and Rural Communities grant, to focus and build on successes. Strengthening the overall capacity of the agency to address health equity, such as by incorporating health equity into agency-wide performance improvement offices and ensuring equity principles are embedded in health assessments and strategic plans. Improving partnerships with community organizations—looking at opportunities to simplify processes; support minority-owned institutions in competing for and managing federal funding; and hiring new staff dedicated to health equity, liaisons with special populations including tribes, and community health workers. This is a remarkable time for public health. Improving public health infrastructure and strengthening the workforce will lead to better health outcomes for all. These grants are critical, providing much-needed funding and flexibility to make real progress in promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion in the workforce and ensuring health equity in public health strategies. Author card spacing 2 Related Content-Blog - DELPH Magazine 3 OE22-2203 PHIG website yes
DELPH Reflections: A Journey Towards Creating a More Equitable and Just Democracy Fredrick Echols DELPH has helped public health professionals reflect on their purpose, cultivate compassionate leadership, understand system dynamics, and build a community of advocates to create a more equitable and just democracy. As an African-American male living in the United States, I have encountered numerous obstacles in life, particularly in my efforts to reform systems that fail to support marginalized and vulnerable populations. These systems have had devastating effects on myself and other individuals belonging to Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) communities as they restrict access to essential health and social services. As a Black physician and public health professional, I continue to encounter this stark reality that engenders a sense of hopelessness in communities across the United States. These systems obscure their true intentions and deceive individuals into believing that they operate in the best interest of marginalized populations while perpetuating inequitable and disparate health outcomes. In consideration of these personal and professional experiences, the Diverse Executives Leading in Public Health (DELPH) program has played a significant role in shaping my career and purpose: Fostering Critical Reflection: It provided me with a journey that encouraged me to think critically about my future and how I can leverage my platforms and relationships to help propel the public health ecosystem toward a system that embraces the humanity of all individuals and prioritizes uplifting and empowering the most vulnerable and marginalized populations. Important note: That said, the presence of silos, political posturing, and missed opportunities due to inefficient and ineffective operational practices resulting from insufficient fiscal investment continue to plague the public health ecosystem—limiting its ability to make strides toward a system that wholeheartedly supports the pursuit of health equity and social justice. Cultivating Compassionate Leadership: The program also provided access to experts and public health thought leaders who helped my colleagues and I understand the evolution of health and social service delivery in the United States (particularly for indigent populations), increase our capacity to embrace divergent thinking, and engage in constructive dialogue. The availability of such a space provided us with an opportunity to establish a secure and conducive environment, one that upheld the virtues of compassionate leadership and fostered effective relationship building. Our ability to engage with stakeholders, both like-minded and those with differing opinions, was characterized by a spirit of intentional listening that sought to comprehend their perspectives. Through this, we were able to create an atmosphere that supported open dialogue and nurtured mutual understanding. Understanding System Dynamics: The experience has enriched my comprehension of the intricacies that drive the amplification of inequality and the resulting health disparity gaps that are pervasive among communities and individuals across the nation. The knowledge thus obtained is of paramount importance to ensure my competency in identifying and avoiding perpetuating the issues that I aspire to address. This, in turn, will prevent any inadvertent harm to the communities I seek to uplift and empower. Building a Community of Advocates: Moreover, the program has enabled me to connect with individuals who are unwavering in their commitment to upholding justice. Despite our diverse backgrounds, we set aside cultural differences to work toward a common goal: the accessibility of quality healthcare and the delivery of justice for all humanity. The DELPH program's fundamental principles and culturally sensitive support structure have played an instrumental role in shaping my professional growth as a public health expert. As I chart the course for my future professional endeavors, I intend to leverage the lessons learned and the tools provided by DELPH to strengthen the public health ecosystem. My ultimate goal is to foster collaboration across various segments of society to create a more equitable, just democracy. The DELPH program has equipped me with invaluable knowledge and skills that will enable me to make meaningful contributions to society's betterment. For this, I express my profound gratitude to the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials, the Morehouse School of Medicine's Satcher Leadership Institute, and CDC for their unwavering commitment to advancing BIPOC leadership in public health. Their steadfast support for this program has enabled me and countless others to acquire the skills and knowledge necessary to effectively lead and drive the transformative change that public health requires. I sincerely appreciate their continued investment in this vital initiative, which has empowered many to become the change agents that public health needs. website yes
Building More Equitable Communities Through Public Health Law Dawn Hunter Every week, my husband and I place a grocery order. We shop at an employee-owned supermarket chain known for its workplace culture. Sometimes we order online and pick it up, sometimes we have it delivered, and sometimes we do the shopping ourselves. In any case, we often purchase our groceries without much thinking—if we order online, we are prompted to “buy it again” and even in person we tend to buy the same staples. Prices are higher online than in store. In addition, we live in a community where plastic bags are still an option, but we used to live in a community where plastic bags are banned. Why am I sharing all of this? Nearly every aspect of our weekly grocery trip is shaped by the law. Laws impact: Food placement, packaging, expiration dates, and prices. Employee wages and benefits. Store location, hours, and accessibility. Availability of rideshare drivers for delivery orders. Whether to choose paper or plastic. Law impacts the way we experience our everyday lives by establishing the framework in which we operate. The grocery store is just one example of how law can shape our decisions and, more importantly, our choices. Because it shapes the resources and opportunities available to us, law is an important determinant of health. Exploring the Landscape of Public Health Law What we think of as “law” can take many forms. It includes statutes, regulations, case law, organizational policy, and budgets, and how they are interpreted and enforced. The law can be a set of requirements or prohibitions, establishing norms and expectations for our behavior as individuals, organizations, and systems. The law can also be the processes and procedures associated with creating laws, making decisions, and interpreting existing laws. Public health law, specifically, is important as a field because it includes the laws that are designed to protect and promote the public’s health and that define the power of the government to act on our behalf. In fact, law is behind every public health success of the 20th century. A 1999 issue of the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report listed vaccinations, motor vehicle safety, safer workplaces, healthier moms and babies, and recognition of tobacco as a health hazard among those successes. These achievements would not be possible without the law, including: School vaccination laws. Helmet and seatbelt laws. Speed limits. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Food fortification. School lunch programs. The Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) program. Newborn screening. The Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement. Clean indoor air laws. At the same time, these laws have not benefited everyone equally. In fact, they have often operated as a tool of racism and other forms of structural discrimination. The lesson here is that the law can create the conditions that lead to differences in health outcomes, but it can also create the conditions for equity. The Civil Rights Movement and Advances in Health Equity One must look only to the civil rights movement to see the potential. As just one example, today’s robust network of Community Health Centers was born from the activism of the Black Panther Party, which established free health clinics in response to continuing discrimination in the health care system, as well as the work of H. Jack Geiger and Count D. Gibson Jr., who established the first community health centers in 1965. The success of these efforts led to funding for additional community health centers through President Lyndon B. Johnson’s Office of Economic Opportunity as part of his War on Poverty. In fact, key legislation enacted during the civil rights movement led to significant, even if insufficient, improvements in health outcomes for Black Americans. For example, there is evidence that women’s suffrage, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Voting Rights Act all led to improvements in premature mortality and infant mortality, among other benefits. The enactment of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act in 2010 and the resulting adoption of Medicaid expansion saw similar success. There is ample evidence of the Medicaid expansion impact on health outcomes and financial well-being, both at the individual and population level. Addressing the Training Gaps in Public Health Law for More Equitable Public Health Practice The fact that law shapes how we experience our lives on a day-to-day basis is perhaps the most important reason that public health professionals should understand the relationship between the law and health outcomes and how to use the law to achieve more equitable, thriving communities. However, knowledge of public health law continues to be one of the biggest training gaps in the public health workforce. The 2021 Public Health Workforce Interests and Needs Survey, conducted by the de Beaumont Foundation and ASTHO, found that strategic and systems thinking was one of the top training needs as well as an increased interest in policy engagement and topics related to justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion (visit the 2021 Dashboard). Another report in 2021, “Challenges and Opportunities for Strengthening the US Public Health Infrastructure: Findings From the Scan of the Literature” by the National Network of Public Health Institutes, found a need for increased awareness among the public health workforce of the legal basis for public health authority and identified both how to influence law and policy development and how to understand the effects of law and policy on health among the top training needs. These findings align with public health accreditation standards. Whether or not you work for an accredited health department, the Public Health Accreditation Board Standards and Measures serve as a guidepost for the practice of public health. There are two specific domains where this is relevant: domains 4 and 5, as detailed in Table 1. Padding Block - Medium(10) Table 1. Public Health Accreditation Board Guidance for Equity Domain Measure Examples Domain 4: Strengthen, support, and mobilize communities and partnerships to improve health. Measure 4.1.3 A: Engage with community members to address public health issues and promote health. Making the decision-making structure inclusive and transparent to empower community members or developing mechanisms for shared ownership in the process. Enhancing residents’ capacity to understand levers of power or influence in policy change. Domain 5: Create, champion, and implement policies, plans, and laws that impact health. Measure 5.1.2 A: Examine and contribute to improving policies and laws. Assessment of the impacts of the policy or law on equity. Input gathered from stakeholders or strategic partners. Padding Block - Large(2) Lessons Learned: Involving and Empowering Communities The inclusion of community members in assessment, decision-making, and capacity-building efforts to understand levers of power or influence reinforce key lessons learned in the past three years, spurred by COVID-19 and the racial justice movement of the summer of 2020: The first lesson is the need to recognize and rectify historical injustices. It is important that we understand the historical legal context behind current health inequities. We must know and name the problem to solve it. The second is the need to rectify current inequities by analyzing and assessing the ways in which our current system of laws is creating and reinforcing inequities. The third is the need to engage impacted people in identifying, designing, and implementing solutions. One of the lessons learned from the work of Geiger and Gibson was that there is a difference between what the health system thinks people need and what communities think they need. It seems we are still trying to learn this lesson today. Leveraging Law to Drive Equity and Make Public Health More Trustworthy Law is the only way to truly change the game for inequities. It can give a voice to historically marginalized people by creating pathways to ensure inclusion and representation in the political process. It can also change systems and institutions by changing the way they operate and the way that people within those systems operate. Additionally, it can serve as a tool to enforce conditions that will lead to more equitable outcomes and to hold people in positions of power accountable. We have often heard in the past few years about the need to rebuild trust in public health. I’d like to reframe that to think about how we make public health as a field more trustworthy. It starts by increasing our understanding of the authority of public health to promote the public’s health and to use that authority to create systems in which we all can thrive. article yes
DELPH scholars discuss the important role of Community Health Workers (CHWs) in the public health workforce, the need for support, recognition, and investment in their development, and the importance of sustainable funding for CHW programs across the United States.
Communication, Community, and Power-Sharing: A Conversation with DELPH Scholars Communication, Community, and Power-Sharing Learn how public health leaders are moving from a top-down approach to a collaborative model that builds and sustains trust with community partners. The current public health landscape can feel daunting, uncertain, and increasingly stressful for leaders to navigate. While public health professionals have a wealth of expertise, reliance on expertise isn’t enough; collaborative leadership points the path forward. Moving away from traditional top-down approaches, effective and innovative leaders are learning to share power, practice meaningful community engagement, and create environments where partners, community, and staff feel valued and heard. Three scholars from ASTHO’s Developing Executive Leaders in Public Health (DELPH) program discuss how they apply these principles to strengthen collaboration within public health and build more resilient communities. Meet the Scholars Working in public health is not individualistic; it requires working collectively to achieve a common goal: healthier communities. These three scholars are championing collaboration. Brandon Horvath, Assistant Program Manager of Preparedness at the Philadelphia Department of Health, believes in the power of collaboration to navigate periods of uncertainty and that moving away from top-down leadership allows space for new ideas to flourish. Ethan Greenblatt, Health Education Supervisor at the Saint Louis County Department of Public Health, focuses on building partnerships to combat misinformation, amplify accurate messaging, and support overlooked populations. Halana Kaleel, Public Health Community Engagement Specialist at Austin Public Health, centers her work on developing genuine engagement between partners before making decisions that impact the collective, emphasizing that participation and power-sharing build trust. “When city council, city management, and other departmental leadership attempt to implement programs, policies, and budgetary changes without doing engagement and collaboration with the impacted community first, they lose trust with the communities we are trying to serve.” — Halana Kaleel Brandon, you oversee emergency communications as part of your role with the Philadelphia Department of Public Health. Can you talk more about the strategies and frameworks you have applied and how they help your team manage complex projects during both emergencies and blue-sky days? BRANDON HORVATH: When deciding how best to infuse collaborative leadership principles into our current reporting structure, I wanted to ground my approach in something relatable that staff would typically associate with comfort and relaxation. That’s when I thought back to the activities that worked best for relieving stress during the COVID-19 pandemic response. In my case, those were running, binge-watching a new TV show, or endlessly scrolling through TikTok. Each of these activities has a few key ingredients in common: time and energy set aside to make the activity happen, and controls to customize the experience. I factored these in when developing two activities that encourage staff participation, collaborative leadership, and feedback. The energy check is a self-reflection activity I like to start off our weekly touch-base meetings with, intentionally setting aside time to highlight accomplishments, discuss challenges staff were experiencing, and set attainable goals and priorities for the next week. Let’s talk it out is a collaborative leadership exercise where staff are encouraged to lead the conversation, using a set of functions you’d find on a remote control: Settings, Pause, Rewind, Fast-Forward, Record, and Power On/Off. The conversation begins with Settings, where we establish ground rules and outline expectations, acceptable behaviors, and how decisions will be made. Regardless of how the activity unfolds, it is important to document what’s discussed, identify any successes or pain points, and work together to draft next steps and potential solutions. Some optional functions can be folded in, depending on time and complexity. Pause (Reflect) involves making space for reflection, which can help ensure continuous improvement and make adjustments easier, regardless of where you’re at in a project. Rewind (What Worked) involves looking back at past decisions or progress since the last check-in, which can help ensure successful strategies are repeated and mistakes are avoided. Fast-Forward (What Do We Want to See) encourages discussion of what you would consider a successful partnership or collaboration. This is especially helpful when a project is complex and involves many stakeholders. Power On/Off (Let’s Revisit This) should be considered when a project is not progressing or we’ve identified pain points that require follow-up. This can bring the conversation to an intentional end, and another time can be set when all involved will regroup and resume planning. The strategies and frameworks you choose to apply will likely vary based on the role you play, the collaborations already underway, and the level of buy-in within your organization or team to shift away from the current project management approach. Ethan, in Saint Louis County your department has utilized community-based partnerships for vaccination efforts and to address the opioid epidemic. How does focusing on building community partnerships help address misinformation, reduce stigma, and increase trust? ETHAN GREENBLAT: Community partnerships allow public health agencies to meet people where they are, both physically and culturally. By working with trusted local institutions and leaders, our partners can deliver public health messages with voices that communities already know and respect. These collaborations also provide valuable feedback that helps programs remain responsive, relevant, and grounded in community needs. Halana, you emphasized that collaborative leadership requires a paradigm shift away from performative community engagement. How can governmental public health agencies transition to power-sharing to rebuild trust with community members who have been historically disenfranchised and excluded? HALANA KALEEL: In discussions with community members and stakeholders, time and time again they saw that they were only being consulted after decisions had already been made. Saying things like, “we want to hear from you” is performative engagement when you already know how you are going to approach an issue. At the end of the day, many communities would rather have honesty about a bad system than feel tricked by tokenistic engagement. To share power with community and stakeholders, governmental public health agencies need to provide opportunities for the communities they serve to participate in decision making at the beginning of the process, and we should empower and hire staff or liaisons who reflect the communities we are trying to reach. We also need to meet people where they are through more informal engagement instead of continuing to force community members who have been disenfranchised to come into governmental spaces that may be hard to reach and perceived as too formal. Lessons Learned and Actionable Advice Reflecting on your experiences, how do you actively build and maintain trust with community partners, staff, and stakeholders? HORVATH: Building and maintaining trust with staff requires leaders to be consistent, reliable, and authentic in their approach. For me, it’s always been about showing up and following through. Creating safe spaces, both formal and informal, where staff can share feedback and ideas, is the first step to making two-way communication happen. Recognizing staff for their accomplishments and highlighting team wins reinforces both trust and integrity. These same approaches can be applied when working in the field or communicating with a variety of stakeholders. GREENBLATT: Building trust requires consistent communication, transparency, and a shared sense of purpose. I focus on developing relationships over time and ensuring our partners feel heard and included in decision-making processes. It is also important that teams and stakeholders align around the organization’s mission, vision, and goals. When partners have a role in shaping the direction of an initiative, they are far more invested in its success. KALEEL: One of my best practices is focusing on closing the feedback loop by showing community members exactly how their input and feedback directly inform final plans and policies. What practical strategies can public health leaders use to strengthen partnerships and build more resilient public health systems? KALEEL: Something that can be daunting, especially during times of uncertain funding, is compensating community for their time and expertise, but this can be something as simple as small stipends, gift cards to local grocery stores, or feeding people at events. HORVATH: Start with a clear purpose. Set aside time to meet with your team to talk not only about what each person will be doing but why it matters. Find ways to infuse collaborative leadership into the culture, such as trying out a new approach to staff check-ins or promoting shared ownership of projects. Most of all, it is important to meet your staff and community members where they are and to be flexible with your approach. Mistakes will happen, but how we learn from them and adapt can help us be more prepared and resilient the next time. GREENBLATT: Public health leaders can strengthen partnerships by being intentional about how they engage with communities and partners. An important starting point is understanding the local landscape — specifically the initiatives, organizations, and trusted leaders in your community — so you can build on what’s already working rather than duplicating efforts. It’s also important to identify shared goals, making
Learn how public health leaders are redefining leadership and building more collaborative, sustainable systems.
It has never been more important for public health to better understand the disability community and quickly build skills and resources to better serve them, which makes it critical to include more people living with disabilities in the public health workforce.
To learn more about how the DELPH program has influenced our scholars’ leadership journey so far, ASTHO spoke with three leaders in the current cohort: Andrea Lowe, director of legislative services at the Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services; Tiffany Wilson, data analytics branch manager at the Alabama Department of Public Health; and Harold Gil, data science support unit supervisor at the Washington State Department of Health.
An issue that public health wrestles with is how to combat racism as we would any other public health emergency. ASTHO’s board of directors has declared structural racism a public health emergency. And health equity is the number one priority in ASTHO’s strategic plan, which means our staff will prioritize equity work as we support all aspects of our members’ technical assistance and capacity building needs.
Learn how public health leaders can lead through crisis and support their teams in this blog post.
Rethinking “Soft” Leadership Skills in Public Health Rethinking “Soft” Leadership Skills in Public Health Angela Cochran, Jamilia J. Sherls Learn how public health leaders can leverage interpersonal skills to better navigate cross-sector partnerships in this blog post. Budget reductions, staff lay-offs, conflicting federal guidance, limited funding opportunities, being asked to do more with less — these are just some of the challenges public health professionals navigate. Public health’s goal to promote health, safety, and wellness across the nation is difficult to achieve while negotiating these challenges, often leading to stress and burnout. According to the 2024 Public Health Workforce Interests and Needs Survey, approximately 71% of state and local government public health workers are experiencing at least one symptom of burnout and about 20% are experiencing near-constant symptoms. When stress creeps into collaborative spaces, it can lead to frustration, misalignment, poor decisions, strained relationships, and weakened outcomes. As leaders work with internal teams and external partners to achieve public health goals, they must remain vigilant for signs of stress impacting the work. Stress often presents as irritability, conflict, errors, and stagnation. When stress gets in the way, it is critical for leaders to tap into their “soft” skills to alleviate pressures and create a clear path forward. Across sectors, communication, empathy, adaptability, and critical thinking are often grouped under the label “soft” leadership skills. Soft skills are considered foundational, interpersonal qualities or skills that help individuals interact with peers and navigate complex work environments. They may also increase resiliency, which is important in today’s ever-changing world. The term “soft skills” may sound neutral, but it carries an implicit assumption that these skills are easier, less rigorous, or secondary to technical expertise. These are, in fact, the skills that most define the quality of a leader. In practice, they are the very competencies that determine whether collaborative efforts succeed or stall. While there are many “soft” skills or leadership practices that can be helpful in stressful partnership situations and reducing conflict, there are three leadership habits especially critical to sustaining collaboration: Practice Intellectual Humility. Intentionally Build Psychological Safety. Anchor Communication in Values, Not Reaction. Each of these habits is learnable and, when applied with intention, can shift the entire energy of a room. Practice Intellectual Humility Collaborative leadership requires the ability to rethink assumptions without abandoning core values. In cross-sector work, leaders frequently navigate different perspectives, competing priorities, and incomplete information. Approaching these situations with a fixed mindset or rigid assumptions can limit progress, while intellectual humility creates space for better solutions. Practicing intellectual humility does not mean being easily persuaded or lacking confidence. It means remaining open to new information, asking thoughtful questions, and recognizing that no single perspective fully captures the complexity of the issue. Leaders who model this behavior create environments where others feel more comfortable contributing ideas, raising concerns, and engaging in meaningful dialogue. This becomes especially important when partnerships, both internal and external, are under strain. As expectations shift or challenges emerge, the ability to pause, reflect, and reconsider can prevent unnecessary conflict and support more productive problem-solving. For example, in cross-program initiatives where teams bring different priorities or funding requirements, taking time to understand competing perspectives before moving forward can prevent misalignment and strengthen long-term collaboration. Intentionally Build Psychological Safety Effective collaboration depends on trust, but trust does not develop passively. It must be built intentionally through leadership behaviors that create psychological safety. In practice, this includes clearly defining roles, maintaining open communication, and creating space for respectful disagreement. Proactive relationship management, such as regular check-ins and early disclosure of challenges, is essential to maintaining alignment and preventing breakdowns in collaboration. Without these efforts, stress can quickly erode trust and lead to disengagement. At the local level, building psychological safety often requires visible leadership behaviors that demonstrate support rather than control. This can include showing up alongside teams during outreach efforts when additional support is needed, not to direct the work but to reinforce shared ownership and trust. It also involves intentionally creating space for team members to share perspectives and acknowledging when or how those perspectives shift your own thinking. For example, when team members raise concerns or offer alternative approaches, responding with openness, such as acknowledging a perspective that had not been previously considered, can reinforce that you value their input. Over time, these behaviors help establish an environment where staff feel more comfortable speaking up early, allowing leaders and teams to address challenges before they escalate. Leaders play a critical role in shaping this environment by normalizing open dialogue and demonstrating that they value differing perspectives. Anchor Communication in Values, Not Reaction In fast-paced and often high-pressure environments, it can be easy for communication to become reactive. However, reactive leadership can create confusion, erode trust, and shift focus away from shared goals. Anchoring communication in shared values provides consistency and clarity, particularly when navigating uncertainty or competing demands. This means responding thoughtfully, aligning messaging with the broader mission, and maintaining transparency even when challenges arise. For example, during executive leadership discussions involving shared funding opportunities or cross-agency initiatives, leaders may face competing priorities and uncertainty around ownership of the work, responsibilities, or decision-making authority. In one discussion regarding a collaborative grant opportunity, a leadership team navigated tensions by grounding the conversation in organizational values that had been intentionally developed through prior team building, reflection, and difficult conversations around how the group wanted to lead and work together. Because there was already a shared understanding around values such as honesty, respect, integrity, trust, and clarity, team members felt comfortable asking difficult questions openly and respectfully. Rather than reacting defensively or avoiding tension, the leadership team was able to clarify expectations, define roles, and move forward with greater alignment and confidence. Listening to partners and stakeholders remains essential, but listening does not require immediate agreement or action. Leaders must balance openness with discernment, ensuring that decisions remain aligned with both evidence and organizational values. This approach reinforces stability within partnerships and helps to sustain collaboration over time, even when external pressures are high. Applying these three leadership habits the next time you feel the room get tense will significantly improve group dynamics, allowing the team to focus on the tasks at hand. It is important that leaders understand these practices require intention, consistency, and reflection. After an event, leaders should take time to think and reflect on how they used these practices, what the immediate outcomes were, and if there is anything different they would do the next time. These leadership habits do take practice, so leaders should be patient with themselves as they get more comfortable applying them in the heat of the moment. As the great philosopher Epictetus said, “It’s not what happens to you, but how you react to it that matters.” Public health is truly in unprecedented times, bringing with them unpredictable, challenging, and nuanced situations. Leadership calls for not only “technical” expertise, but for “soft” expertise as well to manage stress and complexity, provide clarity, and achieve the best possible outcomes in collaborative spaces. Resources PH WINS 2024 Findings by de Beamount Soft Skills Matter Now More Than Ever, According to New Research by Harvard Business Review Intellectual Humility by Character Lab Values-Based Communication (PDF) by TCC Group What Is Psychological Safety at Work? Here’s How to Start Creating It by APA Reviewed by - Mason, Prather article yes
Leading from the Inside: Advancing DEI at the State Level astho, association of state and territorial health officials, workplace cultures, financial performance, creates a positive, diversity equity and inclusion dei, united states, work life balance, hiring process, human resources, organizational culture, top talent, team members, employee engagement, recruiting process, long term, public health worker, socioeconomic status, races ethnicities, retain employees, company s culture, diversity equity inclusion, public service, recruitment retention development, public health workforce, work culture, organizational values, diversity matters James Bell III Three steps on how to implement DEI strategies at the organizational level. Campaigns for racial justice have grown throughout our country, and parallel conversations focusing on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) have increased, especially in public service. We experience this effect through the lens of facilitating more equitable and responsive service delivery. Our programming, policies, and data must be culturally informed and relevant. But DEI must also be valued internally in how we contribute to employee recruitment, retention, and development. Today’s workplace is complex, and DEI is vital for improving outcomes for all the populations we serve. Most modern organizations have come to terms with the critical need for DEI initiatives. The evidence highlighting how these efforts can improve an organization’s productivity, creativity, retention, and financial success has been clear for some time. But, honestly, is that enough? And why haven’t we made the earth-shattering changes we all know are possible? Perhaps it could be traced back to the changes we hope to seek being assigned outside of our organization when it should be us who are leading and implementing change. Breaking down siloes for diversity requires new ways of working with fewer barriers among and across teams and their unique people. To remove these perceived barriers, I propose that a few key steps must take place. 1. Put the people first. I have been in too many meetings where employees are considered “resources” or “FTEs,” and it’s so unfortunate. As advantageous as it may be for some, the lure of DEI as a return on investment cannot be the sole purpose for pursuing such initiatives. We lose the essence of humanity and unique individuality that makes diversity so special when we limit people to a box on an organizational chart. If governments want to attract and retain the best possible talent, the actual business case to make is talent itself. Building a diverse and inclusive culture cannot only be a human resources function or a top-down effort. All people across departments should see themselves reflected in this work and be able to identify a path to make it their own. As leaders, we should work relentlessly toward understanding the needs of others while building a safe environment for the type of collaboration needed to solve complex problems better. This means constantly learning and embracing new concepts, ideas, and ways of doing things. Each of us has the power to create a more substantial, fairer workplace where everyone can contribute their strengths, talents, and ideas while being treated with dignity and respect. 2. Back your program with a budget. Organizations have shouted their pledges and promises to foster more diverse, equitable, and inclusive environments from any rooftop they could find for at least three years. Although determining which groups are walking the walk is challenging, a strong indication of one’s commitment is to look at budget line items. A lack of or limited budget is an immediate red flag that conveys that DEI is not a priority. Just like anything else, if something is important to you, you will spend the money required to implement it properly. One of the best ways to demonstrate your commitment to DEI is through sustainable, tangible financial investment. This allows our DEI initiatives to be continuous and to evolve over time based on the immediate need. We are not in a position to check the box or allow one implicit bias course to cover all the broad gaps we are experiencing. There is also the benefit of a broad supply of qualified DEI practitioners and consultants who are experienced in guiding organizations through complex DEI issues. Should we continue to face complicated and longstanding DEI issues, it isn’t up to our staff to try to resolve them. We must assign monthly, quarterly, or annual monies to address these problems. 3. Hold yourself and your organization accountable. Regardless of agency or size, DEI efforts within organizations often lack strategic follow-through and accountability. These endeavors are often reactive, episodic, or only prioritized after a public relations crisis. We can’t only respond when we are required to respond. The communities we serve—and our employees—expect that we will carry out our responsibilities and fulfill our promises. We have not consistently been diligent in creating mechanisms for feedback, and if we have, we fail to implement them. To truly embed DEI into our culture, we need meaningful metrics and the willingness and courage to use the data to hold ourselves accountable. How will we ever know if we are going in the right direction or making desired changes if we never discuss the data? And that isn’t to say results must be perfect because we know changes take time. But it communicates clear goals and allows for solid focus and discussion for alignment. This disclosure is necessary to drive change and inspire others by demonstrating that progress is possible. The future of state government must fully embrace diversity, equity, and inclusion both as an aspiration and as a responsibility. We must create a sense of belonging and environment for organizational justice, even if this means resisting the status quo that we have nurtured and become far too comfortable letting stand. We should be celebrating rather than marginalizing employees because of their individuality. We should be challenging business practices that undermine our organizational values and fail to treat employees equitably. Author card spacing 1 Related Content-Blog - DELPH Magazine 2 website yes