Archive for October, 2010

$500 Billion From Where?

October 26th, 2010

In a recent conversation with a long time healthcare CEO, he made the following observation:

“There are about 2,750 pages to Obamacare.  I have no idea what the implications are of the first 2,700 pages, but I do know that at least 50 pages allude to the fact that $500B will be cut from hospital reimbursements in order to support the new legislation, and it’s also clear that these monies will be cut based upon quality.  Pay-for-performance will be the new catch phrase of the reimbursement world, and our peers are not ready for this stark reality.”

How does one move from a non-transparent system to one that allows anyone to log onto healthcare websites and search every detail relating to the success rates, scores, and capabilities of any given institution?  One very obvious “missing element” in hospital-related problems is the lack of dedication to getting to the “root cause” of most issues.  We are great at work arounds, but rarely take the time, energy, and have the cultural commitment to dig deeply enough to literally stop the root cause of the problem.  Is that why there are a reported 98,000 people killed by our facilities, and about an equal number injured each year?


Several organizations have attempted to take on these issues, but few have gone beyond scratching the surface of the real problems.  As bundled payments become the norm, a commitment to getting the highest available reimbursement for procedures will take on a new meaning.  Imagine a great doctor in an under-performing medical center where his or her work is not rewarded equally to a peer in a stronger hospital, because that bundled reimbursement was lowered due to institutional medical imperfections. Charles Kenney in  The Best Practice, and Steven Spear in The High-Velocity Edge have both addressed some of the nuances of this new culture, this new world order, but for hospital administrators, physicians, and staff to “get their arms around it,”  there will need to be transformational shifts in the fundamental culture of the organization.

Leadership will be forced to accept personal responsibility for virtually everything that occurs in an organization.  Employees will need to be empowered to embrace shared values, and key targets such as patient and employee safety will need to be identified so that goals can be set that stop nothing short of a level of complete PERFECTION.

The healthcare establishment will also need to embrace transparency within their organizations, and that information must be shared with everyone.  Most importantly, it must include the human element.  What is the human impact of each and every error or mistake?  This point alone will represent a major cultural shift in the way we do business.

Truman's phrase "The Buck Stops Here" - F. Nicholas Jacobs, FACHE

Employees, physicians, and administrators will need to actually be taught to see risk, and be provided with data upon which actions may be taken.  Most importantly, however, problem solving must be encouraged and supported at every level of the organization.

How is this all possible?  I was recently on a speaking tour to several hospitals, and the bottom line at these facilities was that their leadership was “new age.”  They had worked diligently to decrease the hierarchy and to reduce and reorganize the roles of those in operations in order to support the fastest possible improvements.

The tsunami is coming, however slowly it may appear to be; it is approaching our healthcare shores, and quality – no, perfection, is the only means left for achieving success or, in many cases, is the only way to survive.  We must discipline ourselves to see problems and not simply try to work around them.  We must establish a problem solving culture.  We must set our goals and empower all of the players to do what is needed to solve these problems once and forever.  Harry Truman’s phrase, “The Buck Stops Here,” should become every CEO’s mantra, and the journey will finally begin, the journey to solve the myriad repeating problems in our current system.

Nick Jacobs, FACHE - HealingHospitals.com

Share

Things People Are Thinking About

October 14th, 2010

Every few weeks or so, I take the time to read articles produced by The Pew Research Center, a non-partisan fact tank. Pew does not take sides in policy disputes, but they do provide a valuable information resource for political leaders, journalists, scholars and citizens. I believe that I come under that last category, citizen. The only requirement that Pew has relative to their findings is that their sources are cited accurately and in context.

Recently, they provided some fun statistics:

For example, among the public, one-in-four (25%) believe in astrology (including 23% of Christians); 24% believe in reincarnation, nearly three-in-ten (29%) say they have been in touch with the dead; almost one-in-five (18%) say they have seen or been in the presence of ghosts. If none of those statistics surprise you, then you clearly are not me.

Here was another great poll finding: 87% of scientists say that humans and other living things have evolved over time and that evolution is the result of natural processes such as natural selection, but only 32% of the public accepts this as true. (From the work of Jodie T. Allen and Richard Auxier, Pew Research Center)

Conference on Climate Change, Poznan, Poland

Well, this next poll was even more interesting to me. As both a business person and a humanist, it has been difficult for me to hear large numbers of my friends and acquaintances literally “going off” about how ridiculous global warming is. They say things like, “Global warming and global cooling happen all the time; it’s just a natural course of events.” Others say, “Al Gore filled us with lies about global warming for his own financial gain.” Finally, I have heard over and over, “Well, we can’t do anything about it anyway, so why worry.”

Then there’s the opposite side where experts say things like, “If we stopped using all fossil fuels right now, the earth will continue to heat for another 60 years, and all of the devastating floods and fires that we’ve seen this year were the result of only a 1 degree increase in the world’s temperatures, and in 60 years we will heat up by 5 degrees.”

What did Pew find about the current global attitudes about climate change?

Pew - global attitudes about global climate change - Nick Jacobs, FACHETheir international polling shows that publics around the world are concerned about climate change. In the recent spring 2010 Pew Global Attitudes survey, majorities in all 22 nations polled rate global climate change a serious problem, and majorities in ten countries say it is a very serious problem. There are some interesting differences among the countries included in the survey. Brazilians are the most concerned about this issue: 85% consider it a very serious problem. Worries are less intense, however, in the two countries that emit the most carbon dioxide — only 41% of Chinese and 37% of American respondents characterize climate change as a very serious challenge.

Even though majorities around the globe express at least some concern about this issue, publics are divided on the question of whether individuals should pay more to address climate change. In 11 nations, a majority or plurality agree that people should pay higher prices to cope with this problem, while in 11 other nations a majority or plurality say people should not be asked to pay more.

These findings remind me of numerous other examples of confusion created by the short term winners and losers in what are serious economic discussions. There are 1.5 B Chinese, and over the next several years, many of them are going to want a car. Regardless of your own personal stand on this issue, that’s some serious potential pollution.

Share

Bhutan’s Philosophy of “Gross National Happiness”

October 3rd, 2010

Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted.
—Albert Einstein

At a recent conference I had the opportunity to learn about the Himalayan nation of Bhutan. Most of us had not heard of this country, but we should have, because they have done something that is reminiscent of the Broadway Musical “Camelot,” or possibly “Brigadoon.” Their King introduced a philosophy of living that is intended to shape all of the government’s activities. According to Mr. Kuenga Tshering, Director of the National Statistics Bureau of Bhutan, Gross National Happiness (GNH) was promulgated as Bhutan’s philosophy of economic and social development by the Fourth King of Bhutan as soon as he came to the throne in 1972.

The reason I’m writing about this is because I believe it is an amazing idea, a wonderful goal, and a step toward embracing  idealism.  Many of you have heard my thoughts on change, and know that I do not believe that there is only one route to follow on this journey through life.

Takstan Monastery, Bhutan (image credit: johnehrenfeld.com)

Takstan Monastery, Bhutan (image credit: johnehrenfeld.com)

The Bhutanese philosophy of “living” refers to a set of social and economic interventions that evaluate societal change in terms of the collective happiness of people.  Further, these measures are also applied to the creation of policies that are aimed at that objective. Premised on the belief that all human beings aspire to happiness in one way or another, the concept promotes collective happiness of the society as the ultimate goal of development.  Now that would be a political platform!

The philosophy of Gross National Happiness considers economic growth as one of the means towards achieving happiness, but it also offers a holistic paradigm within which the mind receives equal attention. While GNH recognizes the importance of individual happiness, it emphasizes that happiness must be realized as a collective or societal goal and not be defined as an individualized or competitive good.

The philosophy should also not cause misery to future generations, other societies, or to other  beings, and it is important to the government of Bhutan that the efforts of this philosophy be distributed evenly across all sections of  the society.

They work at strengthening the institutions of family and community; the spirit of voluntarism, tolerance and cooperation; the virtues of compassion, altruism, honor and dignity, all of whose active promotion may be a contributing factor to Bhutan’s low crime rate.

Culture also provides a framework where an individual’s or society’s psychological and emotional needs are addressed. By preserving local, regional, and national festivals, the government attends to these needs and provides a forum for maintaining social networks and promoting the conviviality of public culture.

His Majesty, King Jigme Singye Wangchuck of Bhutan

His Majesty, King Jigme Singye Wangchuck of Bhutan

Bhutan treasures the extended family network as the most sustainable form of social safety net. Aware of the possibilities of family disintegration or nuclearization, the government makes conscious efforts to revive and nourish the traditions and practices that bond families and keep communities resilient and thriving.

Their environmental policy is predicated on the perspective that human beings and nature not only live symbiotically but are inseparable from each other. According to this perspective, nature is a partner in existence; a provider of sustenance, comfort and beauty.

Environmental preservation, therefore, is a way of life in Bhutan. Currently, 72% of the country’s area is under forest cover, 26% of the area is declared as protected areas, and the state has decreed to maintain 60% of its area under forest cover for all times to come. Environmental cost is an essential ingredient of evaluating new development projects in  Bhutan.

Finally, Bhutan launched parliamentary democracy 2008, becoming the youngest democratic country in the world. All this was initiated by the country’s leader – His Majesty, King Jigme Singye Wangchuck, thus fostering people’s capacity to make choices.

Well, we have generally been making choices as a country for some time now that generally do not embrace nature, family, our fellow man, or the environment.  On a recent boat trip up the Caloosahatchee River, I expressed a dream, namely that mankind would embrace a philosophy of “National Happiness.”

Now wouldn’t that ROCK?

Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted. — Albert Einstein

Read more: http://blog.rypple.com/2010/06/chip-conleys-ted-talk-on-gross-national-happiness-gnh/#ixzz11MQ5ZTm6

Share