If it Bleeds, Does it Always Lead? Newsworthy Notes Hidden Under the Bench

U.S.News Best Hospitals

U.S.News hospital rankings are out and so are the promo shields marking the best hospitals and services in various communities across the country. The question that always surfaces is, "is this about quality or popularity?"

When 70% of consumers studied say they are dissatisfied with their patient experiences, these rankings get blurred in a fragmented maze of today's healthcare delivery.

According to research, the United States ranks near the bottom on access to care, administrative efficiency, equity, and healthcare outcomes. One clear differentiator that makes other countries better is they invest in primary care systems to ensure that high-value services are equitably available.

When something is lacking, others take over. Enter Amazon, CVS, Walgreens, and Walmart for retail primary care.

Ranked hospitals also use their U.S.News ratings in 61% of their direct-to-patient advertising. The cost to buy the U.S. News promotional shield added to the advertising placement expense - albeit the social media postings are generally free - leaves one to question the rationale of spending six-figure amounts.

Granted, it does make hospital boards of directors, some physicians, and leaders feel good about perceived quality, but what about the patient as a consumer? Do they care?

Twenty years ago they did. A Chicago study showed that improvements in ratings resulted in Medicare patients shifting business to higher-ranked hospitals resulting in $750 million changing hands.

Are these numbers higher today given digital access to more information, changing demographics along with the demand for more convenience and transparency?

Is the quality better, or is it still a popularity contest?

Research today says it remains an expensive 'work in progress.'

__________________________________________

Marketing & Communications - What Was Once Separate, is Now Together

LinkedIn connection, Tara McDonagh recently triggered this discussion by asking why the word marketing always appears before communication.

Is there a valid reason, or is it just an easier flow off the tongue?

IMO, marketing was more about sales and revenue, hence the sales & marketing marriage from the beginning.

Communication was mostly PR. The positive, feel-good mojo that drives image and reputation.

Over the years, the evolution occurred for many reasons...cost efficiency, building stronger brands, company positioning, consistent messaging, and the realization that what's inside is outside and vice versa.

Content is now king. Good communication delivers the content.

Marketing supports the brand and sales, is at the mercy of operations, and stakes a claim for the product to drive revenue.

Marketing is about ROI. Revenue paves the way to viability.

"Show me the money!"

________________________________________

Tactics Without Strategy is Marketing Malpractice

Tactic: "We need a bigger logo on the building."

#Strategy: The brand experience inside that building is way more important.

Tactic: "That billboard logo is too small."

Strategy: Who can read anything - but the logo - driving by at 70mph?

Tactic: "I need my hospital department featured on the website homepage."

Strategy: Consumers go to healthcare websites for three reasons...to find a doc, a service, or a location. Everything else is inside.

Tactic: "I operate on people's brains and I don't get any marketing support."

Strategy: What's your capacity, doctor? A three-month waiting list needs fixing first.

Tactic: "I want two sales liaisons for my cardiology practice. Put your big boy pants on and get me what I want."

Strategy: One sales liaison integrated with a multi-channel marketing strategy will drive a 15% increase in your business. Trust the strategy.

"Oh, when will they ever learn...when will they ever learn?" - Peter, Paul and Mary