As always an honest insight driven by curiosity and benficience. While this may be feasible, it is not necessarily desirable or viable in the current healthcare ecosystem. It depends on which side of the health care system you are on. What is the primary purpose of the healthcare system? Its core behaviors are extractive and patients are necessary access points to the wallets that pay for their services. Patients are not customers, they are consumers and are playing in a casino where the house is stacked against them. There is no doubt that a consumer would find this desirable, only the biggest, most vertically and horizontally integrated health care system would find it desirable and even then one would question the motives. To be viable, patients would need to be in charge of the wallet, they are not. We need a free market where the best service providers rise to the top because they are visible and outcomes data is based on true value, outcome over cost, benficience and autonomy. I dream of such an open healthcare marketplace.
I think that is the undertext of what I wrote about. A true market needs free flow of accurate information. That is the network I speak of. While there are tectonic forces that are fighting for continued opacity (where there is mystery, there is margin), there are equally tectonic forces that are rising to push back.
Another brilliant piece, thanks. Really inspiring. I fully subscribe the need for a network-oriented "architectural intention" so that people, as patients, aren't left "swimming between islands" along their health journeys (and, may I add, healthcare professionals realize that for the most part they operate in weakly connected ones).
Thanks for reading. The interesting thing is that so many of my colleagues are shooting for rudimentary functionality because our baseline is so far even below that. We need iPhone/App Store levels of network development.
As always an honest insight driven by curiosity and benficience. While this may be feasible, it is not necessarily desirable or viable in the current healthcare ecosystem. It depends on which side of the health care system you are on. What is the primary purpose of the healthcare system? Its core behaviors are extractive and patients are necessary access points to the wallets that pay for their services. Patients are not customers, they are consumers and are playing in a casino where the house is stacked against them. There is no doubt that a consumer would find this desirable, only the biggest, most vertically and horizontally integrated health care system would find it desirable and even then one would question the motives. To be viable, patients would need to be in charge of the wallet, they are not. We need a free market where the best service providers rise to the top because they are visible and outcomes data is based on true value, outcome over cost, benficience and autonomy. I dream of such an open healthcare marketplace.
I think that is the undertext of what I wrote about. A true market needs free flow of accurate information. That is the network I speak of. While there are tectonic forces that are fighting for continued opacity (where there is mystery, there is margin), there are equally tectonic forces that are rising to push back.
Another brilliant piece, thanks. Really inspiring. I fully subscribe the need for a network-oriented "architectural intention" so that people, as patients, aren't left "swimming between islands" along their health journeys (and, may I add, healthcare professionals realize that for the most part they operate in weakly connected ones).
Thanks for reading. The interesting thing is that so many of my colleagues are shooting for rudimentary functionality because our baseline is so far even below that. We need iPhone/App Store levels of network development.