The Secret of Success for Independent and Thriving Hospitals?

https://www.definitivehc.com/hospital-data/the-secret-of-success-for-independent-and-thriving-hospitals?source=newsltr-blog&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=06-20-17

Image result for rural hospitals

Consolidation remains a major trend in the healthcare industry, especially among hospitals. In 2016, there were 102 announced partnership and transaction deals, compared to 66 in 2010, according to a Kaufman, Hall & Associates analysis. In the current climate of declining reimbursements and greater emphasis on value-based care, many hospital executives see mergers as a necessary way of reigning in costs and benefiting from economies of scale. Yet, a significant number of acute care hospitals remain independent and even thrive. A recent article highlighted Marin General Hospital, which separated from Sutter in 2008 but has performed well enough on its own to fund construction of a new $400 million replacement hospital. What do high-performing independent hospitals have in common? An analysis of Definitive Healthcare data suggests independent hospitals with consistently strong operating margins have limited competition from other facilities, high discharge volumes, and a greater proportion of private payers.

Under the analysis, a high-performing hospital was classified as a facility with a median operating margin of at least four percent during a five-year period from 2011 to 2015, as four percent is often cited as the traditional minimum necessary for a hospital to be able to raise capital effectively. 143 out of around 1,450 independent hospitals met this condition, according to Definitive Healthcare data. Of them, 67 were non-profit, 56 were proprietary (for-profit) companies, and 30 were government owned.

A favorable payor mix and higher-than-average discharge volume appear to be the most common characteristics among the selected hospitals. The median payor mix for independent hospitals was 38 percent private/other, 6 percent Medicaid, and 51 percent Medicare, compared to 50 percent private, 6 percent Medicaid, and 41 percent Medicare at hospitals with median margins over four percent. The greater percentage of private payors means higher reimbursement rates per procedure and can reflect the presence of a more affluent patient base. The larger volume of discharges compared to the overall median, 1,662 to 792, also helps explain their higher margins. Despite the trend towards outpatient treatment, inpatient care is still necessary and tends to be more profitable for hospitals. Some facilities actually witnessed discharge increases from 2011 to 2015, possibly indicating a growing area population, but they were the minority and the trend did not always coincide with a stable operating margin.

Geography also appears to be an important factor. Isolated hospitals with limited competition have a natural advantage, being the only source of inpatient care within the immediate area. Some independent critical access hospitals, which by definition are geographically isolated, do have strong margins, but so do many regular acute care hospitals. Of the top 10 non-critical access facilities by median operating margin, eight are located at least 15 miles from the next-closest hospital, making them the primary destinations in terms of convenience and emergency care for local residents.

The company status of independent hospitals is also associated with high profitability. While proprietary hospitals constituted only around 10 percent of all independent hospitals, they were 37 percent of all those with median margins over four percent. In addition, they tended to have the highest margins overall. Of the top 30 hospitals by median margin, only three identified as non-profits or government-owned hospitals. Nearly all were specialty hospitals, which are generally more profitable than acute-care hospitals as they usually have more favorable payor mixes and focus on a single high-margin specialty, such as surgery or orthopedics. Non-profits came next, while government-owned facilities were the least likely to have strong margins. Of course, the margin of a government-owned hospital is less significant due to its ability to leverage tax revenues to support operations.

While financially strong independent hospitals appear to benefit largely from circumstances beyond their control, such as patient income, insignificant competition, and fundamental organizational structure, they are not a guarantee of success. Previous research, such as that here, has identified other characteristics that are equally if not more critical to an independent hospitals’ fortunes. Among them are strong business and clinical planning, high levels of cooperation with both local providers and national institutions (such as those covering specialty consults and clinical trials access), and capable leadership. Obviously, such qualities are easier described than achieved, but if attained, could be enough to create a strong, thriving hospital even in spite of unfavorable geography, payor mixes, or organization type.

Stryker buys Canadian imaging technology firm for $701M

Stryker buys Canadian imaging technology firm for $701M

Stryker announced Monday that it is acquiring a Canadian imaging firm for $701 million.

Novadaq, a public company based in Missisauga, Canada makes fluorescence imaging technology that allows surgeons to see in real time blood flow in vessels, and related tissue perfusion in a variety of surgical procedures including cardiac, cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, plastic, microsurgical, and reconstructive procedures.

“With NVDQ SYK receives what we view as a best-in-class technology that allows for an entry point into the small, but rapidly expanding open visualization segment, and fortifies the company’s overall imaging offering where SYK already has a market leading position in the larger minimally invasive (MIS) endoscopic visualization segment,” wrote Richard Newitter, an analyst with Leerink Research, in a research note Monday.

The $701 million purchase price is a whopping 95.8 percent premium over Novadaq’s current share price and 8.4 times its trailing twelve-month revenue. While steep, the transaction is a smart one by Stryker, analysts believe.

“We believe adding NVDQ’s IP to Stryker will allow [it] to better grow the fluorescence field and we feel SYK is the most equipped company to do so,” wrote Sean Lavin, an analyst with BTIG, in a research note Monday after the deal was announced.

Another analyst provided a different reason for why the deal makes sense.

“While the premium paid is high, we believe the deal price is defensible given NVDQ’s superior topline growth profile (20%+ topline growth) and the large opportunity for SYK to take costs out of NVDQ,” wrote Glenn Novarro, an analyst with RBC Capital Markets, in a research note on Monday.

The Canadian company has been growing its revenue — $80 million in 2016, up from $63.8 million the year before — but isn’t profitable. Other than its Spy and Pinpoint technologies, the company is also the exclusive worldwide distributor of LifeNet Health’s Dermacell products and has a licensing partnership with Intuitive Surgical (ISRG) for the FireFly fluorescence imaging system, according to Novarro.

Novadaq will fit into Stryker’s video imaging business once the deal closes, and that is expected to be at the end of the third quarter.

“This acquisition aligns with Stryker’s focus on enabling our customers to see and do more by enhancing cross-specialty surgical visualization,” stated Timothy J. Scannell, Stryker’s Group President, MedSurg and NeuroTechnology, in a news release. “NOVADAQ’S unique innovative technology complements Stryker’s advanced imaging portfolio and expands our product offerings into open and plastic reconstructive surgery.

 

 

Recipe for Successful Health System M&A: Ensure Focus on Execution of Transaction Does Not Undermine Key Long-Term Strategic Imperatives

http://www.healthleadersmedia.com/leadership/recipe-successful-health-system-ma-ensure-focus-execution-transaction-does-not-undermine?spMailingID=11163372&spUserID=MTY3ODg4NTg1MzQ4S0&spJobID=1180078976&spReportId=MTE4MDA3ODk3NgS2

Image result for strategic imperatives

The evolving U.S. healthcare landscape, perhaps more now than ever before, requires that health system executives possess varied and deep skill sets. Not only must executives navigate the changing political and macroeconomic landscape, including the repeal-and-replace uncertainty, but in execution of their well-intentioned strategic transactions, health system leaders must remain focused on the original strategic imperatives and objectives to help ensure long-term, sustainable success. Of 140 surveyed participants, 61% believe their organization’s merger, acquisition or partnership activity will increase within the next three years.

Commonly, a decision is made to move forward on an appropriate strategic transaction and then senior leadership assigns a multidisciplinary deal team to consummate such. The majority (74%) of surveyed participants cite both financial/operational and clinical/care delivery equally as the primary objective when deciding to transact. Prior to commencement, successful healthcare organizations will have gone through a lengthy strategic planning process, developed a list of strategic imperatives and had such approved by their board of trustees. Some of these strategic imperatives may include: the Triple Aim, relevance/attractiveness with employers and payers, alignment of incentives, ability to manage the resulting organization as a system versus a loose federation, and the stickiness and sustainability of the resulting system.

A breakdown in the deal consummation process that results in the strategic imperatives not maintaining primacy but being subordinated or ignored may result in a nice press release or closing ceremony but when measured by the test of time, the transaction may not deliver expected and necessary sustaining strategic benefits. This is exacerbated in complex M&A transactions and strategic partnerships. Such complex transactions cannot be managed in a manner similar to important but more routine operational or capital initiatives (e.g., construction of a new bed tower or implementation of a staff reduction initiative) facing healthcare organizations. Senior leadership must help ensure that the strategic benefits of a transaction do not become deemphasized due to deal fatigue, completion of task bias, arbitrary deadlines, and other pressures that work against the deal team obtaining optimal outcomes.

Healthcare leaders must help ensure that the strategic imperatives are effective guardrails of the deal team’s efforts and not lost in the difficult and dynamic transaction negotiation and consummation process. A successful approach focuses less on arbitrary timelines or goals and embraces an accountability process that monitors the deal progress and documentation to help ensure a true north heading. Effective leaders must remain laser-focused on the strategic imperatives and not allow completion and execution of the deal to subordinate the foundation of the original strategic mandate.

Healthcare’s Consolidation Landscape

http://www.healthleadersmedia.com/leadership/healthcare%E2%80%99s-consolidation-landscape?spMailingID=11162259&spUserID=MTY3ODg4NTg1MzQ4S0&spJobID=1180070662&spReportId=MTE4MDA3MDY2MgS2

Image result for hospital market consolidation

Market and regulatory factors have unleashed a wave of merger, acquisition, and partnership activity that is changing the delivery of healthcare services.

Consolidation in the healthcare-provider sector has accelerated in recent years, reshaping the relationships between health systems, hospitals, and independent physicians across the country.

In the Buckeye State, healthcare consolidation activity has been a transformational force at OhioHealth, says Michael Louge, CPA, who serves as executive vice president and chief operating officer at the 11-hospital health system based in Columbus.

“When you look at OhioHealth, and you go back two or three decades, it was a much different organization. The reason it is different today is because of philosophy and the way we approach regional partnerships—how we have worked with physicians and hospitals in the region. Our whole organization’s evolution has been through successful partnerships and consolidations with regional players.”

Over the past year, statistics have been gathered on the pace of healthcare-provider consolidation.

In a recent HealthLeaders Media survey, 159 healthcare executives—mainly from health systems, hospitals, and physician practices—were asked about their merger, acquisition, and partnership (MAP) deals.

Eighty-seven percent of the respondents said their organizations were expected to both explore potential deals and complete deals that were underway in the next 12–18 months. Only 13% of the respondents said their organizations were not planning MAP deals in that same time period.

From the passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) in 2010 through the end of last year, merger and acquisition transactions involving acute-care hospitals increased 55% from 66 announced deals to 102, according to Skokie, Illinois–based Kaufman Hall. Last year, the operating revenue of acquired organizations was more than $22 billion, according to the consultancy.

Kit Kamholz, managing director at Kaufman Hall, says two sets of drivers are propelling consolidation activity among health systems and hospitals.

“There are transactions that are driven by financial rationale. This is driven by a level of distress at the smaller organization, either from a historical-financial standpoint, an access-to-capital standpoint, or they are experiencing some significant clinical deficiencies. … The second bucket is in the category of strategic rationale. These are organizations that tend to be relatively strong financially, that are considered to be strong community-based providers in their marketplaces; but they are looking at the landscape of the evolving healthcare environment and saying, ‘Do we have the skills and capabilities to be successful in this new era of value-based care?’ ”

Healthcare consolidation activity is impacting the country’s physician practices and physician-employment trends.

Reading Health to buy five SE Pa. hospitals

http://www.philly.com/philly/business/reading-health-to-buy-five-se-pa-hospitals-20170530.html

Image result for reading health system

Reading Health System has agreed to buy five community hospitals in Southeastern Pennsylvania from Community Health Systems Inc. for an undisclosed price, the two parties announced Tuesday.

The hospitals included in the deal, which is expected to close this summer, are: the 169-bed Brandywine Hospital in Coatesville, the 148-bed Chestnut Hill Hospital in Philadelphia, the 63-bed Jennersville Hospital in West Grove, the 151-bed Phoenixville Hospital in Phoenixville, and the 232-bed Pottstown Memorial Medical Center in Pottstown.

In aggregate, the five hospitals had $585 million in operating revenue and a very thin operating margin of $1.4 million in the year ended June 30, 2016, according the Pennsylvania Health Care Cost Containment Council.

The deal represents a significant expansion for Reading, which is anchored by a 695-bed acute-care hospital in the city of Reading. The nonprofit health system had $978.5 million in revenue and a narrow operating margin of $12.2 million in the year ended June 30, 2016. Reading Health has more than 700 beds in all, including 50 beds in a nursing home, which means the Community Health acquisition will more than double Reading’s size in terms of beds.

The acquisition also potentially opens the door to further expansion by Pittsburgh-based health care giant UPMC in Southeastern Pennsylvania. Reading Health and UPMC Health Plan have a joint venture to offer health coverage and related services to individuals as well as employers and their employees in the Reading Health System service area. UPMC already offers Medicare Advantage plans in Southeastern Pennsylvania and has been picked to provide managed Medicaid services in the region starting next year.

Community Health Systems, based in Franklin, Tenn., has been on a selling spree in a bid to pay off debt and improve profitability. In the Philadelphia region, it previously agreed to sell the Memorial Hospital of Salem County to the Prime Healthcare Foundation for $15 million.

 

Recipe for Successful Health System M&A: Ensure Focus on Execution of Transaction Does Not Undermine Key Long-Term Strategic Imperatives

http://www.healthleadersmedia.com/leadership/recipe-successful-health-system-ma-ensure-focus-execution-transaction-does-not-undermine?spMailingID=11083005&spUserID=MTY3ODg4NTg1MzQ4S0&spJobID=1161895525&spReportId=MTE2MTg5NTUyNQS2

Image result for Recipe for Successful Health System M&A

The evolving U.S. healthcare landscape, perhaps more now than ever before, requires that health system executives possess varied and deep skill sets. Not only must executives navigate the changing political and macroeconomic landscape, including the repeal-and-replace uncertainty, but in execution of their well-intentioned strategic transactions, health system leaders must remain focused on the original strategic imperatives and objectives to help ensure long-term, sustainable success. Of 140 surveyed participants, 61% believe their organization’s merger, acquisition or partnership activity will increase within the next three years.

Commonly, a decision is made to move forward on an appropriate strategic transaction and then senior leadership assigns a multidisciplinary deal team to consummate such. The majority (74%) of surveyed participants cite both financial/operational and clinical/care delivery equally as the primary objective when deciding to transact. Prior to commencement, successful healthcare organizations will have gone through a lengthy strategic planning process, developed a list of strategic imperatives and had such approved by their board of trustees. Some of these strategic imperatives may include: the Triple Aim, relevance/attractiveness with employers and payers, alignment of incentives, ability to manage the resulting organization as a system versus a loose federation, and the stickiness and sustainability of the resulting system.

A breakdown in the deal consummation process that results in the strategic imperatives not maintaining primacy but being subordinated or ignored may result in a nice press release or closing ceremony but when measured by the test of time, the transaction may not deliver expected and necessary sustaining strategic benefits. This is exacerbated in complex M&A transactions and strategic partnerships. Such complex transactions cannot be managed in a manner similar to important but more routine operational or capital initiatives (e.g., construction of a new bed tower or implementation of a staff reduction initiative) facing healthcare organizations. Senior leadership must help ensure that the strategic benefits of a transaction do not become deemphasized due to deal fatigue, completion of task bias, arbitrary deadlines, and other pressures that work against the deal team obtaining optimal outcomes.

Healthcare leaders must help ensure that the strategic imperatives are effective guardrails of the deal team’s efforts and not lost in the difficult and dynamic transaction negotiation and consummation process. A successful approach focuses less on arbitrary timelines or goals and embraces an accountability process that monitors the deal progress and documentation to help ensure a true north heading. Effective leaders must remain laser-focused on the strategic imperatives and not allow completion and execution of the deal to subordinate the foundation of the original strategic mandate.

Anatomy of a post-acute care partnership

http://www.beckershospitalreview.com/hospital-transactions-and-valuation/anatomy-of-a-post-acute-care-partnership-a-guide-to-finding-the-right-partner-and-forming-a-successful-joint-venture.html

Image result for post acute partnership

In communities across America — large and small — local hospitals serve a purpose that goes beyond being a center for on-demand emergency care. Our nation’s healthcare facilities have a legacy and responsibility as leaders and guardians for the health of individuals in the communities they serve.

As such, it is imperative that local hospitals continue to take the lead in community patient care and avoid being relegated to the position of bystander through managed care or government mandate.

In addition to providing quality patient care, hospitals also have a responsibility to remain financially healthy. And in today’s environment of uncertain and changing regulation, government-mandated penalties, and shifting payment models, hospital leaders are being reminded that financial health and quality patient outcomes go hand-in-hand.

Balancing these two responsibilities is an increasingly tough task. Avoidable readmissions are a cost no organization can afford to ignore, and many of America’s best healthcare facilities are struggling to find an effective solution to their patients’ post-acute needs.

For many hospitals and health systems seeking an answer, partnering with an experienced and proven post-acute care provider has been the solution.

In a value-based world, the ability to manage the total cost of care — from admittance, through acute care, to the post-acute environment — is a strategic advantage for sustaining organizational health and getting patients the right care at the right time, obtaining efficient outcome and attracting and retaining the best and brightest of professional caregivers.

But how do executives and hospital leaders find the right partner, and how can they determine competence and compatibility for their needs?

William F. “Bud” Barrow II, the recently retired president and CEO of Our Lady of Lourdes Regional Medical Center in Lafayette, La., developed what he calls his “Four-Way Test” for evaluating prospective  post-acute care partners.

“There are many players in the sub-acute space, and a lot of them are not in it for the right reasons,” Mr. Barrow says. “There are many small companies formed not to advance care AND make a profit, but to make a profit and flip the company for even more profit.”

“It’s important to partner with a large capital healthcare provider that has demonstrated long-term commitment to patients, to profitability and to doing the right thing at the right time — every time,” adds Mr. Barrow.

The four “C’s” in Mr. Barrow’s test include:

  • Character: Examine the cultural history of the organization and the character of key individuals.
  • Competence: Can they demonstrate long-term, systemic success and expertise in their field?
  • Capital: Is there a financial model in place that suggests sustainability in a profitable way?
  • Creativity: Does the organization demonstrate nimbleness and the ability to rethink and adjust on-the-go based on the uncertainties inherent in healthcare reimbursement and the overall healthcare landscape?

Once a suitable partner is found, Mr. Barrow further identifies three “must-haves” for forming a successful and sustainable joint venture.

  • Organization-wide support

    Support must come from all areas of the organization. Everyone — from board members to medical staff — must understand and support the goal of the enterprise and fully endorse what is a time-consuming process and significant investment.

  • A critical eye

    You must be willing and able to employ a critical eye when viewing your own organization and make a clear and unbiased assessment of what you do well versus what you wish you did well. “Most people are unable to make this critical internal evaluation,” Barrow says. “As a result, they continue to try and do things on their own, often times leading to long-term failure.”

  • Assemble the right team

    The right people must be in place to evaluate various alternatives and possible solutions as you go through the process and fill in the deficit gaps determined in the critical assessment.

Poor evaluation of organizational readiness, Mr. Barrow adds, is one of the most common pitfalls — particularly when it comes to the vital mutual commitment from administration and medical staff.

“There has to be alignment between the business of medicine and the practice of medicine — it’s paramount,” he says. “The prevailing attitude must be that failure is not an option. This is not something where you put your toe in the water, see what happens, and then back out the first time you hit a bump in the road. Everyone must be on board with an all-in focus on clinical networks, evidenced-based best practices, shared accountability and a singular focus on best patient outcomes.”

Nearly two decades ago, LHC Group pioneered a model of post-acute care partnership that has since earned a reputation for enhancing patient outcomes and financial performance in cities and towns across the country. Since then, the company has pursued a mission to build stronger healthcare delivery systems in the communities it serves.

Quality outcomes — for patients and partners — are the driving force behind everything LHC Group does. Quality metrics are now the preferred standard for evaluating post-acute providers, and with more than 60 percent of its home health locations named among the 2016 HomeCare Elite®, and with the highest CMS Star Ratings compared to home health national averages, LHC Group continues to enhance its reputation as one of the top quality home health providers in the country.

“I can think of no other post-acute provider that demonstrates all of the ‘Four C’s’ at the level of LHC Group,” says Mr. Barrow, who formed his first joint-venture partnership with the company in 2007. “Their overwhelming commitment to character, competence and creativity has allowed them to develop the strong capital to deliver on what they promise.”

LHC Group’s record of designing and growing successful post-acute care partnerships throughout the country is the result of years of dedication, tireless work and experience. Their team is accustomed to rising to the challenge of succeeding in the constantly shifting landscape that is the healthcare industry, and they know how to provide value for partners and improved outcomes for their patients.

The conclusion is clear: Choose the right partner. The health of your community and your organization is at stake.

12 recent hospital transactions and partnerships

http://www.beckershospitalreview.com/hospital-transactions-and-valuation/12-recent-hospital-transactions-and-partnerships-51517.html

Image result for hospital m&a

The following healthcare mergers, acquisitions and general partnerships took place or were announced the week of May 15.

1. Erlanger in talks to acquire or affiliate with 25-bed Murphy Medical Center
Erlanger Health System, a five-hospital system in Chattanooga, Tenn., is in talks to partner with 25-bed Murphy (N.C.) Medical Center.

2. 3rd hospital joins Beth Israel Deaconess, Lahey Health merger
Newburyport, Mass.-based Anna Jaques Hospital is the third health system to join the proposed merger between Boston-based Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Burlington, Mass.-based Lahey Health, bringing the total number of health systems interested in merging up to five.

3. Quorum to divest 2 hospitals in Tennessee
Brentwood, Tenn.-based Quorum Health Corp., signed a definitive agreement May 15 to sell two hospitals in Tennessee.

4. Steward Health Care to acquire IASIS Healthcare
Boston-based Steward Health Care signed a definitive agreement to acquire Franklin, Tenn.-based IASIS Healthcare.

5. Mount Auburn joins Beth Israel Deaconess, Lahey merger: 3 things to know
Cambridge, Mass.-based Mount Auburn Hospital will join a proposed merger between Boston-based Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Burlington, Mass.-based Lahey Health.

6. Quorum Health seeks to sell 6 more hospitals
Brentwood, Tenn.-based Quorum Health, the 35-hospital spinoff of Franklin, Tenn.-based Community Health Systems, plans to sell six hospitals to restructure its portfolio to improve financial performance.

7. Accumen partners with SSM Health hospital to improve quality of care, patient outcomes
SSM Health Saint Louis University Hospital partnered with Accumen on a multiyear agreement to implement a comprehensive patient blood management program.

8. Geisinger Health System, Jersey Shore Hospital sign integration agreement
Danville, Pa.-based Geisinger Health System and 25-bed Jersey Shore (Pa.) Hospital and Foundation signed an agreement integrating Jersey Shore’s facilities into Geisinger.

9. HealthEast, Fairview Health Services receive final OK to merge
The respective boards of directors of HealthEast, a four-hospital system in St. Paul, Minn., and Fairview Health Services, a seven-hospital system in Minneapolis, approved the organizations’ plans to merge, effective June 1. The merger will create one of the largest hospital networks in Minnesota.

10. Hackensack Meridian, St. Joseph’s Healthcare to partner on home health, hospice services
Hackensack Meridian Health, a 13-hospital system in Edison, N.J., and Paterson, N.J.-based St. Joseph’s Healthcare revealed plans to form a jointly owned home health services agency and a hospice services agency.

11. Yale New Haven, Day Kimball Healthcare partner to improve clinical care
Yale New Haven (Conn.) Health System and Putnam, Conn.-based Day Kimball Healthcare inked an agreement to become community partners and enhance the breadth of clinical care services available at Day Kimball.

12. Wake Forest Baptist partners with Northern Hospital of Surry County on cardiac rehabilitation care
Winston-Salem, N.C.-based Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center and Mount Airy, N.C.-based Northern Hospital of Surry County will partner to provide residents with better access to cardiac rehabilitation services.

The health system CEO’s affiliation playbook — 5 thoughts from a CEO who has executed 50+ agreements

http://www.beckershospitalreview.com/hospital-management-administration/michael-dowling-the-health-system-ceo-s-affiliation-playbook-5-thoughts-from-a-ceo-who-has-executed-50-agreements.html

Image result for compatibility

As hospitals and health systems seek ways to fortify their organizational strategies amid the transition to value-based care, the drive to forge new partnerships will continue. Although analysts forecast the consolidation trend will carry on, strategic organizations are increasingly realizing the value of establishing other relationships, such as affiliations and joint ventures.

The local forces at play in a given region are a significant determinant of an organization’s need to merge with, acquire or be acquired by another hospital or health system. And while transactional deals will always be necessary, ongoing financial pressures stemming from the transition to value-based reimbursement and the overall emphasis on population health management have prompted health care leaders to partner with their likeminded peers to deliver better, more cost-effective care.

The key is figuring out where your organization can do a better job working with a partner than alone, and more importantly, who to collaborate with.

In some cases, this has led to the union of unlikely bedfellows — organizations that were formerly competitors are, in some cases, coming together to pursue a joint goal. In other cases, hospitals and health systems may benefit from establishing partnerships with pharmaceutical companies, medical device makers, retail clinics or even non-healthcare entities. For example, Northwell Health has worked with The Ritz-Carlton and Tiffany & Co. as part of our efforts to improve the patient experience and our operational processes.

As with all relationships, the most positive and high functioning are symbiotic; both partners must satisfy and complement the other. They must also — at the most basic level — get along. Here are five more ideas on successful partnerships, affiliations and joint ventures.

1. Know what you need and what you can offer. Partnerships create opportunities to expand into new markets and broaden your reach. But when it comes to selecting a partner, it’s important to clarify what it is they have that you want — and visa versa.

For example, we have a strategic affiliation with Cold Spring Harbor (N.Y.) Laboratory, a premier cancer research facility on Long Island. They have an international reputation, with  several Nobel laureates in their ranks. We needed to strengthen our cancer research, and they needed a clinical partner that would allow them to connect with patients. We entered into a long-term partnership in 2015. Even though we’re very different organizations, we both benefit from the relationship. 

2. Don’t overemphasize the short-term benefits. Focus as much on the short-term benefits of a partnership or affiliation as you do on your goals for five or 10 years down the line. Most relationships hit a rough patch in the beginning, but if you give up on the partnership because your troubles are making you doubt the viability of your short-term goals, you’re being too impetuous. In other words, success takes time. Take steps to solve short-term complications, but hang in there and try to make it work.

3. Be open to new partners. Keep an open mind when it comes to discussing new relationships with different partners — even those that don’t seem to make much sense in the beginning. The rapid pace of change in healthcare and our collective pursuit of innovation oblige us to at least listen to others’ ideas and consider new possibilities. 

4. Don’t get stuck in an abusive relationship. New partners might hit a rough patch or need to adjust their communication style to meet one another’s needs, but it is also important to know when it’s better to cut your losses and call it quits. If a relationship becomes abusive or dysfunctional and there is no longer any benefit for being involved, then it’s time to re-evaluate the situation.

5. Determine whether you’re truly compatible with a potential partner. If your organization is looking for a long-term partner — not just a fling — the two entities must mesh culturally. When considering a potential partner, ask yourself if there is mutual respect on both sides. Do those who are in charge of communication and collaboration work well together? Is the relationship riddled with conflicts or is it smooth sailing? Keep in mind, however, that conflicts are not necessarily a symptom of an impending breakup. Sometimes the issue can be resolved by changing the people or metrics at hand.

Most importantly, there must be ongoing and open communication. Two partners can disagree, but in most cases they can work it out.