← Back to Insights
September 22, 2021
Authors
David Burda
Topics
Consumerism Outcomes System Dynamics
Channels
Blogs

What Executives Think of Their Own Health System’s Performance

They say the first step to recovery is admitting you have a problem. That sage advice apparently applies equally to people suffering from an addiction and people running a health system.

A new study in the Journal of Healthcare Management reveals a big gap between what many executives think of their health system’s performance and how their system actually performs. You can download  this interesting look at healthcare executive denial here.  

Researchers from the Rand Corp. wanted to know if there was any connection between the subjective performance of a health system, as expressed by senior executives, and the objective performance of the same health system, as measured by publicly available quality of care and patient safety indicators.

To find out, the researchers interviewed 138 executives at 24 health systems in four states: California, Minnesota, Washington and Wisconsin. Each of those states has an independent agency or organization that collects and reports performance data from hospitals, health systems and medical practices. The study did not identify the executives or the health systems.

Using the objective data from the state agencies and organizations, the researchers separated the 24 health systems into three buckets—high, medium and low performers—based on how well the systems scored on the publicly available performance measures.  Of the 24 systems, nine were high performers, eight were medium performers and seven were low performers. 

Then the researchers interviewed the executives from the systems, asking them whether they thought their system was a high performer, medium performer or low performer and why. They also asked the executives about the factors that separate the high performers from the low performers. 

In 14 of the 24 cases, subjective performance was different from objective performance:

  • Six execs said their system’s performance was high when it was actually low
  • Five execs said their system’s performance was high when it was actually medium
  • One exec said their system’s performance was medium when it was actually low
  • And two execs said their system’s performance was medium when it was actually high

None of the executives rated their system’s performance as low although seven of the systems were objectively low performers.

In the 14 cases where subjective performance differed from objective performance, the executives cited a number of reasons other than clinical quality and safety for giving their system high marks, according to the study, including:

  • Comparisons to the performance of local competitors
  • Performance in national rankings
  • High customer satisfaction and loyalty
  • Effective leadership
  • Strong financial performance  

None of that really matters much to a patient if the care is lousy, dangerous or expensive.

In the two cases where the execs said their systems performed worse than they actually did, the execs, the study said, “… reported substantial variation in performance across the system and commented on the need to standardize operations and better align organizational cultures across clinical sites.”

Those are the health systems where you’d want to go if you were a patient. They’re better than they think they are. They have a chip on their shoulder. And they know what they have to do to get better. Improvement starts with self-awareness.  

As for what makes the difference between a high-performing health system and a low-performing one, the executives almost universally cited three factors:

  • Organizational culture
  • Organizational governance
  • Staff engagement and satisfaction

Yet, clearly, many of the health system execs in the study don’t take their own advice.

If you want to learn more on this topic, please read “Should Consumers Trust Hospital Advertising?on 4sighthealth.com. You already know that answer, but it’s worth your time.

Thanks for reading.

About the Author

David Burda

David Burda began covering healthcare in 1983 and hasn’t stopped since. Dave writes this monthly column “Burda on Healthcare,” contributes weekly blog posts, manages our weekly newsletter 4sight Friday, and hosts our weekly Roundup podcast. Dave believes that healthcare is a business like any other business, and customers — patients — are king. If you do what’s right for patients, good business results will follow.

Dave’s personnel experiences with the healthcare system both as a patient and family caregiver have shaped his point of view. It’s also been shaped by covering the industry for 40 years as a reporter and editor. He worked at Modern Healthcare for 25 years, the last 11 as editor.

Prior to Modern Healthcare, he did stints at the American Medical Record Association (now AHIMA) and the American Hospital Association. After Modern Healthcare, he wrote a monthly column for Twin Cities Business explaining healthcare trends to a business audience, and he developed and executed content marketing plans for leading healthcare corporations as the editorial director for healthcare strategies at MSP Communications.

When he’s not reading and writing about healthcare, Dave spends his time riding the trails of DuPage County, IL, on his bike, tending his vegetable garden and daydreaming about being a lobster fisherman in Maine. He lives in Wheaton, IL, with his lovely wife of 40 years and his three children, none of whom want to be journalists or lobster fishermen.

Recent Posts

Default Image
Consumerism
4sight Friday | February 9, 2024
The Machines Are Coming | Know Your Price Transparency Audience | The Medical Debt Wealth Transfer Read the… Read More
By February 9, 2024
Consumerism
Price Transparency? I Don’t Know About That
One of my all-time favorite Saturday Night Live sketches is this one about a voice-activated personal assistant for… Read More
By February 7, 2024
Consumerism
Bad Billing
If you tell consumers in a timely manner exactly what they owe and when they have to pay… Read More
By January 17, 2024