CENTRALISED REPORT COUNTER

One of the questions that often comes up as healthcare organizations look to get more deeply
into data analytics is whether their reporting functions should be centralized or decentralized.
The answer I usually give is:

“YES!!”

At Health Catalyst we believe in a concept touted by Reed Hastings, co-founder and CEO of
Netflix, refers to as “highly aligned, loosely coupled.” Highly aligned means everyone shares
the same strategic goals–team interactions are focused on strategies. Loosely coupled means
different groups have the flexibility to approach tactics differently as needed.

The approach is much like the offense on an NFL team (A National football league team).
The coaching staff develops a game plan and the overall strategic approach the team will take
to win the game. However, during the game, the offensive and defensive coordinators call the
plays according to the game plan. That is highly aligned.

Suppose at the line of scrimmage the quarterback sees a certain defensive formation and
realizes there is a better opportunity available. He has the freedom to call an audible and
make a tactical decision that is still highly aligned with the team’s overall strategy.

Loosely coupled means different groups have the flexibility to approach tactics differently as
needed.

Suppose at the line of scrimmage the quarterback sees a certain defensive formation and
realizes there is a better opportunity available. He has the freedom to call an audible and
make a tactical decision that is still highly aligned with the team’s overall strategy.

The purpose of analytics in a healthcare organization is to create insights that help achieve
strategic goals. Analysts are the conduits that collect various data points from different
sources that allow no analysts understand and act on it. The tactics they use depend on the
organizational structure.

One is a centralized model, where the analytics group is its own entity, independent of any
particular group.

In a decentralized model, the analysts work directly for the different groups or departments.

Each of these models has its pros and cons; the pros of one are usually the con of the other.
Let’s look a little more deeply at each to see where their strengths and weaknesses lie– and
why a hybrid of the two tends to work best.
Centralized Reporting Pros
The centralized model has many advantages. Overall, if you had to choose a single approach, this
would be recommended based on our experience with both. The strengths of the centralized model
follow:

 Standards and best practices vs. a maverick approach

This begins with standard tools. If everyone is sharing the same tools, the analysts are able
to share their knowledge about those tools as they learn. Having a standard set of reporting
tools ensures it can be done almost instantly.

 Flexibility
Organizations that use a centralized approach can shift resources where and when they’re
needed; those with a decentralized approach cannot.

 Ability to support individuals with different skill sets

In a centralized model, the organization can have a mix of skill levels since the junior or mid-
level people can always go upstream to get questions answered or learn new skills.

 Spot analytics trends vs. analytics islands

In a decentralized model; what is learned in the domain tends to stay in the domain. When
reporting is centralized the organization can aggregate reports from multiple areas and build
customized dashboards that enables executives to get ahead of trends.

 Better management of resources

In a centralized model, management is provided by experts in analytics who know how long
a particular task should take–and when a heroic effort is needed to deliver a particular
report.