BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic impacted many aspects of normal operations in academic medicine. While effective leadership is always important, the intensity and urgency of COVID-19 challenged academic medicine leaders to find new ways to lead their institutions and manage their own experiences of the pandemic.MethodsSixteen physician leaders from Michigan Medicine took part in semistructured interviews during April and May 2020. Participants were asked open-ended questions about the attributes and techniques that were important to effectively lead during a crisis. The authors analysed the interviews using thematic analysis.ResultsParticipants described three overarching themes of leadership during the COVID-19 pandemic: (1) bringing together a diverse team with clear, shared goals; (2) using a range of strategies to tend to their teams’—as well as their own—well-being; and (3) engaging in leadership reasoning as a way of learning from others and reflecting on their own actions to inform their future leadership practice.ConclusionThe results of this study reveal several salient themes of crisis leadership during the COVID-19 pandemic. The findings also highlight the role of leadership reasoning, a reflective practice employed by leaders to understand and improve their leadership skills. This finding presents leadership skill development as part of lifelong learning in medicine. Findings may be incorporated into best practices and preparations to inform future healthcare leaders.

Objective Assessing the diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) climate of emergency departments (EDs) can inform organizational change to provide equitable, inclusive, and high‐quality care to their diverse patient populations. The purpose of this project was to investigate patient perspectives on the climate of DEI in an urban ED. Methods This was a cross‐sectional survey study conducted in a large‐volume, urban ED in Detroit, MI, from November 2018 to January 2019. The survey was developed by an experienced ED DEI committee via an iterative process and broad consensus. Results During their care in the ED, 849 patients completed an anonymous survey about their perspectives and experiences of DEI in that ED. Overall, the responses were favorable as most respondents reported that the ED staff treated patients from all races equally (75.8%) and made patients feel accepted (86%). However, some respondents felt that the ED staff's treatment of populations with greater complexity, such as patients who are mentally ill (16.8%) or lower income (14.3%), needs the most improvement. Conclusions This DEI climate assessment survey of ED patients’ perspectives revealed important insights that could guide strategic initiatives to advance DEI in the ED. This assessment may serve as a model for continuous evaluation of DEI over time and in multiple healthcare settings to help guide organizational change efforts.