Issue link: https://beckershealthcare.uberflip.com/i/1203108
27 INNOVATION MD: at's a tricky one. ere are a few that come to mind, but one is using mobile devic- es to communicate among care teams. I was just talking to our chief medical information officer, and she has been looking for a way to scale and define a one modality solution in means of communicating via mobile among physicians and nurses. We currently have multiple tools and ways to communicate, but it would be ideal if we could have one way of communicating in a secure manner versus multiple modalities. e other issue has to do with the prediction of using artificial intelligence. However, one distinction I want to make is that it's aug- mented intelligence, not artificial. e tech- nology is not designed to replace the scien- tific thinking of our experts and the field they represent. However, I'm really excited about the opportunity it presents with the ability to take hordes of data and, based on training mechanisms and algorithms, provide very significant data points that can augment the intelligence and thinking of how we can move forward and provide better outcomes, wheth- er operational or clinical. n Innovationeering: Creativity is dead ... long live innovation By Thomas J. Graham, MD, Director of Strategic Planning and Innovation, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, NYU Langone Health I t is equally fascinating and frustrating that one of the most important characteristics increasingly valued by healthcare and business leaders alike is also one of the hardest to define. "Innovation" is not an ethereal creative wind that blows through the corridors of your organization, somehow multiplied by implementing "Casual Fridays," bringing dogs to work and setting up a Ping-Pong table in the break room. Those metaphors for a creative culture have become rep- resentative of the concept of innovation but are not its substitute. I'm not here to knock creativity — it's an obvious and integral prerequisite for building an innovation archi- tecture, just as speed alone doesn't define the professional athlete but is a part of a complex mosaic that can be culti- vated into a high performer. Innovation is a discipline to be practiced. It is metrics-driv- en and process-oriented. Innovation is reducing transcen- dent thought to practice; in other words, it's putting ideas to work. Even an inventor isn't synonymous with an innova- tor, just as a pilot and an astronaut differ. They share traits and skills, but there is simply more gravity associated with the latter (no pun intended). All patent holders are inven- tors, but they are not necessarily innovators. (Later in this series we'll explore the relationship between technology transfer and innovation capacities.) As one of the original chief innovation officers in health- care, I have observed with pride and optimism the prolif- eration of that title, innovation centers and incubator and accelerator programs. Becker's, for example, now reports annually on the hospitals and health systems with innova- tion programs (from 25 of them in 2015 to 66 in 2018). In- novation has taken its place alongside patient experience and strategy as a discipline that was once thought to be in- visible and immature, but now is central to the identity and success of institutions of all sizes and in every geography. The propagation and proselytizing of innovation is timely. We've all received the memo about unsustainable health- care costs, shifting disease burden and the expanding aging population. Solutions to these pressing problems and unmet needs require a more systematic and logical approach — enter: innovation. Using validated instruments, developing and optimizing filtering processes, enlisting domain experts and strategically deploying capital are all part of the contemporary innovation playbook. The best news is that innovation is a team sport. It is accel- erated and expanded through collaboration; even organi- zations that may compete for patients can share new ideas that may complement each other, finding that a key on one campus fits a lock on another. That's not unlike the ethos of discovery science, where we share breakthroughs for the common good. Furthermore, innovation always occurs best at the intersec- tion of knowledge domains. Healthcare leaders can't af- ford to be myopic and concentrate solely in our sector. De- spite the fact that it is the largest concentrated component of the American economy, healthcare must invite expertise (and investment) from other industries, many of which have more longevity or facility as innovators. The purpose of this inaugural installment in the "Innova- tioneering" series is to connect and level set. We need to be working with the same understanding of nomen- clature and practice if we are to collaborate to solve big problems for large populations in faster and cheaper ways (also known as "value-based innovation," a subject for a later installment). I don't have to describe to this sophisticated audience how difficult it is to innovate at scale. Innovation is ardu- ous, nonlinear, fraught with failure and long to success. It's my hope that this column will serve as a vehicle to share best practices and lower the barriers to global partner- ship and to facilitate and accelerate innovation by pro- moting creative collisions. I can't imagine anyone being offended by being called an innovator: It is becoming a coveted consideration for in- dividuals and institutions, and it is becoming synonymous with quality and thought leadership. Now it's up to us to leverage our respective experience and expertise into col- lective success. Let's build a community of colleagues who optimize inno- vation and perpetuate an open exchange. Reach out and tell me what you're thinking, doing and innovating. n Thomas J. Graham, MD, is a clinical professor and director of strategic planning and innovation in the Department of Orthopedic Surgery at NYU Langone Health. Dr. Graham, formerly the inaugural chief innovation officer of Cleveland Clinic, is the author of Innovation the Cleveland Clinic Way.