Measure 2x, cut 1x - but what should you measure?
Analytics and statistics are malleable. It's easy to manipulate data by choosing what to include. To run a practice you need Healthcare Business Intelligence that is agnostic - that works for you.
Whenever a statistic is quoted at me, I used to snap back “well fair, but did you know that 62.3% of statistics are made up on the spot?” For some reason, I always gravitated between 60% - 90% in my number. I presume because when I first heard that the number was in that range, and I didn’t want to seem too far off. The idea of anchoring is big in negotiation theory. There’s this idea that you want the other person to go first in a negotiation because it’s a reference point - it’s free information. Alternatively, you can anchor the conversation by offering a number within reason, and then it’s a basis point question of going slightly up or slightly down. I’m not sure which is better - what do you think?
Measuring using statistics though is really interesting because like those statistics (the 71.4% that are made up on the spot, for example), you can drive a lot by what you decide to count in the numerator or in the denominator. At RevOps Health, we talk to a lot of customers who tell us that they don’t need analytics - actually, their billing company provides numbers and business looks great. We like to ask if their school lets their kids grade their own homework, since that’s effectively what they have endorsed.
This is especially important for anyone thinking about selling their business or talking to a financial institution for a loan to invest or expand the business. Or anyone trying to measure efficacy of a new solution they implemented. There’s a ton of opportunity right now to install new tools to automate and enhance provider and patient experience. Measuring the impact - that’s almost as important as the actual savings made. We all remember hearing about WeWork’s community adjusted EBITDA and thinking, huh? Some things are pretty clearly defined, and this kind of thing doesn’t make sense. Letting a startup tell you how they are doing makes sense - but validating makes even more sense.
I think understanding what you are measuring is critical. What’s at risk is spending resources solving problems that aren’t problems while allowing others wounds to fester unnoticed until it’s too late. What we end up with when pay attention to the wrong things is a bullwhip effect. Cue my second1 favorite ad:
How you measure and what you measure can have a big impact on operations if you don’t take a moment to consider your perspective.
Bringing it back to healthcare we hear all the time about practices that are getting reports from their vendors - but you have to wonder, are interests aligned? My favorite are talking to the practices that are in the midst of changing vendors - maybe it’s a new biller or new PM system, but haven’t figured out how they are going to measure that change. We have metrics, KPIs, and software. Of course, we tell them, but is the denominator the same? What about the calculations for the numerator of your KPI? Who is going to do that adjustment so you are comparing apples to apples, oranges to oranges, jack fruit to jack fruit, dorian to dorian.
Now I think I should have renamed this post - really my advise is measure continuously, and in the same way, so that you can see the impact, cut with precision (and if it doesn’t work, be able to glue it back together - maybe not, that’s a mouthful). You may change a lot of things in your practice, but have the courage and continuity in how you measure to change tack. It’s the only honest transparent way to see change in your practice. That’s what takes it from an analytics tool to true healthcare business intelligence.
This older post still points to what remains my favorite ad: https://revopshealth.substack.com/p/aspire-inspire-to-the-absurd-aka