Closing the AI Adoption Gap in Healthcare

This title was summarized by AI from the post below.

A week out from THMA's Chief Supply Chain Officer Forum in Scottsdale with Kenan Yarboro, and one exchange keeps coming back to me. A speaker asked the room how ready their organizations are for AI. Leadership rated themselves an 8.5 out of 10. Frontline staff? Closer to a 3. That gap isn't a communication problem. It's a design problem. When the people closest to the work aren't shaping the solution, friction shows up exactly where you can't afford it — at adoption. And then we wonder why only 1 in 10 AI pilots delivers measurable labor or revenue impact. The health systems making real progress are doing a few things differently: - Treating frontline teams as co-designers, not beta testers - Embedding finance from day one, not validating results after the fact  - Leading change conversations with workload and patient care, not ROI  - Redesigning roles deliberately, before the tools redesign them for us As Ginger Sharp, CMRP from Legacy Health put it: "All too often, role redesign happens to us and not by us." The bar has moved. Soft ROI isn't enough anymore. But hitting hard ROI requires organizational conditions most pilots were never built for. Grateful to THMA for convening the conversation, and to the CSCOs who spoke candidly about where this is actually hard. https://lnkd.in/eZ9NGi3C 

The reframe from communication problem to design problem is right and it's rarer than it should be. What's underneath it is even more specific: when the people closest to the work aren't co-designing the solution, it's usually because the organization doesn't yet have a structure where their input is treated as signal rather than noise. The gap between 8.5 and 3 isn't just a perception gap. It's quite a huge power gap Lisa!

Like
Reply

To view or add a comment, sign in

Explore content categories