Currencies of recognition: What rewards and recognition do Canadian distributed medical education preceptors value?

Abstract

Background: Medical schools spend considerable time, effort, and money on recognition initiatives for rural and distributed medical education (DME) faculty. Previous literature has focused on intrinsic motivation to teach and there is little in the literature to guide institutional recognition efforts or to predict which items or types of recognition will be most appreciated. Methods: To better understand how rural and DME faculty in Canada value different forms of recognition, we asked faculty members from all Canadian medical schools to complete a bilingual, national online survey evaluating their perceptions of currently offered rewards and recognition. The survey received a robust response in both English and French, across nine Canadian provinces and one territory. Results: Our results indicated that there were three distinct ways that preceptors looked at recognition; these perspectives were consistent across geographic and demographic variables. These “clusters” or “currencies of recognition” included: i) Formal institutional recognition, ii) connections, growth and development, and iii) tokens of gratitude. Financial recognition was also found to be important but separate from the three clusters. Some preceptors did value support of intrinsic motivation most important, and for others extrinsic motivators, or a mix of both was most valued. Conclusions: Study results will help medical schools make effective choices in efforts to find impactful ways to recognize rural and DME faculty.

Rewards and recognition for Canadian distributed medical education preceptors: a qualitative analysis

“…Our results support previous research showing that the intrinsic rewards of teaching are highly influential 4 . The importance of personal connections, the need for fair and transparent remuneration practices, and a range of types of recognition in order to broadly satisfy DME faculty are congruent with our previous research in this area 5 . Our participants valued the connection to central campuses while also emphasizing the need for a degree of self-determination and input into decision making.…”

“…The current study is part of a larger research project that we titled ‘Currencies of Recognition.’ We chose this term to acknowledge the multiple ways of recognizing faculty contributions, and to emphasize that effective recognition will hold value for both the giver and the receiver. Results from the quantitative exploratory phase were previously reported by Johnston et al , (2022), and the qualitative study builds upon this work 5 . The overarching goal of the Currencies of Recognition project is to provide guidance to medical schools about the financial remuneration and non-financial rewards that are most attractive, effective, and practical in recognizing community preceptors for their contributions to medical education.…”

“…DME faculty receive a variety of rewards and recognition from their medical schools. These offerings can be described in terms of the ‘clusters of recognition’ that we found in the survey results 5 . DME faculty described being provided with Tokens of Gratitude —items that include plaques, certificates, and small gifts.…”

“…We also suggest that medical schools remain flexible in compensating DME faculty. Given that the value of a particular reward is dependent on the recipient, it would be prudent to offer preceptors diverse ‘currencies’ of recognition from the ‘clusters’ we identified in the first phase of our project 5 . It should also be acknowledged that money is only one of the tokens of recognition offered to DME faculty, and may not fully compensate for any loss of clinical earnings they may experience when taking on learners.…”

“…The survey collected data related to the current forms of recognition provided to DME preceptors, and the value preceptors place upon each recognition type. Survey data was analyzed statistically and the results of the quantitative phase of this project have been reported elsewhere 5 . Many respondents also wrote in the free text fields provided on the survey.…”