My observation of the healthcare insurance reform debate and the war debate and the Tiger Woods debate and the economy debate and the obesity debate and the. . .is that there a lot of debates. There is little action towards an idea, centrally agreed upon that will move the U.S. and perhaps the world forward.
So, I came to the conclusion that all of us have become coffee table, computer desk, bar, stationary bike, recliner, barber shop statisticians as we are all engaged in Predictive Modeling. Let me briefly explain.
Predictive modeling is the process by which a model is created or chosen to try to best predict the probability of an outcome. (Geisser, Seymour (1993). Predictive Inference: An Introduction) In many cases the model is chosen on the basis of detection theory to try to guess the probability of a signal given a set amount of input data (Wikipedia).
The difference with us armchair statisticians in regard to predictive models for healthcare reform is that our models (for the most part) are not based on "detection theory" as described above. If so, that would mean that there was some level of understanding about how we discern potential outcomes. In most of the situations that we currently face including health insurance reform, the dynamics are completely without discernment.
In fact, most predictive modeling going on currently is based on one or a combination of: Self Interest, Fear, Preferred Media Outlet, and in the case of healthcare reform one's general depth (or lack thereof) of knowledge about healthcare.
Now, my biggest concern about the entire dynamic that we are facing is that given the circumstances (maybe given any circumstance at any time), speculation about what will happen in the future that is so highly unpredictable is a formula for failure and perhaps a formula for mass paranoia. It is not worth it.
What is the alternative? Well, I will stick to what I am most familiar with and what is the subject matter of this blog. . .Moving healthcare forward, in my opinion, will be much less dependent on reform of the system than it is on a paradigm shift in our organizations and individual consumers. The fundamental premise of healthcare is not cost, it's people, quality, and care in that order. I recognize that we have to make money to stay in business, those that know me will tell you I am far from naive in that regard.
However, the "money first" strategy has gotten us where we are in healthcare. The heuristic that emphasizes care is grossly compromised by financial considerations. In a model where people come first, efficiency is created through effective communication. Doing things well early in the process and setting the stage for effective self-care will inevitably save money.
Let's try this as a premise--1) focus on people/patients; 2) with this focus learn what effective communication is for each patient--make developing cultural competence central to effective communication; 3) resolve that effective communication for a year and the investment into it (not a highly expensive one) will impact quality/core measures more than anything else a healthcare organization can do.
Now, this premise is not going to quell the voracious appetites for the predictive tweeters and bloggers, ranting on about how the world is coming to a halt due to the actions of a single leader in one year. Nor will it make those demanding a public option without knowing enough about the pros and cons to do anything more than make an emotional plea.
What the premise above or any other premise you suggest can do is move us towards something we commonly agree on with the intent to use this heuristic to prove something or disprove something rather than speculate ourselves stagnant.
Make it a great day!
Showing posts with label cultural competence. Show all posts
Showing posts with label cultural competence. Show all posts
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Sunday, October 25, 2009
Go Beyond the Surface
It has been a minute since I had an entry. It has not been a break from the conversation, just one from my writing about the cultural competence and quality on our blogs.
This one will be short. It often occurs to me that we often think about health disparities purely from a deficit model. We approach the prevalence of adverse health outcomes with the notion that our opportunity lies solely in fixing what's wrong.
It is natural to try to repair the wrongs, especially when they are driving our intention. The issue with this is that it is a purely past-based approach that inherently leaves us with limits. We are limited in the sense that we begin to look for the root of problem and then spend countless hours and endless conversations about changing the root.
The problem is that the root is resistant to change just like we are. In fact, if I were to stretch a little, I would say that where health disparities (aka quality disparities) are concerned, trying to get at the root causes and change them won't work. Of course, I don't think change works all that well either.
When we enter into the conversation about health disparities, it is important to do a strengths inventory as well as understand the dynamics of disparate outcomes on the negative side. In example, is the "Chicana effect" with birth outcomes. This term has been used to indicate that interesting fact that low birth weight birth outcomes are similar to that of whites and in some instances have been found to be lower regardless of social-economic status. It has led researchers to conclude that there are things socially and culturally within Latino/Chicano culture that are protective in nature.
If research and/or anecdote via our experience gives us insight into a positive health outcome in a particular community, it is vital that we look at the dynamics involved within that outcome. They may be sociocultural, they be structural, they can be a number of things. And it is possible that they can be leveraged in our cultural competence and quality efforts.
Make it a great day!
This one will be short. It often occurs to me that we often think about health disparities purely from a deficit model. We approach the prevalence of adverse health outcomes with the notion that our opportunity lies solely in fixing what's wrong.
It is natural to try to repair the wrongs, especially when they are driving our intention. The issue with this is that it is a purely past-based approach that inherently leaves us with limits. We are limited in the sense that we begin to look for the root of problem and then spend countless hours and endless conversations about changing the root.
The problem is that the root is resistant to change just like we are. In fact, if I were to stretch a little, I would say that where health disparities (aka quality disparities) are concerned, trying to get at the root causes and change them won't work. Of course, I don't think change works all that well either.
When we enter into the conversation about health disparities, it is important to do a strengths inventory as well as understand the dynamics of disparate outcomes on the negative side. In example, is the "Chicana effect" with birth outcomes. This term has been used to indicate that interesting fact that low birth weight birth outcomes are similar to that of whites and in some instances have been found to be lower regardless of social-economic status. It has led researchers to conclude that there are things socially and culturally within Latino/Chicano culture that are protective in nature.
If research and/or anecdote via our experience gives us insight into a positive health outcome in a particular community, it is vital that we look at the dynamics involved within that outcome. They may be sociocultural, they be structural, they can be a number of things. And it is possible that they can be leveraged in our cultural competence and quality efforts.
Make it a great day!
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Cultural Competence is a Strategy
Human capital strategy is often considered to be a process that consists of many parts that operate separately. While this is a practical way to get certain things accomplished or checked off of a list, it is not a strategy.
What is a strategy?
I found many definitions for the term "strategy" when doing a search. Most of them were framed around military strategies. This one from Wikipedia resonated most:
A strategy is a plan of action designed to achieve a particular goal. The word strategy has military connotations, because it derives from the Greek word for general.
Strategy is different from tactics. In military terms, tactics is concerned with the conduct of an engagement while strategy is concerned with how different engagements are linked. In other words, how a battle is fought is a matter of tactics: whether it should be fought at all is a matter of strategy.
As our Cultural Competence-Quality Framework evolves and begins to be adopted by healthcare organizations, one fundamental premise is that the CC-Q Framework is to be leveraged as an integrated human capital strategy inclusive of and dependent upon many parts working in concert, fostering sustainable quality for every individual and organization that you seek to influence through your healthcare organization.
For example, in many organizations the focus of the quality efforts are relegated to those responsible for core measures. Occasionally, there will be a report in a leadership meeting and questions will be asked about certain things. However, it is the exceptional organization that is talking to those responsible for cultural competence, diversity, and inclusion about nuances based on individual values, beliefs, and responses that may be confounding core measures, leaving valuable information as a missing variable to ensuring a consistently positive patient experience.
This is not to say that every individual is going to be 100% satisfied with their care; however, knowing how certain dynamics play out creates the possibility.
Now, from this example there is a chain reaction: While the individual, committee, or outside consultant that is leading the efforts for cultural competence adds to the understanding of the quality/core measures leaders, the knowledge that is gained only has impact if those clinical and non-clinical professionals who are the touch points of patients and their families are made aware of what they can contribute to the fostering sustainable quality. It requires connecting with them, sharing with them, and getting their input in response.
Going further (interconnectedness is multi-faceted and inexhaustible but I won't go on and on after this example--maybe in a white paper ;-)) consider that soliciting and getting contributions from myriad areas and levels of employees, community members, volunteers, etc. fosters a level of engagement that creates ownership. Ownership of a thing, process, or idea fosters a relationship to it that engenders not just a good feeling but a level of commitment that leads to a greater contribution to the original idea as well as the many things that one might perceive support the original idea.
Jeremy Dean at PsyBlog says this about the psychology of ownership:
Effort increases perceived value: A table I have bought and struggled to build myself has more value to me than the same table I bought, for the same price, ready assembled. Expending our own effort means we've invested ourselves in an object, so it has more perceived value to us. Other people don't recognize this (and there's no reason why they should).
The bottom line is that when we leverage cultural competence as a strategy (and/or a core piece of your overall strategy) and we look for mechanisms to connect the dots from tactic to tactic, we naturally find how the pieces are seamlessly linked.
This is not to say that this is always easy. When we have been doing things a certain way for a long time change is challenging at its best. Nonetheless, when we truly understand cultural competence as a strategic approach vs. a tactic that speaks to checking something off of a list, the ROI can be tremendous.
Make it a great day!
What is a strategy?
I found many definitions for the term "strategy" when doing a search. Most of them were framed around military strategies. This one from Wikipedia resonated most:
A strategy is a plan of action designed to achieve a particular goal. The word strategy has military connotations, because it derives from the Greek word for general.
Strategy is different from tactics. In military terms, tactics is concerned with the conduct of an engagement while strategy is concerned with how different engagements are linked. In other words, how a battle is fought is a matter of tactics: whether it should be fought at all is a matter of strategy.
As our Cultural Competence-Quality Framework evolves and begins to be adopted by healthcare organizations, one fundamental premise is that the CC-Q Framework is to be leveraged as an integrated human capital strategy inclusive of and dependent upon many parts working in concert, fostering sustainable quality for every individual and organization that you seek to influence through your healthcare organization.
For example, in many organizations the focus of the quality efforts are relegated to those responsible for core measures. Occasionally, there will be a report in a leadership meeting and questions will be asked about certain things. However, it is the exceptional organization that is talking to those responsible for cultural competence, diversity, and inclusion about nuances based on individual values, beliefs, and responses that may be confounding core measures, leaving valuable information as a missing variable to ensuring a consistently positive patient experience.
This is not to say that every individual is going to be 100% satisfied with their care; however, knowing how certain dynamics play out creates the possibility.
Now, from this example there is a chain reaction: While the individual, committee, or outside consultant that is leading the efforts for cultural competence adds to the understanding of the quality/core measures leaders, the knowledge that is gained only has impact if those clinical and non-clinical professionals who are the touch points of patients and their families are made aware of what they can contribute to the fostering sustainable quality. It requires connecting with them, sharing with them, and getting their input in response.
Going further (interconnectedness is multi-faceted and inexhaustible but I won't go on and on after this example--maybe in a white paper ;-)) consider that soliciting and getting contributions from myriad areas and levels of employees, community members, volunteers, etc. fosters a level of engagement that creates ownership. Ownership of a thing, process, or idea fosters a relationship to it that engenders not just a good feeling but a level of commitment that leads to a greater contribution to the original idea as well as the many things that one might perceive support the original idea.
Jeremy Dean at PsyBlog says this about the psychology of ownership:
Effort increases perceived value: A table I have bought and struggled to build myself has more value to me than the same table I bought, for the same price, ready assembled. Expending our own effort means we've invested ourselves in an object, so it has more perceived value to us. Other people don't recognize this (and there's no reason why they should).
The bottom line is that when we leverage cultural competence as a strategy (and/or a core piece of your overall strategy) and we look for mechanisms to connect the dots from tactic to tactic, we naturally find how the pieces are seamlessly linked.
This is not to say that this is always easy. When we have been doing things a certain way for a long time change is challenging at its best. Nonetheless, when we truly understand cultural competence as a strategic approach vs. a tactic that speaks to checking something off of a list, the ROI can be tremendous.
Make it a great day!
Friday, July 10, 2009
Considering Immigration in Health Reform
Mr. Bhargava gives a compelling account discussing health reform and immigration. He points out that illegal immigrants are not driving up the cost of care. He is very much aware of the emotion underpinnings of the immigration debate and the realities of political leanings vs. the reality of situation. The writer clearly is an advocate for immigrants, but is also clear about the bottom line financial impact of this argument.
Make it a great day!
Don't Enshrine Discrimination in Health Care Reform
by Deepak Bhargava
Finally, the country seems serious about reforming health care. But with discussions about a public option, cost control and competition raging, one aspect of achieving true universal coverage is being left out: what to do about immigrants who lack coverage?
All of the plans getting serious consideration in Congress would exclude undocumented immigrants. Many proposals would even bar access to community health centers and emergency rooms -- a historic shift from America's humanitarian tradition that in an emergency no one should be turned away. Some proposals would exclude legal resident immigrants who have been in the United States for less than five years. Unless the debate takes a different turn, millions of immigrants will be left out of the system.
Make it a great day!
Don't Enshrine Discrimination in Health Care Reform
by Deepak Bhargava
Finally, the country seems serious about reforming health care. But with discussions about a public option, cost control and competition raging, one aspect of achieving true universal coverage is being left out: what to do about immigrants who lack coverage?
All of the plans getting serious consideration in Congress would exclude undocumented immigrants. Many proposals would even bar access to community health centers and emergency rooms -- a historic shift from America's humanitarian tradition that in an emergency no one should be turned away. Some proposals would exclude legal resident immigrants who have been in the United States for less than five years. Unless the debate takes a different turn, millions of immigrants will be left out of the system.
Labels:
cultural competence,
health reform,
immigration
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
Culture and Quality Part IV
A couple months ago (April 4) I began writing a series that I entitled Culture and Quality. As the conversation has evolved a new model has emerged. We have entitled it the: Diversity HealthWorks' Cultural Competence-Quality Framework for Healthcare Excellence.
The premise of the model is based on what we have seen over the past year in the diversity dialogue in all industries including healthcare: contraction and a general lack of cohesion about the future of what diversity and inclusion can be and/or needs to be in our corporations and organizations. We simply have not elevated the idea of diversity to that of a core business function that is unquestionable.
Now of course there are exceptions to this rule, but overwhelmingly, most people/companies frame diversity and inclusion as "causes" that they are committed to. Historically, the framing of what I call cause-oriented diversity and what it stands for have been absolutely necessary. To this day, this remains true. Nonetheless, herein lies the conundrum:
1. If diversity is more cause-oriented how does it line up next to other core business functions such as marketing, sales, fulfillment, and all related measures assessing core functions?
2. What if the "cause" of diversity is not held in at a steady level of urgency like other core business functions?
3. Since by their nature causes change--does diversity change or even potentially go away?
No matter how we answer these questions, and I am sure we could (and have) discuss each from different perspectives for days, the fact remains that if a cause-oriented diversity leaning is perceived as the norm, inevitably someone or some group can claim or feign that they are not accountable.
On the other hand, there is Quality. What about quality? Quality is. . .
--Unquestionable
--Valued
--Measurable
--Historical; and
--It is ALWAYS in the budget!
You will never hear any one say out loud that quality is something that is "nice to have but not a need to have". Quality is at the foundation of every organization in one capacity or another. Even if the ambition of delivering the "highest quality" of this, that, or the other is not yet realized, the ambition and possibility remain prevalent.
Healthcare is no exception. In fact, quality is at the core of how healthcare gets done. The President has made this very clear as the conversation about health reform has escalated. In virtually every address he has done around healthcare over the past 2-3 months he has talked about quality. On May 11th, in one of his speeches he said:
"I'm also committed to ensuring that whatever plan we design upholds three basic principles: First, the rising cost of health care must be brought down; second, Americans must have the freedom to keep whatever doctor and health care plan they have, or to choose a new doctor or health care plan if they want it; and third, all Americans must have quality, affordable health care."
This is a mandate that all of us can sign on to. Whether we are conservative or liberal, for or against universal healthcare, feel that healthcare is right or a privilege, quality, affordable, [accessible] care is something we can all agree is a priority.
So how does cultural competence fit in? Two answers:
1) Many hospital organizations have undergone culture change/quality initiatives driven by the likes of greats such as the StuderGroup or the work of Fred Lee (If Disney Ran Your Hospital). Some have had tremendous success, while others less so. Few have made culture change and competent culture evolution something they would consider embedded into how they do what they do each day or more so an ongoing discipline that is cultivated by leaders and cascaded down through the organization.
I hold that it is not because they don't want to. I fundamentally believe that it is because the culture change and quality efforts are not integrated with and inclusive of all of the facets of the organization. In particular many times the not included is the myriad diversity of employees, patients, families, and the greater community that make up WHO the hospital is as well as performs the functions of what it does.
So, I believe that there are cultures within culture change and that we have to develop and evolve our competence in these cultures within an organizational culture to assure continuous quality improvement.
2) We have created a model to discuss these dynamics and we want to share with you in a series of free web seminars. On July 1st and July 8th we will host two free web seminars to share the DHW Cultural Competence-Quality Framework for Healthcare Excellence.
The July 1, 2009 event will be for Diversity HealthWorks members only. If you register for this event and you are not a member of Diversity HealthWorks, you will not receive a confirmation link to the event. Membership however is free. So, if you are not yet a member and want to see a demo of the model and have the change to comment, Join Us.
The July 8, 2009 event is open to anyone interested. We look forward to seeing you on-line.
To register for the July 1, 2009 Free Web Seminar Click the Link Below:
DHW Cultural Competence-Quality Framework for Healthcare Excellence--July 1
To register for the July 8, 2009 Free Web Seminar Click the Link Below:
DHW Cultural Competence-Quality Framework for Healthcare Excellence--July 8
We hope to see you as we share this integrated framework with all who are interested.
Make it a great day!
The premise of the model is based on what we have seen over the past year in the diversity dialogue in all industries including healthcare: contraction and a general lack of cohesion about the future of what diversity and inclusion can be and/or needs to be in our corporations and organizations. We simply have not elevated the idea of diversity to that of a core business function that is unquestionable.
Now of course there are exceptions to this rule, but overwhelmingly, most people/companies frame diversity and inclusion as "causes" that they are committed to. Historically, the framing of what I call cause-oriented diversity and what it stands for have been absolutely necessary. To this day, this remains true. Nonetheless, herein lies the conundrum:
1. If diversity is more cause-oriented how does it line up next to other core business functions such as marketing, sales, fulfillment, and all related measures assessing core functions?
2. What if the "cause" of diversity is not held in at a steady level of urgency like other core business functions?
3. Since by their nature causes change--does diversity change or even potentially go away?
No matter how we answer these questions, and I am sure we could (and have) discuss each from different perspectives for days, the fact remains that if a cause-oriented diversity leaning is perceived as the norm, inevitably someone or some group can claim or feign that they are not accountable.
On the other hand, there is Quality. What about quality? Quality is. . .
--Unquestionable
--Valued
--Measurable
--Historical; and
--It is ALWAYS in the budget!
You will never hear any one say out loud that quality is something that is "nice to have but not a need to have". Quality is at the foundation of every organization in one capacity or another. Even if the ambition of delivering the "highest quality" of this, that, or the other is not yet realized, the ambition and possibility remain prevalent.
Healthcare is no exception. In fact, quality is at the core of how healthcare gets done. The President has made this very clear as the conversation about health reform has escalated. In virtually every address he has done around healthcare over the past 2-3 months he has talked about quality. On May 11th, in one of his speeches he said:
"I'm also committed to ensuring that whatever plan we design upholds three basic principles: First, the rising cost of health care must be brought down; second, Americans must have the freedom to keep whatever doctor and health care plan they have, or to choose a new doctor or health care plan if they want it; and third, all Americans must have quality, affordable health care."
This is a mandate that all of us can sign on to. Whether we are conservative or liberal, for or against universal healthcare, feel that healthcare is right or a privilege, quality, affordable, [accessible] care is something we can all agree is a priority.
So how does cultural competence fit in? Two answers:
1) Many hospital organizations have undergone culture change/quality initiatives driven by the likes of greats such as the StuderGroup or the work of Fred Lee (If Disney Ran Your Hospital). Some have had tremendous success, while others less so. Few have made culture change and competent culture evolution something they would consider embedded into how they do what they do each day or more so an ongoing discipline that is cultivated by leaders and cascaded down through the organization.
I hold that it is not because they don't want to. I fundamentally believe that it is because the culture change and quality efforts are not integrated with and inclusive of all of the facets of the organization. In particular many times the not included is the myriad diversity of employees, patients, families, and the greater community that make up WHO the hospital is as well as performs the functions of what it does.
So, I believe that there are cultures within culture change and that we have to develop and evolve our competence in these cultures within an organizational culture to assure continuous quality improvement.
2) We have created a model to discuss these dynamics and we want to share with you in a series of free web seminars. On July 1st and July 8th we will host two free web seminars to share the DHW Cultural Competence-Quality Framework for Healthcare Excellence.
The July 1, 2009 event will be for Diversity HealthWorks members only. If you register for this event and you are not a member of Diversity HealthWorks, you will not receive a confirmation link to the event. Membership however is free. So, if you are not yet a member and want to see a demo of the model and have the change to comment, Join Us.
The July 8, 2009 event is open to anyone interested. We look forward to seeing you on-line.
To register for the July 1, 2009 Free Web Seminar Click the Link Below:
DHW Cultural Competence-Quality Framework for Healthcare Excellence--July 1
To register for the July 8, 2009 Free Web Seminar Click the Link Below:
DHW Cultural Competence-Quality Framework for Healthcare Excellence--July 8
We hope to see you as we share this integrated framework with all who are interested.
Make it a great day!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)