KURMUDGEON KEITH
(under development)
Supporting the good (individual human life) by commenting critically on the bad.
TABLE of CONTENTS
Suppose it has been discovered that you have a 5 cm diameter lump on your liver.
Oh! is it cancerous?
Good luck finding out quickly, especially under the marvellous government medical systems in Canada, which ration the number of good imaging facilities such as MRI.
Suppose you have been ill, and the diagnosis was that you need an operation to remove your gall bladder.
Now you can have the operation and get back to work.
No
In the marvellous government medical systems in Canada you have to wait a month for the operation time slot, during which time you cannot work.
Where is the saving to Canadian society in that?
Those are two quick examples of a major problem with health care in Canada and increasingly in the US.
In Canada attempts to limit cost to government, thus to taxpayers in general, include rationning - not having adequate facilities and staff to meet demand. So people die on waiting lists.
(The Canadian system removed visibility into cost and claim accuracy by ceasing to advise patients of charges claimed for services to them. There is no cost-sharing - no deductible, no co-pay. You may or may not be able to pay directly yourself to get earlier treatment - unless you go out of the country as prominent Canadian politicians have done when it was their back at medical risk.)
In the US, the increasing bureaucracy and additional government interference resulting from the effect of earlier government interference results in delays getting care, in part because one needs to first determine if insurance will pay (some won't pay if you had the service already, even if it clearly is eligible for coverage) and that process has been bureaucratized in response to government rules and the cost pressures resulting from lack of choice and high prices (pushed up by government).
And be careful offering to pay regardless - government has tried to restrict doctors from charging for extra services.
(Refer to the book Patient Power by the Cato Institute for explanation of the problems and rational alternatives, and to Americans for Free Choice in Medicine for moral justification.)
(And I comment that in my experience over-charging is common, financial personnel working for doctor's offices are not well informed on business matters, office staff at not organized to provide information to their customer. What other business could sustain such poor performance?)
The delay in your productivity and enjoyment comes of your life span - will you act for your own life by voting to eliminate government interference between customer and supplier?
(I use the term "customer" instead of "patient" as the latter infers superiority of the provider. OTOH, I oppose taking advantage of the provider, which government schemes do (just ask providers in B.C. how their job is managed - and ask those who've bailed out by retiring early or changing careers, resulting yet again in shortages.)
How much time does it take you to purchase goods or services? Too much!
The majority of sellers are clueless about that consideration. Some invent excuses to not do what common sense suggests.
It must be nice to have a position in the market giving you the luxury of being so callous. (A position only sustainable with government force providing monopoly or oligopoly.) But in most retailing of goods market forces prevail - it is only the delusion of the owners who think they are invincible. Of course many such sellers will whine all the way to their grave instead of facing the problem (which can be seen in their mirror), when the marketplace speaks in rewarding alternative sources of supply.
Special attention is deserved by doctors, who schedule far too tightly do do a good job of scheduling let alone medical care. What other business could get away with that? (Imagine a hair dresser or airline or [fill in the blank yourself] being as late as doctors regularly are.)
Business owners interested in avoiding such problems in their own organisation might call Keith for assistance. Keith's Capability page
Many business people are sheep. I imagine their decision process....
"Everyone is selling those colorful sandals. Sure, we don't have enough space for customers to get around easily but _everyone_ is selling those sandals so we should. Oh, and we'll copy WalMart and put them on the exit side of the checkout counter (WalMart does well so everything they do must be sensible)." (Has anyone seen someone actually buy what Walmart puts downstream from the checkout counter in some stores?)
"Oh, Pho restaurants are the current hot thing, so we'll open one." Nice family running it, I chat with them while waiting for my takeout order to be prepared, but it is clear business is not as good as expected. "Umm, business is not good, we have to reduce costs, so we'll cut back on the menu, eliminating dishes like chop suey." (Which is what a consultant in Richmond advised to avoid confusing people. ?!) But I like chop suey, so I find a different restaurant - a small "teriyaki" place hidden in a corner, further out of my way home, but it has the vegetables I want to balance my diet. (The first restaurant did add "Chinese and Thai" to the bottom of their street sign, to help potential customers understand what food they might have instead of just relying on the "Pho" buzzword. Unfortunately, unlike what I consider "Chinese" and "Thai" to mean from my Vancouver and Seattle experience, they did not have many vegetables.)
Suddenly Canadian banks are opening more branches. Could it be they've seen the "community bank" fad in the US? Could it be they've noticed that one of the most successful US banks shows that a large company can provide good service locally, thus providing the advantages of both local banks and wide-network banks? (Is it likely the Canadian banking oligopoly understands how BBandT does that? Not likely, as the Canadian bank embracing the notion in greatest volume is still a confused bureaucracy pandering to bad ideas - in contrast to BBandT.)
More examples in Marketing Weenies
"Everyone demands a resume, so we'll insist that applicants for delivering advertising flyers door-to-door produce one." But in the real world, the much larger competitor who doesn't ask for much except "do the job" outperforms them on the street in accuracy and neatness.
"Cheap web hosting" says the page title. Do customers really want "cheap"? Sure they desire low price, but is it possible that many want good service first? Yes, price is important - but how are you going to achieve low price while satisfying customers? (Yes, it is possible but few businesses are well managed enough to achieve it.) Why does this business, who does try to provide good service, use the word "cheap"?
Obviously the copy-cat business people I describe aren't thinking as fully as I describe. If they are thinking at all.
What are they "thinking", or more likely just reacting to? In many cases popular notions that aren't sound. Perhaps they lack thinking skills - the ability to understand and decide. Maybe they are unduly influenced by others - they are who philosopher Ayn Rand called "second handers". Some of those others may be poor consultants, some may be family members. They don't understand the fundamental nature of the business and the customers - what really counts, what most potential customers really want. (Hint - what is the most profitable type of "shopping centre" in Canada and the US? Why?)
Call your Business Bureaucracy Buster for advice on reducing the drain on your profits. Contacting Keith
Copyright - Page version 2009.05.17 (1145PDT)
If any links no longer work please let me know - the Internet changes.