GE Healthcare Camden Group Insights Blog

Initiative Governance: Is Your Team Organized to Drive Decision-Making, Make Change, and Improve Culture?

Posted by Matthew Smith on May 2, 2016 11:59:25 AM

By Vesna Gernot, MBA, Vice President, and Nehal Koradia, RN, MBA, Manager, GE Healthcare Camden Group

The term “Governance” will lead some to think of their Board of Directors or the dozens of committees that some organizations have collected over time. We use Governance more broadly—as the foundation for a focused transformational effort and the engine to sustain performance gains. Initiative Governance is a critical component to any group of people working together to drive change—it nurtures or reshapes the culture and ultimately affects how work gets done.

In this context, Governance applies to an enterprise initiative, program, service line, or functional area. And the need for Initiative Governance is growing with new payment models driving integration across groups that, in the past, have individually provided direct care for the patient but have never had to be truly, directly accountable to each other – such as bundled payment programs or patient experience across the care journey.  

For illustration purposes, surgical services is a great example of how individual politics and incentives might cause misalignment. Most surgical service lines or OR departments have had a committee structure for years, but leaders commonly acknowledge that surgeons don’t attend, meetings are infrequent, real decisions aren’t made, and the “committee” becomes a forum for turf wars and complaints. The unintended results can be mounting frustration over inaction and overall distrust. (Click here for a related post on surgical services.)       

In order to avoid this frustration, organizations must set up an Initiative Governance structure instead of a committee structure. The difference is governance includes meetings that have a clear agenda aligned with key priorities, a cross-section of leaders that makes decisions, utilization of validated, transparent data, and an equitable approach to holding all parties accountable. It may seem like common sense—but not common practice because sustainable improvement and cultural change requires investment beyond a recurring calendar hold, dashboard, and an individual manager to run it all.

Here are questions we ask our senior executives and physician leaders to consider:

  1. Do we have the right people actively involved? Is our governance inclusive of management, physicians, and clinical staff? For physicians, do we have balanced representation of specialties, employed and independent, long-term and new, protagonist and antagonist? Based on strategic priority, do we have a senior executive sponsor that actively and consistently participates?
  2. Do we have the right structure in place or do we need to refresh it based on the times? Is there an operating structure, charter, and established guiding principles?
  3. When did we last review the guiding principles? Do our principles inform the policies and procedures? Does everyone know and have access to these? Who on the current committee was directly involved in their development?
  4. What data analysis have we done to clearly identify our strengths and improvement opportunities? Are we looking at the right measures, and do we know where we should be? Have we walked the committee through this data—is it understood by all and when it isn’t, do we do more socializing through one-on-one discussions?     
  5. Are we using the right metrics to track progress? Are we using data and the policies to make timely, consensus-driven decisions? Or do one-off anecdotes and silo’d views still create bias?
  6. Are we consistently transparent with the data? Do we break down this information by physician, service line or functional area to drive accountability?     
  7. Do we prompt immediate operational implementation? Do we have sub-committees in place to create focus in key areas and empower bottom-up continuous improvement?   
  8. Do we position formal and informal change leaders? Do we equip them with data and change management tools to know when and how to lead productive peer-to-peer conversations?
  9. What is our communication plan for goals, actions, and progress—for our committee, the broader service line or organization, physicians and staff, and related executive committees?  

Lastly, when we invest in this type of governance and it works as intended…

  1. Is senior leadership ready and aligned to address opportunities and barriers that are raised? Are they willing to empower this governance structure to make decisions?

GernotV.jpgMs. Gernot is a vice president with GE Healthcare Camden Group and works with health system executives to improve operational and financial performance through focusing on care delivery efficiency, strategic capacity planning, enterprise strategy activation, and change management. She is responsible for helping clients design enterprise performance initiatives and leading GE engagement teams to deliver. She may be reached at



KoradiaN.jpgMs. Koradia is a manager with GE Healthcare Camden Group. She has been leading healthcare organizations through transformation initiatives for over nine years. Ms. Koradia has worked with many large academic centers and community hospitals to transform their operating rooms, decrease readmission rates, increase early morning discharges, and reduce ER wait times by utilizing simulation modeling. She may be reached at



Topics: Payment Models, Vesna Gernot, Surgical Services, Initiative Governance, Nehal Koradia

Driving Surgical Services and the Tertiary Growth Engine

Posted by Matthew Smith on Feb 3, 2016 7:45:00 AM

By Vesna Gernot, GE Healthcare

Surgical services continues to be a key growth focus for health systems--fueling about half of a hospital’s total revenue today and forecasts for continued growth ahead. In fact, academic medical centers and tertiary providers are forecasted to benefit from an estimated 11 percent increase in tertiary care discharges over the next 10 years. Organizations are pushing to capture this high-margin growth opportunity by creating operating room ("OR") capacity and improving operations to effectively accommodate higher acuity, specialty cases, and ultimately to advance their regional and national destination brand. The environment has never been so complex with limited capital dollars forcing the maximization of existing investments, intense competitive pressures for staff and surgeons, and rising expectations from patients.

These organizations must optimize their surgical services platforms to drive profitable margins in this high-resource, high-cost care setting--meaning attracting more complex cases without adding ORs and staff or extending hours. But almost every executive we have talked to has assigned internal resources to the OR and experienced numerous, recycled improvement efforts with only incremental gains. ORs continue to be plagued by imbalanced case load across the week, a completely blocked schedule, low utilization of OR block time, frustrated staff, inefficient workflow, and long-standing operational practices by each silo – surgeons, anesthesia, staff, and support services.  

These projects are highly political where the stakes are high and part-time approaches typically do not work.   Achieving and accelerating meaningful outcomes, such as freeing up capacity for incremental cases or improving utilization, requires that organizations solve for the OR as a system as compared to the individual parts by executing three highly integrated components in parallel:

  1. Block Schedule and Scheduling Policies (e.g. allocations based on utilization, booking elective add-ons)
  2. Process and Flow (e.g. first case starts, room turnovers, pre-surgery testing)
  3. Governance and Culture (e.g. OR steering committee, data transparency, accountability)  

All three are critical, but here is a closer look into the block schedule and scheduling policies--a component regarded as the most strategic and one of the largest opportunities for improvement.

What Process and Schedule Changes Will Help Move the Needle?

Block schedules and scheduling policies are the most critical lever to optimal OR access, efficiency, and productivity. While process and workflow improvements contribute to overall efficiency, the schedule represents the most challenging but most impactful driver. For example, while shaving 5 minutes off of a room turnover is a surgeon satisfier, you cannot fill that time with an additional elective case or send staff home significantly earlier if the OR consistently runs 2 hours late. It is critically important to understand the return on effort for any changes proposed. 

Block schedules are a common approach to managing OR time and resources, however oftentimes they are not implemented as intended. In fact, many block schedules become 100 percent blocked over time and create an access issue, despite the fact that average overall OR utilization is between 50-60 percent. If not 100 percent blocked, existing capacity is scattered across less desirable, potentially smaller chunks of time, making it difficult to recruit surgeons or offer first case starts to current surgeons successfully growing their practice. These surgeons can operate late into the evening or their schedulers call around to other offices to identify unused time – an unsustainable process for retention and growth. Market competition demands that your system provides predictable, meaningful access.

Data Changes Minds

To unlock latent capacity, you could consider thousands of potential scheduling scenarios with a range of performance results, making it difficult to effectively solve for the best solution manually. The number of scenarios is driven by factors such as patient volume, procedure mix, procedure time, room turn, and staffing. These inputs are straightforward but there are many other strategic decisions that need to be included in optimal block schedule design.

Organizations need to understand the overall impact of key scheduling policies, such as:

  • Full day vs. half day blocks – What is the impact of the surgeon running early or late, such as a long case delay or idle gap in the middle of the day?
  • Elective vs. emergent/urgent – Particularly for trauma centers, how do you effectively accommodate unpredictable emergent/urgent volume while protecting capacity for scheduled cases?   
  • Blocked vs. open time – What is the right balance of blocked-to-open time based on factors such as growth plans and case mix?

Some scheduling decisions can be more political but have significant impact on overall results, such as:

  • Time allocations – Are surgeon or service level blocks most effective? Will the organization allocate time based on actual utilization?
  • Flip rooms – What is the volume threshold and case types when flipping makes sense? How much productivity does the surgeon and OR mutually gain?
  • Release times – What are the automatic and voluntary release times and when will a surgeon appropriately receive credit?  
  • Clinic – How will you align surgeon clinic schedules with the optimized block schedule?
  • Anesthesia – How will you align anesthesia resources with the OR schedule to address competition due to increasing demand from other procedural areas such as endoscopy?

Other scheduling decisions will have enterprise implications and should be aligned with enterprise goals:  

  • Level loading the elective schedule – What is the day-to-day and week-to-week variation of the block schedule? How does this impact optimal use of the ORs and staff across the week? How does this impact downstream inpatient capacity, process and resources?   
  • Acute care vs. ambulatory – What are the “right” cases to shift to ambulatory care settings based on lower acuity clinical needs, consumerism expectations and changing payment models? What is the downstream inpatient impact of backfilling this newly created capacity with higher acuity cases, including the PACU or critical care units?

All of these factors are in the data and can be modeled with advanced tools to make an informed decision about the option that best aligns with your organizational goals. This data is the backbone to a change management process, enabling surgeons and administrators to move from anecdotes, perceptions and tribal knowledge, to data-driven, objective assessment. In our experience, only advanced modeling tools and effective governance provide the horsepower to critically understand the net impact of the individual surgeons and parts, on the OR as a system.   

What Should I Expect?

We find consistently that a 10-20 percent increase in Prime Time minutes is achievable through taking a sophisticated approach that uses data and engages surgeons in the options available to improve performance.  An effectively implemented block schedule drives high performance, accountability, and positive financials for the organization and physicians.  

Here is an example of how a 16 OR tertiary facility improved their performance:


In later articles, we will cover the need to address process and flow to create credibility with surgeons that warrant changes to the schedule and the role highly effective governance can play in engaging, aligning, and driving accountability with surgeons and staff.   

Case Study, Operating Room Capacity


Ms. Gernot works with health system executives to improve operational and financial performance through focusing on care delivery efficiency, strategic capacity planning, enterprise strategy activation, and change management. She is responsible for helping clients design enterprise performance initiatives and leading GE engagement teams to deliver. Her experience in both planning and operations enables her to bridge strategy to execution. She may be reached at or 312-909-2874.


Topics: Block Scheduling, Operating Rooms, OR Optimization, Scheduling Policies, Vesna Gernot, Surgical Services

Subscribe to Email Updates

Value Model, Health Analytics

Recent Posts

Posts by Topic

Follow Me