Now! Who Is The Client (patient) by Andres Agostini (Andy)

1 Now! Who is the client? The true patient who ended up passing away? Or the ailing psychiatrist who is failing to be fully compliant (among others, to him to become an “excellent expert” is to rise up his own ANXIETY)? I am serious. I miss her but this subject is helping me clarify the question of ages of about—in the healthcare realm—Who is really the one who deserves to being delighted (life saved)? Clearly, the supervisory human systems all failed.

2 For 18 years I have negotiated with physicians to make certain that medical coverage (national and international) is available to a group of 210,000 (full universe) of Citgo's parent company. Through unions, local governments, private sector associations, and the public at large, I also negotiated schedules to medical expenses for a group of 700,000 people with the most diverse demographics. Things are much more treacherous that we would like. Again, a good look at the horizon without seeing the atmosphere, ecology, universe (sic), etc.

3 No one would like treacherous initiatives for the sake of solving critical problems. I have thought of the quot;Power of Simplicityquot; by Jack Trout, an author and consultant I really support and like. Also, my friend and colleague Trevor legitimately speaks with BASIS of SIMPLICITY. I gave it some thought. We both have our thesis concurrently right. I will explain. A system (non computational) can only be mapped/discerned/operated by using Systems Approach.

4 Then, one has to use The Transformation Box. On the left, there is the quot;known inputs.quot; On the extreme right side, there is the quot;desired outputs.quot; In between, yes, Trevor and Andy (to use a practical example) can institute concurrently quot;simplicityquot; and quot;complexity.quot; Between quot;known inputsquot; and quot;desired outputsquot; there is quot;throughput,quot; something like the totality of efforts to administer the processes implicated.

5 Clearly, this involves (a) processes, (b) transactions, (c) stages, (d) facets, so forth. To expand the example, Trevor has a mandate, by logic, not to make easier what WORKS PROPERLY IN COMPLEXITY. Andy, by the same token, has a mandate, by logic, not to make more complicated anything (within said system) when it already WORKS PROPERLY IN SIMPLICITY. Thank you, Trevor. It has been so fruitful integrate the framework a la Gestalt (holistically).

6 So SIMPLICITY, under its context, has a huge realm. So does COMPLEXITY. Harmonizing the whole picture to glean better? Posted by Andres Agostini (Andy) at May 14, 2008 9:15 PM

Now! Who Is The Client (patient) by Andres Agostini (Andy)

by Andres Agostini on May 14, 2008

Accessibility

Categories

Tags

Upload Details

Usage Rights

1 Embed 20

Statistics

Now! Who Is The Client (patient) by Andres Agostini (Andy) — Presentation Transcript