We take stability for granted, until it’s no longer there.
Some art forms and enterprises benefit from an unstable environment, where systems are in flux and the changes are unpredictable.
Others are nearly impossible.
How much priority do your investors, clients and employees put on building processes that do well in chaos? Or are you betting that the conditions will be just like now, but better?
Resilience is underrated.
Some facts and assertions about healthcare (particularly in the US) and then an outline of a change agent that could improve health, perhaps dramatically.
And so, a system that’s organized around treatments and status, that misallocates time and effort, causing stress for practitioners and patients. Historical bias in training leaves more than half of the population underserved and unseen, and, as a result, stress is high, many people don’t get the right treatment or hesitate to get any treatment at all, and costs continue to rise.
Systems change is difficult, because persistent systems are good at sticking around. They create cultural barriers that make their practices appear normal, and there are functional barriers as well.
When a change agent (often an external technology or event) arrives, the system must respond, often leading to change. All around us, we see systems changing, and often, that change agent is the smart phone. 91% of adults in the US have a smartphone, and it’s even higher among people under 65.
The ubiquity of the connected supercomputer in our pockets has overhauled the taxi industry, the hotel business, restaurants and most of all, pop culture. But it hasn’t transformed the healthcare system. Add AI to the mix, and it’s possible that change is about to happen.
Imagine an app that does the following:
Some patients aren’t comfortable with this sort of interaction, they won’t use it. Some doctors might be skeptical, or concerned about the shift in their status, and they might not work with patients who use it. These behaviors are typical of status quo systems, and both often fade in the face of better results combined with user satisfaction.
Like any tool that shifts an industry of this scale, the business models often take care of themselves.
The biggest information shift here is the more accurate collection and correlation of symptoms and treatments. The secondary (but ultimately longer-term) shift is finding threads of common interest and comparing doctors in their responses to symptoms. (And the side effect of giving patients agency and the solace that comes from insight can’t be ignored). Because both of these data shifts will lead to better patient outcomes (usually at much lower cost, with less trauma) the healthcare professionals who signed up for precisely this outcome will also thrive.
It’s not a panacea. But shifting information flows, improving peace of mind and the quality and timing of diagnosis are problems we can work to solve.
Systems change is never without real dislocations and regret, but this one might be worth building.
The smartphone is the most expensive device most people own, and the one they use the most.
Here’s everything you can’t have, can’t afford and won’t get, right here.
Here’s everyone you want to have an argument with, one click away.
Here is every piece of bad news we can imagine, much of it imagined instead of real.
Connection is powerful and magical. It’s also enervating, subject to manipulation and addictive.
Doing what?
When we choose which job to apply for, what career to commit to, which business to start, it might be worth a moment (or a few moments) to get at the heart of what a day well spent produces. What’s it for?
Here are a few to get you started:
It’s hard to have all of them.
Over the last 50 years, 167 different people have been part of the Saturday Night Live ensemble cast. Some of them went on to become comedy superstars, others lasted less than a season and are fairly obscure in the cultural pantheon.
But if you were tasked with creating an all-time MVP cast, it would be a mistake to only pick the movie stars.
Like a baseball team or the local non-profit, the group works when it functions as an ensemble, not a collection of individuals striving for the spotlight.
A brilliant and generous ensemble player isn’t someone who tried to be the big star and almost didn’t make it. They’ve chosen a different path and done it with skill.
Phil, Jane and Fred showed up to do a different sort of work. Weaving the fabric of the ensemble is not a runner’s-up prize, it’s the point.
Because most organizations don’t celebrate this role, they rely on simply stumbling around until they find the linchpin who can hold things together.
Two questions to get you started:
This is a complicated promise. It’s about commitment and connection and most of all, time.
If we’re saying that we’ll do what’s in our short-term interest and convenient, then there’s really no reason to say anything at all, since that’s what we usually do anyway.
Instead, we’re promising to shift our time horizon. To show up when we don’t feel like it, especially then. To invest focus and time and resources when there may be other more compelling short-term options.
Commitment is a reward in itself. It gives us boundaries and structure, and also creates meaning. Commitment only counts when it costs us something, and that cost usually involves shifting time.
Because we said we would.
This is not a real word, but it’s useful nonetheless.
When we default to doing what we did without examining our options, we’re ‘usualing.’
It’s a helpful way to save time, because we can’t re-examine every possible option or we’d never get out the door in the morning. We wear our usual clothes, leave at the usual time, take the usual form of transport, drink the usual coffee and that’s all before we even get to work.
This efficient habit might not always be the most effective, though.
When a new opportunity arises, it might make sense to say “I’m usualling” to remind yourself that you’ve decided it’s not worth your time to consider.
And this is how we fall behind. A little at a time.
If you’re the client or the boss, it’s possible that someone is going to create creative work for you.
Sooner or later, you’ll get something that doesn’t work. You might want to explain why it’s not good enough. Perhaps you can demonstrate how it doesn’t fit the genre or meet spec. Explain the historical context, the market demands and the structure of the problem and the work to be done.
That’s useful if you’re correct and clear.
Or, you might simply say, “I don’t like it.”
That’s okay too.
Frustration sets in when you should say “I don’t like it,” but try to justify it with a complicated and probably incorrect series of assertions as to why no one will.
Taste is elusive and often hard to describe. That’s okay.
But asserting that our personal, ineffable taste is also universal is probably not helpful.
There’s a delay between the time something goes wrong and when we notice it.
Sometimes, it can take years.
Part of the art of project management is noticing things more quickly.
And it helps to acknowledge that by the time we notice something, it’s probably too late to easily undo it, and our work involves ameliorating the damage instead.
What’s the best speed to drive?
I was caught in a snowstorm the other day. Visibility was low, so I was going about 25 mph.
Someone passed me on the highway, doing 30. Not 55 or 75, but fast enough to take a risk and pass the rest of traffic. Do that often enough and you’ll end up in a snowbank.
Our velocity through life is always relative. The pace of our career advancement, the expectations we have for change, the number of followers we have online–none of them are absolute.
You win a track meet by running faster than the other runners, not by breaking the world record.
The question, then, is, “compared to what?” Does this race deserve what you’re putting into it?
Choosing well can shift our expectations, our effort and whether or not we’ll even get to where we hope to go.
