 The article, Critical thinking: Assessing the Darwinian Model of Mutation in Pharmaceutical Companies is incredibly insightful and stimulated the framework for the resources and tools available in the new Critical Thinking and Roundtable Solutions Members Only pages. Just click on the link or button in the side-bar, enter your email address and you will be granted free access. Only the first 100 individuals will be invited for free so what have you got to lose? Here is a brief overview of the granularity you can expect to help "genetically" engineer your content development and strategy. The different channels are evolving from conversations with health policy leaders, health economics influencers, and change-drivers from within and outside a variety of industries. Content frameworks are developing that include, how to define gaps in our medical understanding. within the evolving ecosystem of health policy and economics, identifying stories for journalists, understanding the data deluge, and unpacking research findings for validity and value. These gaps can then be operationalized for story topics, medical education proposals or content creation, HEOR content, or other stakeholder interests. Brian D Smith, over at PragMedic, actively researches the different components of the life science sector--looking for emergent properties or "mutations" that improve value-driven outcomes. Applying scientific inquery to a variety of markets allows them to transform scientifically in a measurable and sustainable manner. The article describes "Assessing the Darwinian model of mutation in pharmaceutical companies" and I wanted to unpack it a little bit within the context of medical writing whether for medical education or a variety of other clients--providing granularity for the fee for value DNA of modern healthcare. Think of The Violinist's Thumb, and the genetic display of Paganini's dexterity that contributed to excellence as a violinist. Or the FOXP2 gene described by Smith, as enabling the proper development of speech and language regions of the brain. What happens if noticeable and scalable "mutations" occur within organizations? Maybe there are smaller less noticable mutations that create effective shifts in communication or collaboration. Can we reverse engineer these successes to see what "genes" created the advantage? What firms are doing differently is readily uncovered by careful observation. The “mutant” groups question how the problem is framed, how things are defined and how things are connected to each other. This challenging is what leads to better solutions. For example, one group, trying to accelerate new product uptake, questioned if it was an adoption issue, redefined KOL influencing as a learning problem and redrew how the patient experience was mapped--Brian D. Smith.
Suppose we reframe the first OR mutation to enable continuing medical education teams (for example) to redefine how we identify the knowledge or competence gaps or issues in planning an intervention or learning activity. Many companies decide to frame this based on a request for proposal (RFP) or a therapeutic area designated as fundable by the pharmaceutical companies. In contrast, the "mutation" model might frame the task on a more macrolevel and take a more systematic approach.to contextualize the educational need. Instead of attempting to create a need around a funding request, the mutated OR considers "ultimate rather than proximate commercial objectives and setting aside functional perspectives in favor of overall business needs." Professor Smith now mentions a second OR mutation aligned with communication strategies. This may be an oversimplification but this model is focused much more on novel solutions that evolve beyond "well this is how we have always done it." Challenge the disease state verticals for distinctive high-value meanings. Value defined by whom? What should be measured? Strive to "flush out ambiguity and weak thinking". Remove barriers to critical thinking. The final observed OR mutation discussed in the article focuses on interconnectivity. How do different factors such as disease state define causal relationships to social determinants of health or health policy? Hidden assumptions and dense networks reveal multiple factors amenable to quantitative factor analysis. The evolutionary advantageous gene confers a competitive advantage to the evolving complex medical education market place. These critical thinking genes will be the framework for establishing excellence in how we define solutions for physician learning and the content that will help transform fee-for-service to a high-value driven organizational capability.  Join the group--many of your colleagues are already over there "mutating" as we speak. Thoughtful discussions about content development and outcomes analytics that apply the principles and frameworks of health policy and economics to persistent and perplexing health and health care problems. Comments are closed.
|
Browse the archive...
 
Thank you for making a donution!
In a world of "evidence-based" medicine I am a bigger fan of practice-based evidence.
Remember the quote by Upton Sinclair... “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!” Sign up for our newsletter!
|
