A Pressing Dilemma in the Healthcare Industry

In many ways, healthcare is at the forefront of innovation.

Advances like cancer vaccines and mind-controlled robotic limbs were science-fiction 10 years ago, but now represent a wave of life-extending innovations that are actively improving lives across the globe.

As with any sudden and significant increase in momentum, the effectiveness of the change required to keep up is only as effective as the management of the change.  Well-managed change is the catalyst for innovation, while poorly managed change hinders real progress.

Looking at the current healthcare industry climate, there are clear indicators that show significant change needs to come to the way new technology and advancements are managed--for both the good of the industry and for Americans who are increasingly unable to afford reasonable healthcare.

Let’s take a look at the key players.

The Money Exchange

As of 2015, healthcare in the United States is a $2.9 trillion industry that continues to grow.

So what’s the dilemma?

As quickly as the industry is changing, it’s failing to keep up and adapt to changing needs and priorities. Consumers, that is, patients, are increasingly more savvy around making healthcare decisions and are demanding better visibility of costs to evaluate quality of care against cost of care.

Until recently, the industry has been self-regulated and enjoyed the luxury of setting its own rates with relatively little pushback. Those days are numbered as consumers bring change, treating healthcare as a business where they have choice to spend their money or move on to a more competitive provider.

Duelling Stakeholders and Communication

Unfortunately, for the healthcare industry, change management tends to be localized by hospital, lab, or corporation, impeding the efficacy of universal change and implementation. This localization occurs for a number of reasons, but usually because it’s not profitable to share.

NU: Not clear- not profitable to share with who and how? I think the CM isn’t happening because there is not a holistic view of the organization. People get a mandate and apply it (or not) at their local level- missing the bigger picture of the mandate. IMO, there is resistance to what would be a profitable shared effort, not because it is profitable to resist- but because the local change unit is still looking out for what it thinks it needs, not what the organization actually needs.

In this scenario, patient care isn’t patient-focused, rather, it exists to serve the need of the hospital, government or insurance companies.

"Patient care isn’t patient-focused, rather, it exists to serve the need hospitals, the government, or insurance companies. "

NU: Not sure I agree with this. I am seeing that patient care is often patient-focussed at the expense of the healthcare institution. Each doctor has their own best idea of the processes, tools, etc. needed for their patients, and requires their own inventories, lack of standardization, etc.

Technology is changing--widespread data sharing and open communication is the most accessible it’s ever been, however, only 28% of US healthcare professionals are even using electronic medical records.

Co-ordinated healthcare, where patient data is collated and accessible nationwide, would mean better immediate care as well as greater capacity for preventative care. It’s a system that would cut costs for providers who could quickly and easily access patient information as well as reduce insurance premiums for patients following better quality of care.

Introversion and Innovation

The healthcare industry in the US is a beast all its own and it knows it. It’s not quite government, not quite private, not quite business, which means change management oversights can view their needs and responses to change as isolated, being unwilling to draw inspiration from outside sources.

Innovation comes from thinking outside the box, from learning from others who have broken out of their boxes--taking tried principles and problem-solving and applying them to the current dilemma.

"Innovation comes from thinking outside the box, from learning from others who have broken out of their boxes."

Take for instance the case of 3M who reached out to a theatrical-makeup specialist, who had experience and knowledge in preventing skin infections. From their input, 3M developed a revolutionary product to help prevent post-surgery infections--a potentially life-saving innovation that came about only after looking outside of itself.

Conclusion

For an industry seemingly leading the way in innovation, healthcare is facing a change dilemma it can’t afford to ignore.

From lack of coordinated patient communications to the need for creative thinking to solve problems like out of control R&D costs, the industry needs to learn to effectively handle change in order to see true innovation--innovation that extends beyond technology and improves cost efficacy and holistic patient care.

If you’re currently in the healthcare industry, check out our Finance and Strategy workshop to see how we can help you learn to think big, consolidate, and execute effective change in your business.