On software subscriptions, disconnected systems, and the work that happens between them.
There's a good chance you're paying for more software than you were a few years ago.
Your EHR handles documentation and scheduling. Another platform manages inquiries. You might have something separate for billing, credentialing, marketing, payroll, team communication, or reporting.
And somewhere in the middle of all of it, you're still trying to run a practice.
Most of these tools were purchased for good reasons. Something wasn't working, a process was taking too long, or you needed a better way to manage a growing business.
But over time, something interesting happens.
You end up with a collection of tools that each solve a particular problem, without necessarily working well together.
And now someone has to manage everything in between.
The work between the systems
I've spent a lot of time on both sides of this. Running healthcare practices and working within a company that develops technology for them.
I've seen how much a thoughtfully designed system can improve a business. I've also seen how easily technology can introduce new work when it isn't implemented with the bigger picture in mind.
A new client inquiry comes through one platform. Someone copies that information into another. Scheduling happens somewhere else. The billing team needs information that lives in the EHR. The owner wants to understand where referrals are coming from, but the data is spread across three different systems.
None of these tasks necessarily takes very long on its own.
But multiply them across a team, hundreds of appointments, and a few dozen clinicians, and you've created an enormous amount of work that no one intended to create.
Often, that work falls on the same people who were already stretched thin.
Another subscription isn't always the answer
I understand the appeal of a new platform.
When you're overwhelmed by a particular problem, finding software that promises to solve it can feel like a relief.
And sometimes it really is the right solution.
But I've also seen practices purchase technology before fully understanding the process they're trying to improve.
A scheduling problem might actually be an issue with availability management. A reporting problem might come from inconsistent data entry. A communication problem might have more to do with unclear responsibilities than the platform people are using.
Software can help with those things, but it can't make those decisions for you.
And when the underlying problem hasn't been addressed, another subscription can become another thing your team has to learn, maintain, and work around.
What are you actually paying for?
The monthly subscription is only part of the cost.
There's the time spent learning a new system. Training employees. Updating processes. Troubleshooting integrations. Managing access when someone joins or leaves. And figuring out what to do when two platforms don't agree with each other.
There's also the less obvious cost of asking your team to change the way they work every time you introduce something new.
None of this means the software isn't worth it.
It just means the real cost is bigger than the number on the invoice.
I think it's worth asking whether a tool is genuinely making the business easier to run, or simply moving the work somewhere else.
Sometimes the answer is to simplify
One of the things I've learned about operations is that improvement doesn't always require building something new.
Sometimes it means using more of what you already have.
Sometimes it means connecting two systems so someone no longer has to enter the same information twice.
Sometimes it means getting rid of a subscription that's no longer serving its original purpose.
And sometimes it means sitting down with the people doing the work, understanding what's happening, and redesigning the process before deciding whether technology needs to be involved at all.
I'm a big believer in technology. I enjoy building systems, figuring out how things connect, and finding ways to make work easier.
But I'm not particularly interested in technology for its own sake.
I'm interested in what it makes possible for the people using it.
Your practice shouldn't have to work around its technology
Independent practices already have enough to manage.
The goal shouldn't be to assemble the most impressive collection of platforms or automate every possible interaction.
It should be to create a business where information is accessible, responsibilities are clear, and the people doing the work have what they need to do it well.
That might involve sophisticated technology. It might involve a surprisingly simple process.
Usually, it involves understanding the business well enough to know the difference.
Before adding another platform, I'd encourage you to look at the ones you already have.
Where is information being entered more than once? Where are people working around the system instead of with it? Which subscriptions are you still paying for because no one has had time to reconsider them?
And perhaps most importantly, what would make the work easier for the people who actually do it every day?
That's where I'd start.
Because the point of all this technology was supposed to be making things easier.
It's worth making sure it still is.