Team Engagement to Effect Change

As healthcare providers across the country prepared for the TEAM bundled payment program to go into effect in 2026, I began thinking about broader interpretations of “team” concepts in healthcare.

At a high level, we all know that teamwork is a vital part of providing care to patients in nearly every setting and for nearly every type of need. I cannot think of any scenarios where a patient does not interact with multiple people in any single healthcare encounter, ranging from check-in staff to nurses to technicians to physicians, and those are just the patient-facing roles. Support functions throughout our healthcare system ensure bills are being issued, paychecks are being paid, communities are aware of services, the lights stay on, the floors stay clean, and a myriad of other functions. As in most aspects of society, healthcare is a team effort.

When Corazon conducts projects for our clients, one of the first questions we pose is for our main points of contact to determine who can and should be involved in the process and in what capacity. Some folks are included specifically for fact finding purposes based on their knowledge of the program. Others have a direct interest in a how a program will be run in the future. Others will be responsible for ensuring follow through for any changes that are recommended.

We also have an open discussion about how to make sure information is shared back to those participants as it becomes available. Once findings are reconciled, it may not need to be shared with every person in the program, but it is important to have a plan to close the loop with all of those stakeholders, regardless of title or seniority. There may be certain things, like decisions about which approach to take, that will be discussed in a smaller setting, but sharing certain findings can help to validate what the team feels and thinks about the program while also reinforcing that their feedback was heard, considered, and is helping to shape the future of the program.

I had an interesting experience at a recent client presentation. We were charged with evaluating operations for the cardiac catheterization lab and knew that there were challenges with scheduling, overtime utilization, and other “in the weeds” topics. We heard about this loud and clear from nearly every level of the program, yet when we dug into the data, it showed there was still capacity available in their cath lab schedules. From a purely numbers-based perspective, each lab utilized less than 60% of the available hours each day, even accounting for turnaround time and various inefficiencies.

Of course, from the interviews, and digging deeper into the specific operations for each day and scheduling patterns, we were able to identify some practices that were leading to extended hours and overtime utilization. From there we developed a plan to address these opportunities and, eventually, improve efficiency across the program. However, that is our standard practice. We gather information, evaluate and analyze data, synthesize the two, add expertise, and present a plan of action. What made this situation unique was the engagement of the organization and individual team members.

When we returned onsite to present our findings and recommendations, nearly every member of the cath lab team was present for one or more of the sessions. The room was full, with every seat around the conference room table occupied and even additional chairs brought in from a neighboring conference room to accommodate staff members along the side of the room. A few factors likely contributed to this, some which are innate, but others which can be influenced by effective leadership:

During the session itself, the team was actively engaged, and we could see them leaning in for areas they were interested in. When we said there was available capacity in the cath lab, a handful of cath lab technicians physically reacted in their seats. When we expanded that that was only possible if the issues identified were addressed, they visibly relaxed. Throughout the entire presentation, the team’s engagement reinforced, not just to us as the presenters, but to the rest of the attendees, that this information was real and meaningful. Moreover, it was obvious that the team was energized and interested in acting on and supporting recommendations that would address these needs. It was up to department leadership to ensure that a good plan of action was put into place and accountability and follow through remained top of mind. Now the organization is working to implement these recommendations with a team of staff who are eager to make the potential future they were shown into a reality.

Not every organization will have this exact scenario. Sometimes part of the issue is that key stakeholders have “checked out,” but more often than not, we tend to find that is because of a prior bad experience that made them lose trust. When organizations are considering tackling difficult or complex problems, I encourage you to find small ways to make the staff feel seen and valued throughout the process. Corazon certainly works to build this into our engagements from the very beginning. If organizations ensure their team’s voices can be heard, they can become a significant resource to effect change.

By Michael Church