Transforming Healthcare Negotiation: The ‘Getting to Yes’ Approach

Introduction

In the intricate dance of healthcare negotiations, achieving a win-win outcome can seem like a daunting task. Whether it’s negotiating agreements between health plans and providers, determining reimbursement rates, or collaborating on value-based care initiatives, the principles of effective negotiation remain crucial. One seminal work that sheds light on this process is “Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In” by Roger Fisher, William Ury, and Bruce Patton. This book offers timeless strategies that can transform the negotiation landscape, particularly in the healthcare business context.

Negotiation is a Fact of Life

Negotiation is ubiquitous in healthcare. Providers and payers constantly negotiate to align their interests, share risks, and enhance patient care. However, the stakes are high, and the outcomes directly impact patient access to care, provider satisfaction, and financial sustainability.

The Problem: Don’t Bargain Over Positions

Fisher, Ury, and Patton argue against bargaining over positions, which often leads to unwise agreements and strained relationships. In healthcare, this can translate into protracted disputes over contract terms, pricing, and service levels. For instance, a health plan insisting on deep discounts while a provider demands high reimbursement rates can lead to a stalemate, ultimately affecting patient care delivery.

Principled Negotiation: A Better Way

The authors propose principled negotiation, a method that focuses on merits rather than positions. This approach is particularly relevant in healthcare negotiations, where the goal is to achieve sustainable agreements that benefit all parties involved, including patients. The four key principles are:

  1. Separate the People from the Problem
  2. Focus on Interests, Not Positions
  3. Invent Options for Mutual Gain
  4. Insist on Using Objective Criteria

Separate the People from the Problem

In healthcare negotiations, emotions can run high, especially when discussing sensitive issues like reimbursement rates or care quality standards. By separating the people from the problem, negotiators can address the substantive issues without damaging professional relationships. This approach helps maintain a collaborative atmosphere, which is crucial for ongoing partnerships between health plans and providers.

Focus on Interests, Not Positions

Positions are what parties say they want; interests are why they want them. In healthcare, a provider’s position might be high reimbursement rates, but their underlying interest could be financial stability to invest in quality care. By understanding and addressing these interests, negotiators can find solutions that meet the needs of both parties. For example, a health plan might agree to higher rates if the provider implements cost-saving measures or quality improvements.

Invent Options for Mutual Gain

Healthcare negotiations often present multiple potential solutions. By brainstorming various options, negotiators can find innovative ways to meet mutual interests. For example, a health plan and provider might collaborate on a shared savings program, where both benefit from cost reductions achieved through improved care coordination.

Insist on Using Objective Criteria

Relying on objective criteria helps ensure fair and transparent negotiations. In healthcare, this could involve using benchmarks like Medicare rates, industry standards, or independent cost analyses to guide discussions. Objective criteria reduce bias and build trust, making it easier to reach a mutually acceptable agreement.

Practical Application in Healthcare

Applying these principles can lead to more effective healthcare negotiations. Here are some practical tips:

  • Build Relationships: Establishing trust and rapport with counterparts before negotiations begin can create a more positive negotiating environment.
  • Understand Interests: Invest time in understanding the underlying interests of both parties, which can lead to more creative and acceptable solutions.
  • Explore Multiple Options: Don’t settle for the first solution that comes to mind. Explore various possibilities that can address the interests of both parties.
  • Use Data and Standards: Leverage data and industry standards to support your positions and make your case more compelling.

Conclusion

Effective negotiation is essential for navigating the complexities of the healthcare business. By embracing the principles outlined in “Getting to Yes,” health plans and providers can achieve agreements that are not only efficient and fair but also conducive to long-term collaboration and improved patient outcomes. In an industry where the stakes are high, mastering the art of negotiation can make all the difference.

ROI Calculator for Partnerships to Address Social Determinants of Health

The ROI Calculator for Partnerships to Address Social Determinants of Health is a tool designed to help CBOs and their health care partners explore, structure, and plan financial arrangements to fund social services for people with complex needs. The tool allows health systems, payers, medical providers, social service providers, and CBOs to determine the overall return on investment from integrating social services with medical care under different payment models.

Healthcare organizations are increasingly partnering with community-based organizations (CBOs) to address patients’ health-related social needs such as nutrition, housing, and transportation. These partnerships can help integrate services for people with complex needs, but health care and social service organizations often struggle to establish partnerships and contracts given their different structures and financial resources.

Access the ROI Calculator for Partnerships to Address Social Determinants of Health (ROI Calculator) — designed to assist CBOs and their health care partners to explore, structure, and plan financial arrangements to fund social services for people with complex needs.

The ROI Calculator for Partnerships to Address Social Determinants of Health is a tool designed to help CBOs and their health care partners explore, structure, and plan financial arrangements to fund social services for people with complex needs. The tool allows health systems, payers, medical providers, social service providers, and CBOs to determine the overall return on investment from integrating social services with medical care under different payment models.

This Better Care Playbook webinar describes the application of the ROI Calculator to health care organizations and CBOs. It features a case example of a Washington State CBO that used the tool to quantify the value of their services when developing a partnership with a Medicare Advantage plan.

ROI Forecasting Calculator for Quality Initiatives

The ROI Forecasting Calculator is an excellent tool for any organization looking to improve quality while keeping costs under control. It can help identify where to make investments in quality, how to prioritize proposed initiatives, and how to demonstrate the financial benefits of investing in quality initiatives. By demonstrating potential cost savings, this tool can also help organizations identify potential areas where they can reduce costs while maintaining or improving quality.

As healthcare costs continue to rise, there is an increasing need to find ways to improve quality while keeping expenses under control. The ROI Forecasting Calculator for Quality Initiatives is a web-based tool that is designed to help state Medicaid agencies, health plans, and other stakeholders assess and demonstrate the cost-savings potential of efforts to improve quality.

The ROI Calculator is an easy-to-use tool that walks users through a step-by-step process to develop ROI forecasts for proposed quality initiatives. Users are asked to enter a variety of assumptions, including target population characteristics, program costs, and expected changes in healthcare utilization. By using these assumptions, the ROI Calculator can help determine where to make investments in quality and how to target proposed initiatives for maximum financial impact.

One of the most significant benefits of the ROI Forecasting Calculator is that it can create a financial case to policymakers for obtaining the resources needed to make those investments in the first place. By demonstrating the financial impacts of investments in quality beyond their upfront costs, the calculator can help policymakers understand the long-term benefits of investing in quality initiatives.

The ROI Forecasting Calculator is an excellent tool for any organization looking to improve quality while keeping costs under control. It can help identify where to make investments in quality, how to prioritize proposed initiatives, and how to demonstrate the financial benefits of investing in quality initiatives. By demonstrating potential cost savings, this tool can also help organizations identify potential areas where they can reduce costs while maintaining or improving quality.

In addition to helping organizations make informed decisions about quality initiatives, the ROI Forecasting Calculator can also improve collaboration between stakeholders. By providing a clear picture of the financial benefits of proposed quality initiatives, the calculator can help stakeholders understand each other’s perspectives and work together to make informed decisions.

Overall, the ROI Forecasting Calculator is an essential tool for any organization looking to improve quality while keeping costs under control. By providing a clear picture of the financial benefits of proposed quality initiatives, this tool can help organizations make informed decisions, collaborate effectively, and ultimately improve the quality of care for patients.

If you’re interested in learning more about the ROI Forecasting Calculator, you can visit CHCSROI.org to access the tool and start forecasting potential savings. Don’t wait; start using this powerful tool to improve quality and control costs today!

Supporting breastfeeding employees is good for business

Business case for breast-feeding

Breastfeeding employees miss work less often

Business Savings: One-day absences to care for sick children occur more than twice as often for mothers of formula feeding infants.1

Breastfeeding lowers healthcare cost 2,3

Business Savings: The insurance company CIGNA conducted a 2-year study of 343 employees who participated in their lactation support program, and found that the program resulted in an annual savings of $240,000 in health care expenses, 62 percent fewer prescriptions, and $60,000 savings in reduced absenteeism rates.4

Investing in a worksite lactation support program can yield substantial dividends to the company.

Lower Turnover Rates

Business Savings: Studies have shown companies with lactation support programs have retention rates of between 83% and 94% compared to the national average of only 59%5,6,7

Additional Health Care Savings

Business Savings: Mutual of Omaha found that health care costs for newborns are three times lower for babies whose mothers participate in their company’s maternity and lactation program. Per person health care costs were $2,146 more for employees who did not participate in the program, with a yearly savings of $115,881 in health care claims for the breastfeeding mothers and babies.1

Higher Productivity and Loyalty 8

Business Savings: The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power found that a lactation support program for mothers, fathers, and partners of male employees made a dramatic difference in reducing turnover and absenteeism rates for both male and female workers. Employees felt more positive about the company as a result of the program and 67% intended to make it their long term employer. 9

Companies with worksite lactation support programs enjoy positive public relations.

What are the components of a successful Worksite Lactation Program?

A comprehensive program that includes the following four components has been shown in business environments to provide the greatest return on investment:

1. Privacy for mothers to express milk.
This can be a woman’s private office (if it can be locked) or an onsite, designated lactation room with an electrical outlet where breastfeeding employees can use a pump to express milk during the work period.
2. Flexible breaks
Women need to express milk about every 3 hours, or two to three times during a typical work day. Each milk expression time takes around 15 minutes, plus time to go to and from the lactation room.
3. Education
Employer-provided information and resources accessible through the worksite during pregnancy and after the baby is born help prepare women for balancing the requirements for breastfeeding with their job responsibilities. This information is also beneficial for expectant fathers. Companies that provide lactation information and support for male employees and their partners have lower absenteeism rates among men and lower health insurance claims.
4. Support
A positive, accepting attitude from upper management, supervisors, and coworkers helps breastfeeding employees feel confident in their ability to continue working while breastfeeding.


References:

1. Cohen R, Mrtek MB & Mrtek RG. (1995). Comparison of maternal absenteeism and infant illness rates among breastfeeding and formula-feeding women in two corporations. American Journal of Health Promotion, 10 (2), 148-153.

2. Ball T & Wright A. (1999). Health care costs of formula- feeding in the first year of life. Pediatrics, 103 (4), 871-876.

3. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (2007). Breastfeeding and maternal and infant health outcomes in developed countries. Evidence report, Technology Assessment, Number 153.

4. Dickson V, Hawkes C, Slusser W, Lange L, & Cohen R. (2000). The positive impact of a corporate lactation program on breastfeeding initiation and duration rates: help for the working mother. Unpublished manuscript. Presented at the Annual Seminar for Physicians, co-sponsored by the American Academy of Pediatrics, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and La Leche League International, on July 21, 2000.

5. Mutual of Omaha. (2001). Prenatal and lactation education reduces newborn health care costs. Omaha, NE: Mutual of Omaha

6. Ortiz, J, McGilligan K, & Kelly P. (2004). Duration of breast milk expression among working mothers enrolled in an employer-sponsored lactation program. Pediatric Nursing, 30(2):111-119.

7. EEO Trust. (2001). New Zealand’s Best Employers in Work and Life 2001. Auckland, NZ.

8. Galtry J. (1997). Lactation and the labor market: breastfeeding, labor market changes, and public policy in the United States. Health Care Women Int., 18, 467-480.

9. Cohen R, Lange L & Slusser W. (2002). A description of a male-focused breastfeeding promotion corporate lactation program. Journal of Human Lactation, 18(1), 61-65.

10. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2005) Division of Labor Force Statistics, Washington, D.C. Available at: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/famee.pdf

11. National Immunization Survey. (2005). Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Available online at: http://www.cdc.gov/ breastfeeding/data/NIS_data/data_2005.htm 12. Slusser W. et al. (2004). Breast milk expression in the. workplace: a look at frequency and times. Journal of Human Lactation 20(2):164-169.

12. The Business Case for Breastfeeding Toolkit (2011) Department of Health and Human Services, USA. Available at: http://www.womenshealth.gov/breastfeeding/government-in-action/business-case-for-breastfeeding/