Purpose: This article focuses on identifying cognitive behavioral (CB) techniques that can help nurse supervisors more effectively navigate interpersonal challenges, reduce workplace stress, improve team cohesion, and, ultimately, enhance overall organizational performance and staff well-being. Approach: Through a comprehensive review of leadership literature and clinical management practices, we determined that CB techniques could be integrated into nursing management. Two hypothetical scenarios within this context are offered, where CB techniques can enhance nursing leadership effectiveness. Conclusions and Recommendations: CB techniques offer a humanistic approach to nursing leadership through: (1) providing tools for leaders to reframe challenges and frustrations, particularly in resource-limited settings; (2) offering stress-management strategies for nursing leaders; and (3) enhancing communication skills, self-awareness, and team motivation. These applications can potentially improve both staff and management satisfaction, ultimately improving patient care quality. Healthcare organizations should consider incorporating CB techniques into their leadership development programs. We suggest practical ways to implement these techniques in daily nursing management, emphasizing the importance of creating supportive and safe work environments and provide recommendations for future research. This perspective extends the cognitive behavioral approach beyond its traditional therapeutic context into nursing leadership, providing a novel theoretical framework for understanding and enhancing leadership development in healthcare settings.

Background/Objectives: While nurses showed a willingness to work during the pandemic and wartime, little is understood about how they managed the conflict between their roles as caregivers and personal or family obligations. They are deemed “essential workers,” risking their safety to fulfill their duties. Objectives: This study aims to explore the lived experience of nurses during COVID-19 and wartime, delving deeper into their emotional and moral experiences, providing insights for nurses and nursing management about how nurses negotiate dilemmas. Methods: A focused interpretive, hermeneutic, phenomenological approach was employed. From December 2022 to January 2023, ten hospital-based nurses from two hospitals were purposively sampled for in-depth, semi-structured interviews, which were transcribed and analyzed. The study was approved by the University Ethics Committee (31102022). Results: The essence of “ Moral Conflicts of Dual Identity and Dual Allegiance” revealed profound moral and emotional struggles among nurses. Four key themes emerged: (1) Moral Stressors and Identity Negotiation, (2) Competing Responsibilities and Ethical Double-binds, (3) Virtual and Practical Wisdom in Crises, (4) Responses of Stress and Erosion of Support Conclusions: Understanding nurses’ ethical dilemmas is essential for healthcare leadership. Leaders must make it a priority for workplace safety for their nurses. In wartime, it is not obvious that the workplace is unsafe; leaders must foster open dialog and support systems in response to these crises. This study highlights the significance of peer support, emphasizing the need for policies that address the complex moral challenges nurses face daily.

Background: Healthcare professionals (HCPs) operate within environments of chronic occupational stress; a burden significantly amplified in Israel by the compounded pressures of the COVID‐19 pandemic and active warfare. While resilience and positive affect (PA) are established protective factors, the nature of their interactive role in sustaining quality of life (QoL) during prolonged, extreme crises remains under‐explored. Aim: This study examines resilience, positive affect (PA), and quality of life (QoL) among healthcare professionals (HCPs), investigating whether PA moderates the relationship between resilience and QoL during a prolonged crisis. Methods: A cross‐sectional national online survey was conducted among 260 Israeli HCPs nationally. Participants completed validated instruments including the Brief Resilience Scale (BRS), the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS), and the Multicultural Quality of Life Index (MQLI). Moderation analyses assessed the predictive effects of resilience and the moderating role of PA on QoL. Results: Both resilience and PA significantly predicted QoL. A small but significant interaction effect indicated that PA moderated the resilience–QoL relationship, with stronger benefits among HCPs with lower resilience. Specifically, resilience showed a stronger association with QoL among HCPs with lower levels of PA, whereas this association weakened at higher levels of PA. Linking Evidence to Action: Healthcare leaders and managers could optimize staff quality of life by implementing interventions that promote positive affect, such as peer‐support systems and recognition initiatives, especially for staff with lower baseline resilience. At the policy level, institutions stand to benefit from adopting broader systemic strategies alongside individual‐focused training to sustain a supportive emotional climate during prolonged crises. Furthermore, future research should utilize longitudinal designs to evaluate the long‐term impact of these interventions on workforce retention.