From Institutional Leadership to International Orgs: How a PhD in Nursing Education Shapes Leadership Trajectories

Article information

Cleofas, J. V., Dychangco, Ma. E. A., Olivar, J. J. R., & Vitug, P. Z. (2026). Expanding and accumulating transformative potential: The leadership trajectories of graduates of a doctor of philosophy in nursing education programme. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 82(5), 4270–4282. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.70028  

What this study is about

Doctoral programs are often judged by what happens during training (courses completed, dissertations defended). But nursing needs a longer lens: what happens to graduates’ leadership over time—and how does a doctorate shape that trajectory? 

This paper focuses on a specific doctoral pathway that is less studied globally: a PhD in Nursing Education (PhDNEd)with a major in Educational Leadership and Management, offered by a private Catholic university in Manila. The program is notable because it was established in 2008 and is described as the first of its kind in the Philippines and among the earlier nursing education doctorates in Asia. 

The study has two aims:

1. Describe leadership trajectories of PhDNEd graduates after graduation, and
2. Examine how the doctoral program influenced these trajectories. 

What the researchers did

This is a qualitative study using thematic narrative analysis—meaning the researchers didn’t just code themes; they paid attention to how participants told their leadership “stories” over time. 

• Participants: 10 purposively selected graduates holding middle-to-senior leadership roles (e.g., deans, directors, hospital leaders, professional organization leaders). 
• Interviews: Conducted via videoconferencing (Zoom), with an added tool called life calendaring—a shared document where participants and interviewer co-built a timeline of leadership milestones and reflections during the interview. 
• Sampling: “Maximum variation” purposive sampling was used to capture diverse roles, cohorts, and settings; saturation was framed as achieving sufficient “information power.” 
• Quality safeguards: Member checking (participants reviewed timelines and initial findings), audit trail, peer debriefing, thick description, reflexivity. 

The central concept: “transformative potential”

The core contribution of the paper is a new, integrative way to describe leadership outcomes: transformative potential.

In simple terms, transformative potential means:

the evolving capacity of leaders to influence and improve the structures, norms, and practices in the professional worlds they inhabit—through skills, dispositions, opportunities, actions, and outcomes that accumulate over time. 

This concept becomes the “thread” that connects the different leadership stories into one coherent narrative about post-PhD leadership development.

Leadership trajectories: expanding “fields” of influence

The authors describe three milestones that show how leadership influence expands after graduating.

1) Positioned for transformative potential

Right after the PhD, graduates often become positioned for leadership—sometimes because the doctorate is itself a credential required for certain roles (e.g., dean-level appointments), and sometimes because it strengthens credibility and trust. 

At this stage, leadership is real—but still constrained by institutional cultures, politics, and the “newness” of authority. Some leaders describe early challenges (e.g., managing colleagues who used to be peers, meeting accreditation/board exam pressures). 

2) Narrow field of transformative potential

In the next milestone, leaders begin implementing significant change within their organizations: raising accreditation levels, improving research policies, strengthening curriculum and clinical training systems, building faculty development, improving facilities, institutionalizing emergency online learning practices, etc. 

It’s called “narrow field” not because it’s small impact—but because the impact is still largely inside the home institution (a university, hospital, college unit).

3) Widened field of transformative potential

Over time, many graduates expand influence beyond their institutions—through leadership in professional organizations, governance bodies, and even international training and recognition. Examples include taking officer roles in national nursing associations, serving in boards, training other countries’ faculty, or receiving international awards for nursing leadership initiatives. 

So the trajectory is not simply “promotion after PhD.” It is a widening arc: institutional leadership → sector leadership → broader professional/governance influence. 

How the program shapes leadership: accumulating capacity

The second major contribution is explaining how doctoral education feeds leadership development—through three interacting processes:

1) Curriculum-driven capacity building

Graduates describe the PhD curriculum as a practical leadership toolkit: research methods, curriculum design, legal/financial management in higher education, strategic planning, comparative education, ethics, and dissertation work. These are not just “academic” outputs; they become usable tools for solving real leadership problems. 

2) Beyond-curriculum capacity building

This is where the paper gets especially relatable: many leadership capabilities were learned outside formal coursework—through peers, mentoring, exposure to best practices in an accredited university environment, and what educators often call the hidden curriculum (what you absorb from institutional culture and role modeling). 

Graduates describe gaining networks, benchmarking practices across institutions, learning “reality-based” leadership lessons from classmates, and importing structures (like modular clustering formats) into their own programs. 

3) Character building

Finally, the PhD journey reshaped leadership identity and values: confidence with humility, service orientation, resilience, the shift from seeing the doctorate as “promotion” to seeing it as a responsibility to share knowledge. In this program’s context, Catholic values and servant-leadership themes were also explicitly noted by participants. 

Bottom line

This study reframes doctoral education outcomes as more than competencies or job titles. It offers a clear story: a PhD in Nursing Education can cultivate leaders whose influence expands outward over time—because the program helps them accumulate transformative potential through curriculum, networks, and identity/values formation.

---

Policy/practice recommendations (actionable takeaways)

1. Design doctoral curricula with explicit leadership development
   • Don’t assume leadership “emerges.” Build it into coursework, practicum, and dissertation scaffolding with real-world leadership problems (accreditation, quality systems, curriculum reform, research governance). 
2. Treat peer networks as a core learning mechanism
   • Formalize cohort-based benchmarking, cross-institution learning exchanges, and mentorship circles—because beyond-curriculum learning is a major driver of leadership growth. 
3. Make the hidden curriculum visible
   • If institutional culture and role-modeling matter, name them: create reflective activities that help students identify what practices they’re absorbing and how they will translate them ethically in new contexts. 
4. Support post-PhD “trajectory building,” not just graduation
   • Universities and professional bodies can create structured pathways for graduates to participate in professional governance, policy work, and national/international leadership opportunities—matching the “widened field” stage described in the study. 
5. Invest in doctoral programs in the Global South
   • This paper makes the case that nursing education doctorates can strengthen leadership pipelines in underrepresented contexts—important for workforce, education quality, and system resilience. 

---

Glossary of key terms

• PhDNEd (PhD in Nursing Education) — A doctoral degree focused on nursing education leadership, curriculum, and research, not only clinical practice. 
• Leadership trajectory — The evolving pathway of leadership roles, responsibilities, and influence over time after graduation. 
• Transformative potential — The evolving capacity to create meaningful change in organizations and professional systems, shaped by skills, opportunities, and leadership identity. 
• Thematic narrative analysis — A qualitative approach that identifies themes while preserving how participants structure their stories over time. 
• Life calendaring — A participatory method that maps a timeline of life/leadership events during interviews to support recall and meaning-making. 
• Maximum variation sampling — Purposive sampling that seeks diverse participants (roles, cohorts, settings) to capture a broad range of experiences. 
• Member checking — Sharing data summaries or findings with participants to confirm accuracy and resonance. 
• Curriculum-driven capacity building — Leadership competence gained through formal coursework, practicum, and dissertation processes. 
• Beyond-curriculum capacity building — Leadership learning gained through peers, mentors, networks, and institutional culture (including the hidden curriculum). 
• Character building — Shifts in values, resilience, confidence, and leadership identity cultivated through the doctoral journey. 
• Hidden curriculum — The informal lessons learned from institutional culture, norms, and role modeling beyond official course content.