recent post
Did you know that auto racing has been the inspiration for some breakthrough improvements in Healthcare? You can read more about that in a recent post on LinkedIn by Tom Dahlborg. Meanwhile, “fasten your seatbelt” as I quickly link auto racing to health care to social determinants to collaboration to benchmarking to better health and human services.
These auto racing-inspired innovations in health care quality leveraged the power of benchmarking, an improvement method that I maintain may be the most underutilized yet among the most powerful. And lately, I find myself wondering if we might be on the verge of a multitude of improvements in health and human services...if we leverage the power of benchmarking.
The First Laps? In some ways, we've been on this journey a while. For me, it started around 2005 – 2010, when the concept and examination of Social Determinants of Health (SDOH) started to gain traction in healthcare both globally1 and in the US2. Hospitals were required to conduct a Community Health Needs Assessment every three years starting in 2010. Meanwhile, another key human service organization network, the 1,000 plus Community Action Agencies, had been conducting Community Needs Assessments every three years since 1965. Those needs assessments had always been focused on the root causes of poverty, which began to be referred to as Social Determinants of Poverty in the 2010s. Within a few years, people working in various health and human services began to observe that the lists of SDOH and SDOP are mostly the same. But they were still working pretty independently and on only a specific aspect of what were often broader, more complex challenges that Social Determinants present.
Out of Nowhere Then something else happened that, to me, revealed another key to responding to social determinants. And it came from maybe the last place I would have guessed would be a source of inspiration: Covid19. During the Covid19 years, when facilitating the development of new Strategic Plans, clients began asking me to include in interviews with stakeholders a question about any “bright spot” in their experience with the Pandemic. They wondered if something...anything...had come from all the tragedy and disruption. Almost to a person and without hesitation, interviewees answered “yes”, explaining that they highly valued the power of collaboration across organizations and areas of expertise. COVID19 forced people from different organizations who “knew each other existed but had rarely or never worked together” to meet and identify ways to respond to the rapidly escalating crisis. For them, the experience was a gamechanger, with many choosing to retain some of those innovative approaches as permanent process improvements. They hoped that even as the pandemic waned, they could find a way to keep this collaboration, and the innovation that came from it, going.
The Power of Learning from Others What if social determinants could be next focus of this kind of collaboration? If so, what would be the “next step” beyond the initial commitment to work together to solve more challenges? Perhaps carefully define the problem. Then move on to find new and different (innovative) solutions. That's where benchmarking may open the door. Learning from others, in the same “industry” (health and human services) is an enormous opportunity. How many communities in the US have a health care organization or a Community Action Agency? Or both? And a Health Department? And a United Way Agency? And one or more philanthropists that have a passion for the particular problem of focus? You get the idea.
And what if in a few communities, these organizations came together and worked on the same, or similar challenge you want to address, and they had great success, but you just don’t know about it (yet)? Imagine the power of learning from each other.
Now add out of industry benchmarking. Think of the expanded potential to find a part, or maybe the core, of a solution to what you are working to improve from some organization or group that on the surface, isn't anything like yours. Perhaps counter-intuitive, and yet Benchmarking experts like Bob Camp found that out-if-industry benchmarking actually leads to the biggest breakthroughs. If you open your search for a best practice or “better way” to include similar organizations, and even different ones, the possibilities could be endless. Remember, Tom Dahlborg and I can give you specific examples of how auto racing inspired significant improvements in healthcare.
Right Time, Right Tools? So here we are today. Multiple organizations see the same challenges (social determinants), they had a taste of the power of collaboration (response to Covid19), and they might just need the right tool to innovate (Benchmarking). I've said it before: "the solution probably already exists". I can't wait to see what happens next. You?
If you are interested in social determinants, collaboration, innovation, or benchmarking, I’d love to talk to you about the possibilities.
Contact me at your convenience.
Jeff
1 The World Health Organization Commission on Social Determinants was operational from 2005 – 2008, they delivery their final report to WHO in July of 2008.
2 The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (AFA) of 2010 included requirements that hospitals conduct a Community Health Needs Assessment every three years. These assessments assemble, analyze, and prioritize needs across many social determinants of health.
Second, my topic was how quality tools and principles could be used to make a very important management report, in this case the Business Plan, even better. Ever since I first learned about quality and process improvement, one of my strongest interests, I've continued to find ways in which the fundamentals, and even some specific tools, could be used in other business practices and products including finance, professional development, and even Strategic Planning, my other strongest interest. So my presentation focused on ways I have used various improvement concepts and tools to create a better business plan...a Business Plan Designed for Quality. And to clarify, this refers to the business plan that a CFO, a Board, or a bank would want to see before approving a major investment to fund product or service development or capital expense.
in a presentation to the West Michigan Association of Financial Professionals at their Fall Forum. What a great group! I had the pleasure of sitting in on some other presentations that day. All had valuable content, and some really insightful dialogue ensued. If you’re a financial professional in West Michigan, and already a member, you’re part of a great association. If you’re not a member, I encourage you to check them out!
We began this series with a detailed explanation of four key criteria for selecting capital projects. In our previous installment, we focused on five critical factors for optimal implementation. Together, these principles form a strong foundation for successful capital investments. However, in today’s fast-evolving operating environment, a few additional considerations can make all the difference—insights our clients consistently emphasize as essential.
These opportunities may arise with a competitor, in a different economic sector (e.g. retail setting), or with another organization in the human services sector focusing on one or more relevant social determinants. To assess these potential partnerships effectively, revisit the four Project Selection Criteria discussed earlier (see sidebar). Evaluate each opportunity for strategic alignment, financial impact, organizational/system influence, and risk. A well-chosen partnership can enhance project success, expand resources, and create long-term value.
I really enjoy working on Community Needs Assessments (CNAs). For me, it’s the critical starting point on the road to meaningful measurable improvement in the health and wellbeing of all community members. So, you can imagine how excited I was when one of my clients invited me to join them in a Podcast to talk about the CNA that we just completed.
Welcome to a new year, filled with new opportunities. And what better time to set the stage for success than at the beginning? You’ve probably heard this kind of thinking in one or more quotes (e.g. Well begun is half done – Aristotle). In fact, these first few weeks of the year really are ideal to engage in a couple of key activities that will create momentum and pay dividends through the months ahead. Let’s run through a short list of ways to leverage this perfect timing.
We suggest that there are four major types of criteria, each of which were addressed in previous posts in this series (see sidebar). If the selection criteria deserve extra scrutiny in an era of tight capital, then it stands to reason that implementation and project management also need added focus. And at that stage, it’s all about the details, especially these five.
As the calendar draws to a close it's a great time to look forward by looking back. What do I mean? You can use data from past performance to identify opportunities for future improvement. And none of this requires a lot of time, which probably sounds especially good during this holiday-infused, busy time of year. Let's take a closer look at several ways to “pay it forward” with your data.
The concept of a Risk Assessment is not new, however incorporating a few tools and concepts can strengthen the reliability of the assessment. With these tools, the assessment can be more thorough and consider circumstances that might otherwise be overlooked. The fourth criterion, Risk Assessment, is intentionally positioned last so useful data gained from examining the other three can inform the risks to be considered.
Some scenarios may relate to major trends (e.g. workforce shortage), while others stem from unique circumstances related to one or more of the requests (e.g. a competitor planning a similar investment). Use these as column headers in a matrix, with the various capital proposals as the row headers. Then, use symbols to indicate negative (-) or positive (+) impact that each scenario (column header) would likely have on each capital request (row header), keeping in mind that an empty cell (no impact) is also possible for any scenario/project combination. The completed table (see example at right) gives evaluators another way to compare the risk of the proposals.
In an era of limited capital, and slowly recovering margins, organizations must exercise more caution and scrutiny than ever in deciding what will be funded. The changing landscapes of competition and consumer expectations can further complicate these decisions. In this series, we describe four types of criteria, and then some additional considerations, all designed to to help you choose the projects most likely to succeed. In the previous two posts, we introduced the first two of four important criteria: Strategic Alignment and Financial Feasibility.
Like Strategic Alignment, the third criterion, Organizational / System Impact, is based on a broader, overall view of the organization. It could be seen as a derivative or hybrid of strategic and financial views. However, it can add some additional helpful perspectives in evaluating a capital investment.
Portfolio View: Will the investment maintain favorable share in a growing market (Star Quadrant) or possibly fuel growth by improving share in a growing market (Question Quadrant)? How do you maintain items still providing high return but pay attention to product or service life cycles? The answers can be found by understanding where the capital investment fits in the traditional portfolio view (see Diagram). However, also take stock of how all other current services would be positioned in the portfolio. Remember the best portfolio for achieving long term sustainability is one with investments balanced among the four quadrants. Your organization may be better served by a capital project fitting into an under-represented quadrant.