Graphs generally represent a much better approach. Practitioners (or office staff members) who are comfortable with spreadsheet applications, such as Excel, can easily chart data using a computer. The graphs then can easily be updated monthly. However, even the practitioner who is still more comfortable with pencil and paper can be effective in developing the graphs. Graphs can portray information effectively. Notice how the graph in Figure 2 more clearly demonstrates the same information that was listed in Figure 1. In comparing the practice?s data from month-to-month, the practitioner should note if data (1) is better or worse than last month, (2) is better or worse than the same month last year, and (3) indicates trends or cycles. Simply contemplating the comparisons each month will make the practitioner think about their meanings. The numbers themselves are not the answers. They are the questions. For example, assume frame inventory is found to be growing while the number of frames sold is remaining steady. The data should force the practitioner to investigate. The practitioner might choose to keep inventory steady for a while - or even reduce it - and see if that impacts frame sales. Is the inventory outdated? Are newer styles needed to make the inventory more sellable? If that is the case, how will the practitioner shed the old frames? Better Comparisons

The process, as outlined so far, allows comparisons only within a practice. Comparison with aggregate data from outside the practice can provide a barometer of performance. However, direct comparison with data another practice can not only represent a potential violation of antitrust law (see Box), it is not necessarily a beneficial practice management technique. There would be little value, for example, in comparing the staff hours at one practice with those of another practice, as every practice has its own style and traits. Such direct data-point comparisons are unrewarding.
Practitioners Must Guard Against Antitrust Violations
Data comparisons among health care practices present the potential for violation of state and federal antitrust laws, designed to ensure competition among practices, warns Lance R. Plunkett, AOA counsel. Practitioners seeking benchmarks against which to measure the performance of their practices should strictly adhere to federal guidelines designed to help practitioners avoid risk of antitrust violation. Specifically, practitioners should compare their practice data only to: - Aggregate data (data compiled from a number of other practices on a nation-wide or state-wide basis); - Data that cannot be identified as coming from a specific practice; and - Data that are more than three months old. For additional information, see The Antitrust Laws and Optometry Practice, in the February "Practice Strategies."


Page 1 | 2 | 3 | Home

Copyright © 2003 Gary W. Ware Business Consultancy. All rights reserved.
This article has been republished with permission from Optometry: The Journal of the American Optometric Association