News   Apr 24, 2024
 851     1 
News   Apr 24, 2024
 1.2K     1 
News   Apr 24, 2024
 597     0 

Mediocrity and Shortsighted Thinking

Northern Light

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
May 20, 2007
Messages
31,844
Reaction score
89,323
Location
Toronto/EY
So, after getting put on to the above theme w/our annual discussion of public fountains here at UT, I decided this topic needs a broader lens.

I'll offer an example or two, but I'm less concerned w/fixing one issue here than I am in asking the question how do we induce institutions and individuals the desire for excellence and the ability, not only to have foresight but to see beyond the narrow confines of a given problem.

So a starter example, for obvious reasons, I hope, I have to omit some details to protect the privacy of persons involved. (healthcare)

So sometime back, a certain GTA hospital admitted a patient on a Friday. The patient was stone cold sober, but unable to walk a straight line or even stay up for any distance (balance issues).

Said hospital admitted the patient at around lunch on a Friday.

They knew, in order to ascertain the patients condition, they would need to do an MRI.

The hospital does not operate MRIs on the weekend unless its deemed an emergency.

The MRI being fully booked for the balance of that Friday, the patient stayed as admitted through the weekend and then Monday, by which the time the backlog was so bad, that the patient had to wait till Tuesday for an MRI.

***

I will pause the story there for now.

To point out that the cost of an admitted patient in acute care shows on the books as roughly $1,200 per day, assuming they are an 'average' patient. (not high need)

A patient confined to a bed, is more expensive.

A delay of 4 days in accessing an MRI creates a sunk cost of $4,800

The cost of operating the MRI on Saturday and Sunday for one 8-hour shift, much lower, labour and power inclusive.

Does anyone else see a problem?

***

So at some point later a discussion occurs w/hospital management about this choice.

The answers given include that the LHIN did not expressly funded weekend hours for the MRI. ( a decision being made about such things that far removed from the direct provider could be a whole other subject)

But it was pointed out that the hospital could accrue savings if just one patient per week got discharged 3-4 days sooner, and that far greater savings were possible.

This resulted in a stunned look as if no one had ever realized that.

***

Suffice to say, the policy hasn't changed.

***

Related note, MRIs are purchased by individual hospitals in Ontario. Typically at a rate of 3-5 per year across the province. The hospitals are required to fund raise for them, the province won't cover the cost.

At roughly $4,000,000 per machine, this eats up a lot of time and fundraising costs for local hospitals.

Of greater concern however, is that by purchasing one-offs there are no discounts.

If the MRIs were batch tendered by the province, say, 15 over a 3 year period from one provider, there would be volume discounts. The exact numbers would vary, but 20% is a safe bet.

That means, on $60,000,000 over three years, the province could save at least $12,000,000 by buying province-wide.

That doesn't count the savings from shifting away from fundraising which often requires significant costs all its own.

***

I personally support robust government services and don't object to paying a healthy tax rate to do so.

But we really do need to demand better of decision makers.

'Efficiencies' are never as easy as some make it out, nor do they make billions fall from the sky.

However, they aren't that hard to find either, and I would be incredibly pleased to see even a few hundred million more wisely spent.
 
Last edited:
To tie that above example back to what I'm hoping for in this thread.......

How do we move people in general and/or government managers away from myopic thinking?

Its not that they are stupid, or uncaring, at least in most cases. Its either an inability or an unwillingness to see how things could be done better and to push for change.
 
A second example for consideration, one which is both government and private sector.

One of the great banes of UT'ers is the endless digging up of freshly paved roads/poured sidewalks.

Toronto's solution was largely to charge more to utilities that make a mess sooner than would be ideal.

Better than nothing, I suppose.

But here's a different solution.

1) By regulatory fiat, the big providers of fibre (Bell/Rogers/Telus) should be required to share under-road infrastructure in common.

They can retain their own back-end operations.

By compelling them to run only one cable under the road, not only would the telcos save a good deal of money, but it would greatly reduce the need to dig up the road.

The savings, would be good for shareholders and/or customers, as well as citizens/taxpayers.

What holds up change is either a lack of ambition or too much ego, I think.
 
The healthcare system is a great example of siloing leading to inefficient use of resources - but joint work requires system level integration, and we suck to high heavens at that. There is no disincentive in the system against upward substitution (and lord knows, we are even worse at preventative care). Pharmacare is another excellent example; ditto homecare. Don't get me started about e-health - the amount of paperwork in the system is still borderline insane.

And using your MRI example - the even more sober fact is that an unused MRI still need to be kept at superconducting temperatures.

What holds up change is either a lack of ambition or too much ego, I think.

Hardly - I think it is inertia, and a pervasive "don't rock the boat" attitude that stifles innovation. Plus there are too many cooks in the kitchen.

AoD
 
Last edited:
The healthcare system is a great example of siloing leading to inefficient use of resources - but joint work requires system level integration, and we suck to high heavens at that. There is no disincentive in the system against upward substitution (and lord knows, we are even worse at preventative care). Pharmacare is another excellent example; ditto homecare. Don't get me started about e-health - the amount of paperwork in the system is still borderline insane.

And using your MRI example - the even more sober fact is that an unused MRI still need to be kept at superconducting temperatures.



Hardly - I think it is inertia, and a pervasive "don't rock the boat" attitude that stifles innovation. Plus there are too many cooks in the kitchen.

AoD

I don't think we're in actual disagreement its a matter of the verbiage used to describe things. I would suggest a lack of ambition is inherent in 'don't rock the boat'.

****

I will share that when I came out of university some years ago, at my very first 'real' job, my co-workers could not believe the time I spent nagging the bosses to do things better.

They were nice enough people and competent, more so than I at what they (and I) were hired to do.

But I not only had fresh eyes, I was profoundly irritated by how software was not being optimized to make my job easier and faster.

I was not hired to do IT, but after much nagging, the IT guy was ordered to work with me to make changes.

The bosses were so pleased, I was promoted. (throughput of tasks per hour rose significantly, and mistakes declined)

I had only been there six months.

This process repeated itself to the point where I was promoted three times in 2 years.

What was going on before I got there?

It was people doing their jobs, competently but without any real desire to re-think how they were done and no nerve to tell the boss there was a better way.

I just couldn't stand wasting my time. (think fields in documents that could be populated automatically, or calculations being done by calculator when everything was already in a database)

I'm not saying the above to toot my own horn, LOL. I didn't do anything brilliant. I just looked at things and knew they could be done better, figured out how and pushed for change.

I have real difficulty understanding all the people who manage to about about their jobs either indifferent to how they could be done better with less effort; or who realize what could be done, but are (scared?) of rocking the boat in advocating for such things.

***

How do we nurture and facilitate ambition?

***

The attitude I would love to see fostered is best exemplified by this quote:

"Strive for perfection, settle for excellence"
 
I don't think we're in actual disagreement its a matter of the verbiage used to describe things. I would suggest a lack of ambition is inherent in 'don't rock the boat'.

Oh no, there is a slight but important difference - you, or even your superiors may have ambitions to do things better - but that ambition takes place in an environment where not causing trouble is highly valued - and if "political" cost of disruption is higher than the gain/risk (often personal gain/risk from a career perspective), it isn't going to happen.

Incidentally, some of our social policies create a very strong disincentive for change - when the price of change is losing one's job and potentially getting stuck with a sucky social safety net, it is no wonder no one wants change even if it is of benefit to organizations and society at large.

Also I have noticed that the urge/need to optimize and increase efficiency definitely is NOT a universal trait. In fact, it is a fairly rare one.

AoD
 
Last edited:
Also I have noticed that the urge/need to optimize and increase efficiency definitely is NOT a universal trait. In fact, it is a fairly rare one.

AoD


I'm going to go ahead and agree with this.

Prime example: surface parking. Surface parking is cheap to construct and maintain (relative to the alternative) and is an example of convenience and habit overriding function and efficiency. In this case, the efficient use of space/land. Obviously, building a parkade or underground car park is expensive and time-consuming, but the value of the land should more than compensate for such cost. This might be a more locally-apt example, I know.

I think the lack of thought given to efficiency in our society is based on the relative ease with which we live life here (most of us). When things are easy and work well enough, people become complacent and have no need to use resources efficiently because there is no perceived loss in not doing so. This could be completely made up, I'm no expert. I just think our society (Canada) has a serious problem thinking in terms of efficient use of resources (just look at water and energy use per capita, for example) and self-responsibility.
Now, you might be thinking "Oh, that MTown bastard is going off on a tangent again", but hear me out.
I believe that a strong sense of self-responsibility is helpful in being able to think in terms of efficient use of resources.
I believe this because a good sense of personal responsibility is indicative of being conscientious and respectful of others. When resources are shared (for example, in a business or in society at large through government services) their efficient allocation and use can only come about through being mindful of the fact that said resources are of benefit to many, not just oneself and are thus treated accordingly.
Of course, in the context of a bureacracy, the fact that the input resources (for example, money) are viewed as an abstract concept completely detached from the reality of what their source is doesn't help.

PS: You blew my friggin mind with the fact that MRIs are not paid for by the government. I did not know this. I assumed that it made sense that they would be (for all sorts of reasons, including the financial example you gave). What kind of ass-backward shit is that?!
 
"Strive for perfection, settle for excellence"

I strive for excellence and settle for whatever the hell I manage to produce. At work this works out as my skills and pride get me by very well. In my personal life.....don't go there. hahahaaaa
 
PS: You blew my friggin mind with the fact that MRIs are not paid for by the government. I did not know this. I assumed that it made sense that they would be (for all sorts of reasons, including the financial example you gave). What kind of ass-backward shit is that?!

They are - Local Health Integration Networks - LHINs - are health authorities that handles the flow through of government funding. The issue is that while they may have very good reasons for their limitations on when and how MRIs are operated, there are always unintended consequences. The system is rife with these sorts of issues.

AoD
 
They are - Local Health Integration Networks - LHINs - are health authorities that handles the flow through of government funding.

AoD

But....
Related note, MRIs are purchased by individual hospitals in Ontario. Typically at a rate of 3-5 per year across the province. The hospitals are required to fund raise for them, the province won't cover the cost.
 
Ah, I was referring to operating. Machines are capital - and the hospitals are actually not public - but private not-for-profit entities funded by the government for services offered (it is a big what to most people)

AoD

That part I did know. It still doesn't make sense that they have to fundraise to buy rather necessary medical equipment because they aren't allowed to turn profits in order to pay for said equipment and are not able to bulk buy through the government.

I feel like a Doug Ford right about now. Good thing I'm not running for public office.
 
That part I did know. It still doesn't make sense that they have to fundraise to buy rather necessary medical equipment because they aren't allowed to turn profits in order to pay for said equipment and are not able to bulk buy through the government.

I feel like a Doug Ford right about now. Good thing I'm not running for public office.

Apparently there was a bulk purchase pilot program for CT and MRIs back in 2004 or so and according to the report it produced savings of 25% of so. Why it wasn't continued, I haven't had a clue.

https://www.longwoods.com/product/download/code/17733

Though the article also offers some clues (institutional independence)

See also:

https://www.cadth.ca/sites/default/files/pdf/ES0303_DI_Equipment_Replacement_es_e.pdf

And also:

https://tvo.org/article/current-affairs/the-challenge-of-fundraising-for-rural-ontarios-hospitals

While one may feel like a DoFo, he is the last person one should expect genuine solutions from.

AoD
 
Last edited:
Apparently there was a bulk purchase program for CT and MRIs back in 2004 or so and according to the report it produced savings of 25% of so. Why it wasn't continued, I haven't had a clue.

While one may feel like a DoFo, he is the last person one should expect genuine solutions from.

AoD

May have it been discontinued because someone's friend was the one selling the equipment to the government?

Ok, I don't actually feel completely like a DoFo, that would probably kick my depression back in.
The only thing I expect from him is "efficiencies" and that I should "trust [him]"....so, nothing.
 
May have it been discontinued because someone's friend was the one selling the equipment to the government?

Ok, I don't actually feel completely like a DoFo, that would probably kick my depression back in.
The only thing I expect from him is "efficiencies" and that I should "trust [him]"....so, nothing.

I have a feeling not. Call me cynical, but I wouldn't be surprised *at all* that government would rather have the responsibility off their balance sheet, overall savings or not (another perverse outcome that happens a lot - saving money overall is different from saving money in my budget).

AoD
 

Back
Top