The previous blog discussed how real time communications was improving the Pharmacy, Physician, Patient transaction process.
Here
is the next step in the process improvement that hasn’t been nailed
down yet. We need to use improved communication methods to improve
patient care relative to medication usage.
In
the US, policymakers are painfully aware of the fact that several
unhealthy lifestyle conditions including diabetes and heart disease take
up a disproportionate amount of health care spending.
Researchers at the CDC have gotten even more specific with a report that 4 drugs cause almost half of the emergency visits in the US.
According
to researchers, nearly 100,000 hospitalizations every year are linked
to adverse drug events such as allergic reactions and unintentional
overdoses. Nearly half, or 48.1 percent, of those hospitalized were
adults 80 years old or older.
“These
data suggest that focusing safety initiatives on a few medicines that
commonly cause serious, measurable harms can improve care for many older
Americans,” said lead study author Dr. Daniel Budnitz, director of the
CDC’s medication safety program. “Blood thinners and diabetes medicines
often require blood testing and dosing changes, but these are critical
medicines for older adults with certain medical conditions.”
“Of
the thousands of medications available to older patients, a small group
of blood thinners and diabetes medications caused a high proportion of
emergency hospitalizations for adverse drug events among elderly
Americans,” he added.
Read more: http://www.thestatecolumn.com/health/according-cdc-four-drugs-er-visits/#ixzz1f1y6QKXw
Physicians, patients, and insurance companies have figured out how to improve the
transaction process of filling prescriptions. We need to go the next
step and use real time communications to improve the monitoring process.
One
could imagine tying a regular automated daily phone call check in to
any patient taking certain medications who meets certain criteria.
Outbound messaging combined with very simple DTMF gathering of
information from the patient would certainly help to lower the number of
ER visits.
For more information on these topics contact us at www.marketlaunchgroup.us
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
CEBP improves Healthcare: Part 1
Digging into a Health Information Technology press release I noticed an update on a HIPA compliance topic referred to as NCPDP Telecom D.0 (NCPDP D.0).
It took some research but this little bit of news reflects significant changes in the way that doctors, pharmacies and health insurance companies communicate with each other.
Specifically, it requires pharmacies and insurance companies to interact using real time communication standards rather than the previous batch information standards.
I know this sounds like esoteric stuff. Yet, think about your typical interaction with a pharmacy over the past year as compared to a few years ago. I deal with a very large regional drug store chain so they may be ahead of the curve.
1. If you need a monthly prescription refilled many pharmacies proactively call you to tell you it is ready. At worst, one need just call a number on the bottle and request a time to pick it up.
2. Annual updates or anything requiring your physician’s involvement can most often happen over the phone within 24 or 48 hours.
3. For the most part there is little or no involvement that is required between the patient and the insurance company regarding prescription drug processing.
4. I am also told that Drug Enforcement Agency work in conjunction with Pharmacies has been greatly improved. Unfortunately, due to the increase in prescription drug abuse this technology enhancement has been vital.
There are certainly still outlier scenarios but the vast majority of pharmacy/physician/patient interactions have become faster, better, and cheaper for all parties involved thanks to real time communications. Go to MarketLaunchGroup.us for more information on these topics.
Patrick Murphy
It took some research but this little bit of news reflects significant changes in the way that doctors, pharmacies and health insurance companies communicate with each other.
Specifically, it requires pharmacies and insurance companies to interact using real time communication standards rather than the previous batch information standards.
I know this sounds like esoteric stuff. Yet, think about your typical interaction with a pharmacy over the past year as compared to a few years ago. I deal with a very large regional drug store chain so they may be ahead of the curve.
1. If you need a monthly prescription refilled many pharmacies proactively call you to tell you it is ready. At worst, one need just call a number on the bottle and request a time to pick it up.
2. Annual updates or anything requiring your physician’s involvement can most often happen over the phone within 24 or 48 hours.
3. For the most part there is little or no involvement that is required between the patient and the insurance company regarding prescription drug processing.
4. I am also told that Drug Enforcement Agency work in conjunction with Pharmacies has been greatly improved. Unfortunately, due to the increase in prescription drug abuse this technology enhancement has been vital.
There are certainly still outlier scenarios but the vast majority of pharmacy/physician/patient interactions have become faster, better, and cheaper for all parties involved thanks to real time communications. Go to MarketLaunchGroup.us for more information on these topics.
Patrick Murphy
Wednesday, November 2, 2011
Why is the CEBP value proposition being stolen away from Telcos?
# Martin Geddes: Telcos will not be the hubs of multi-sided markets in connectivity. Commerce platforms will give away access to drive transactions.
According to Martin, I’ve been looking in the wrong place for UC/CEBP inspiration. For background, one of the key opportunities in multisided Telco related markets has been CEBP.
Geddes is typically right on target. For the most part, the innovative activity is not coming from Telcos or telco inspired and dependent firms, it is or will come from companies that are focused on driving consumer or business transactions.
Several major examples have made news examples.
Amazon’s Kindle has come with wireless data connectivity as a free feature for years. Of course, the KindleFire is being positioned as a one stop commerce platform. Gaming stations have Unified Communications tools baked into their systems. In theory, Microsoft’s cloud initiatives dovetails nicely with their Skype acquisition. Given track records for Skype and Microsoft it is premature to make any real predictions about successful integration and collaboration efforts.
One can certainly see mobile content providers giving away or subsidizing the sale of low cost mobile entertainment, sms, communication devices to teenagers and young people globally under the assumption that all this demographics’ entertainment purchases will flow through their mobile entertainment, communication,commerce platforms.
Providing mobile phones to remote villages around the globe to encourage the use of mobile commerce via sms is already happening. Similar to credit card companies in the US over the last five decades, get the commerce platform in the hands of the consumers anyway possible.
It seems that the important innovations so far, are with consumer driven initiatives. Obviously some of these niches like gaming, app stores, and mobile payments are very big.
Are any of these innovations and the value they are creating being driven by Telcos? Not really, as Telcos continue to deal with commoditization issues the only differentiator over the last few years has been provided by Apple’s alignment with ATT.
So, from the Telco perspective, how do we bring more CEBP/UC style innovations directly to businesses?
The irony is this challenge is no longer a technology problem. The tools, talents, platforms or apis required to integrate most communications functionality into practically any business process are understood and affordable. Many Telcos have platforms that allow for new services and apis to provide innovative solutions to clients. Furthermore, the client use cases and return on investment calculations are already proven.
The challenge that has not been overcome by most Telcos and telco dependent companies is their view of the customer world is horizontal.The “most” creative Telcos and vendors may admit to several types of customers: consumers, business- class, and enterprise...alas small, medium and large is the same customer segmentation done by my local ice cream shop.
The challenge for Telcos and their vendors is one of organizational structure and culture change on the revenue generating side of each company. Sales and marketing teams in CLECs and the vendors that support them have to get hyper focused on industry verticals...or at least CEBP vertical solutions.
Here are two examples of vertically specific opportunities that would allow Telcos to move beyond the selling of commodity voice and data services.
Healthcare is the vertical with the most money sloshing through it in the US today.
1. The Federal government is providing $42,000 subsidies for physicians to adopt EMR technologies. Amazingly, few of the EMRs that I have reviewed have any real communications functionality embedded in their platforms. Here are two challenges to be solved by UC/CEBP.
First, making sure that patients don’t miss appointments has hard ROIs understood by everyone in healthcare. Secondly, the ability to securely transfer EMRs within and between healthcare organizations and physicians has lots of lags and drags in the process.
K-12 and Higher Education continues to see above average growth while serving the most connected of our generations.
2. Outbound messaging and surveying applications have become a standard requirement for most schools and towns within the last six years. Why couldn’t a CLEC provide school districts or municipalities partner with Student Information Systems or Municipal CRM platforms to provide outbound student/citizen messaging applications as part of the voice and data packages.
Identifying the right types of CEBP functionality to add real value for customers is a matter of focus. Regardless, it does come down to a fundamental question. Are the Telcos and all the Telco dependent firms really willing to think about customers with a bit more complexity than small, medium, or large. Then, are the best firms willing to align their sales and marketing organization to take ownership of this communications value proposition?
According to Martin, I’ve been looking in the wrong place for UC/CEBP inspiration. For background, one of the key opportunities in multisided Telco related markets has been CEBP.
Geddes is typically right on target. For the most part, the innovative activity is not coming from Telcos or telco inspired and dependent firms, it is or will come from companies that are focused on driving consumer or business transactions.
Several major examples have made news examples.
Amazon’s Kindle has come with wireless data connectivity as a free feature for years. Of course, the KindleFire is being positioned as a one stop commerce platform. Gaming stations have Unified Communications tools baked into their systems. In theory, Microsoft’s cloud initiatives dovetails nicely with their Skype acquisition. Given track records for Skype and Microsoft it is premature to make any real predictions about successful integration and collaboration efforts.
One can certainly see mobile content providers giving away or subsidizing the sale of low cost mobile entertainment, sms, communication devices to teenagers and young people globally under the assumption that all this demographics’ entertainment purchases will flow through their mobile entertainment, communication,commerce platforms.
Providing mobile phones to remote villages around the globe to encourage the use of mobile commerce via sms is already happening. Similar to credit card companies in the US over the last five decades, get the commerce platform in the hands of the consumers anyway possible.
It seems that the important innovations so far, are with consumer driven initiatives. Obviously some of these niches like gaming, app stores, and mobile payments are very big.
Are any of these innovations and the value they are creating being driven by Telcos? Not really, as Telcos continue to deal with commoditization issues the only differentiator over the last few years has been provided by Apple’s alignment with ATT.
So, from the Telco perspective, how do we bring more CEBP/UC style innovations directly to businesses?
The irony is this challenge is no longer a technology problem. The tools, talents, platforms or apis required to integrate most communications functionality into practically any business process are understood and affordable. Many Telcos have platforms that allow for new services and apis to provide innovative solutions to clients. Furthermore, the client use cases and return on investment calculations are already proven.
The challenge that has not been overcome by most Telcos and telco dependent companies is their view of the customer world is horizontal.The “most” creative Telcos and vendors may admit to several types of customers: consumers, business- class, and enterprise...alas small, medium and large is the same customer segmentation done by my local ice cream shop.
The challenge for Telcos and their vendors is one of organizational structure and culture change on the revenue generating side of each company. Sales and marketing teams in CLECs and the vendors that support them have to get hyper focused on industry verticals...or at least CEBP vertical solutions.
Here are two examples of vertically specific opportunities that would allow Telcos to move beyond the selling of commodity voice and data services.
Healthcare is the vertical with the most money sloshing through it in the US today.
1. The Federal government is providing $42,000 subsidies for physicians to adopt EMR technologies. Amazingly, few of the EMRs that I have reviewed have any real communications functionality embedded in their platforms. Here are two challenges to be solved by UC/CEBP.
First, making sure that patients don’t miss appointments has hard ROIs understood by everyone in healthcare. Secondly, the ability to securely transfer EMRs within and between healthcare organizations and physicians has lots of lags and drags in the process.
K-12 and Higher Education continues to see above average growth while serving the most connected of our generations.
2. Outbound messaging and surveying applications have become a standard requirement for most schools and towns within the last six years. Why couldn’t a CLEC provide school districts or municipalities partner with Student Information Systems or Municipal CRM platforms to provide outbound student/citizen messaging applications as part of the voice and data packages.
Identifying the right types of CEBP functionality to add real value for customers is a matter of focus. Regardless, it does come down to a fundamental question. Are the Telcos and all the Telco dependent firms really willing to think about customers with a bit more complexity than small, medium, or large. Then, are the best firms willing to align their sales and marketing organization to take ownership of this communications value proposition?
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Was British Telecom's acquisition of Ribbit a success or failure?
On July 29th, 2008 BT announced it had acquired Ribbit for $105 million dollars in cash. At the time I was working with Jaduka, a Network IP company. Although, we were a bit envious many of us saw this exit as validation of a wider industry vision that the global telecom companies were ready to reinvent themselves. The vision of inevitably becoming a dumb pipe provider had begun to shock a few global telcos into action. The concept of a Telco 2.0 world was beginning to take hold, so we thought.
Two plus years after the acquisition has been finalized, implemented, and accounted, can it be viewed as a success or failure?
From the financial standpoint of the founders and investors in Ribbit, it must be viewed as a success. It can be counted as a minimum 8x return on the total $13 million dollar investment. The company had only been started in early 2006. Ribbit was a text book Silicon Valley startup and exit.
The next questions are whether BT and the wider industry view the acquisition as a success.
Ribbit's founders, lead executives and much of the original talent at Ribbit are no longer employed by BT. Some would consider that loss of staff natural attenuation during tech company acquisitions. Entrepreneurs having achieved a liquidity event don't typically stick around large companies. However, it gets tougher for BT to defend the loss of their leading executive force behind the acquisition, JP Rangaswami. His team was seen as the leading evangelists for re-inventing the Telcos.
Some might say that a move to SalesForce can be expected for an executive most comfortable with the title of chief scientist. World class executives make moves all the time and JP's team was recognized as leaders by the industry. So, maybe the people side of the BT/Ribbit acquisition was always destined to work out like it has.
However, the BT phrase that I have heard used several times over the last few months regarding Ribbit is that it is being "internalized." No one seems to use the term and then follow it up with a jaunty phrase of congratulations. I know corporate speak is strange but it feels more like a pyscho-analytical term to me. Internalizing the Ribbit platform within BT suggests that it will be used as a self help tool kit.
I am confident that somewhere within BT accounting a credit and debit EBITDA sheet can justify the $105 million dollar acquisition. The Ribbit platform as a tool for internal development and the Ribbit soft switch as a no cost alternative to vendor supplied development tools and switches could be viewed as "internalized" assets with depreciation value. Given the US dollar exchange rate, any of us could come up with a financial equation that justifies the deal.
On paper, both sides can probably make claims that the acquisition was a financial success.
Does it feel like a success to the wider industry? Is Telco 2.0 style innovation being driven through out BT or the wider telecom industry because of this acquisition?
At this point in time, the primary BT/Ribbit failure is one of hopes, expectations, and vision. There are worlds' of innovation happening within the broader telco application industry. Can this innovation always be supported and leveraged by the giant global telecoms. No, of course not.
What are the factors that drive success or precipitate failure and can we control for them?
Patrick Murphy
508-364-3464 (m)
pmcape@gmail.com
www.facebook.com/pmcape
Two plus years after the acquisition has been finalized, implemented, and accounted, can it be viewed as a success or failure?
From the financial standpoint of the founders and investors in Ribbit, it must be viewed as a success. It can be counted as a minimum 8x return on the total $13 million dollar investment. The company had only been started in early 2006. Ribbit was a text book Silicon Valley startup and exit.
The next questions are whether BT and the wider industry view the acquisition as a success.
Ribbit's founders, lead executives and much of the original talent at Ribbit are no longer employed by BT. Some would consider that loss of staff natural attenuation during tech company acquisitions. Entrepreneurs having achieved a liquidity event don't typically stick around large companies. However, it gets tougher for BT to defend the loss of their leading executive force behind the acquisition, JP Rangaswami. His team was seen as the leading evangelists for re-inventing the Telcos.
Some might say that a move to SalesForce can be expected for an executive most comfortable with the title of chief scientist. World class executives make moves all the time and JP's team was recognized as leaders by the industry. So, maybe the people side of the BT/Ribbit acquisition was always destined to work out like it has.
However, the BT phrase that I have heard used several times over the last few months regarding Ribbit is that it is being "internalized." No one seems to use the term and then follow it up with a jaunty phrase of congratulations. I know corporate speak is strange but it feels more like a pyscho-analytical term to me. Internalizing the Ribbit platform within BT suggests that it will be used as a self help tool kit.
I am confident that somewhere within BT accounting a credit and debit EBITDA sheet can justify the $105 million dollar acquisition. The Ribbit platform as a tool for internal development and the Ribbit soft switch as a no cost alternative to vendor supplied development tools and switches could be viewed as "internalized" assets with depreciation value. Given the US dollar exchange rate, any of us could come up with a financial equation that justifies the deal.
On paper, both sides can probably make claims that the acquisition was a financial success.
Does it feel like a success to the wider industry? Is Telco 2.0 style innovation being driven through out BT or the wider telecom industry because of this acquisition?
At this point in time, the primary BT/Ribbit failure is one of hopes, expectations, and vision. There are worlds' of innovation happening within the broader telco application industry. Can this innovation always be supported and leveraged by the giant global telecoms. No, of course not.
What are the factors that drive success or precipitate failure and can we control for them?
This post is one attempt to get more industry journalists, analysts or business school teams to take a deeper look at a few of the past technology driven acquisitions made by global Telcos. The success or failure of a particular initiative or acquisition is not the most important question. What are the factors required to drive Telco innovation? Can innovation really happen from within a Telco anymore?
Patrick Murphy
508-364-3464 (m)
pmcape@gmail.com
www.facebook.com/pmcape
skype:pmcape
twitter:pmcape
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
