Opinions and discussion on content management and document management by two of the biggest guys in the business. *Measured by combined weight

If Healthcare Were Software

Author

Follow Lee

Disclaimer

The opinions shared here represent those of the contributor themselves and not those of their employers nor that of Big Men On Content as a whole.

U.S. Supreme Court building.

The Supreme Court hearings on the Patient Protection and Affordability Act (Obamacare)  last week fascinated me. It is one of the few news stories in recent memory that requires you to think rather than just react. In following the topic, I have tied to compare and look for patterns in other areas of my life to help me understand these complex issues. Maintaining boundaries of the Federal government and the limitation of its powers does not really have a good analog though but I go with what I know best. What if healthcare were like enterprise software?

So one line of thinking may go like this. The idea of the individual mandate would be like requiring everyone to have virus scanning software. Imagine, if when you go to work your employer requires you to pay out of pocket for security software. If you don’t, then they buy it for you and deduct it from your paycheck. Why? Because you use their network (interstate commerce) and when your machine is sick it has a negative impact on everyone else. They might also be able to require to do more than just install it. They might further mandate a wide range of other practices on what is essentially your property. (the broccoli argument)

But wait a minute – why should I have to pay for it at all? Shouldn’t the company (government) pay for it. Well if you are using a company asset that they acquire, control and maintain then that is simple question. Of course they should but with the growing popularity of Bring Your Own Device maybe it isn’t so absurd. Sure you might never have an infected Android tablet but odds are EVENTUALLY you will and doesn’t the company have a right to protect everyone else from the costs that you will bring to the population.

What is missing completely from the healthcare picture is that software benefited from it’s greatest disruptor of the past decade – open source. The community contributing code for the betterment of all. There is no such thing as Open Source Healthcare though.

But could there be? Why does healthcare have to come from either the central government or an individual. Why can’t it come from the community?

Fifteen years ago virtually every CIO in America would argue open source software would never run in their business. Now 100% of them are wrong. Why can’t the government (the company) ultimately benefit by facilitating access to healthcare(software) that is provided essentially free (open source) from the provider for all but the most complex and essentially expensive problems?

There are a million reasons why not still there are are things to consider here. On the negative, software is a static product with essentially no manufacturing or distribution cost as opposed to being a dynamic process (diagnosis) with a complex, expensive and immensely lucrative supply chain.  The capitalistic business model hardly disappears with OS. It is alive and well in the implementation services and support structure of open source companies.

For all the bravado around the “free” aspect of open source there is no one out there that gives the services away. For the healthcare analog this means that providers are still being paid. What is comparable is the concept of unrestricted access. Anyone can download it (access to knowledge) and decide on implementation without the vendor. This to me sounds like free choice of provider and the ability to direct funds at will for services. Who ultimately controls those funds? – the departments (states) , central IT (the Federal government) or the individual.

Today as the cloud provides choice for IT’s customers, the business is going elsewhere and IT budget’s shrink.  I further wonder about corporate software mandates being charged back to departments because they benefit from enterprise services even if they don’t know it.

Software unlike healthcare lacks a key element in this debate. Constitutional guidance. The framework and theoretical rules of engagement between the three branches of government are well established. Software in the enterprise is only guided by capitalism and hopefully common sense.

Lastly healthcare and software do share a common danger. That decisions about access, choice and funding are far more often driven by political expedience and ego that the long term benefit to the people or even the organization at large. In that regard, I hope that the preservation of the company/country in the face of enormous cost and risk wins the day.

Tagged as: , , ,

Categorised in: cloud, Consulting, Random Thoughts, Technology

1 Response »

  1. I will always refuse to like ‘mandates’, that said, what else could the government do, or the private sector, to curtail costs of health care?

    The current answer is nothing. They don’t want to do anything because too much money is being exchanged. But we HAVE TO do something to stop cost increasing and in a capitalistic society that is
    a sin when people are getting rich. It is a war that everyone is in denial about and those who are profiteering from it are spending alot
    of money to make those who need healthcare fearful of changing anything. In a war you have to sacrefice, everyone. A mandate was the easy thing, the fastest thing…the only thing for a president/admin who wanted to start the process of doing…

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: