“Less is more” – Reduce volume of marketing content, minimize production costs, and focus on subjective quality at the expense of quantity?

 

Marketers are always faced with a balancing act of quality versus quantity. It becomes a balancing act, because you unquestionably need both to accomplish content marketing success. But time, budget constraints, staffing shortages, and a host of other aspects prevent both quality and quantity from working together on a regular basis. When it comes to health care marketing, which is better:

• “Less is more” – Reduce volume of marketing content, minimize production costs, and focus on subjective quality at the expense of quantity?
• “More is more” – Provide robust marketing content at a rapid pace, increased production cost, and focus on information quantity at the expense of low quality?

Are there instances where either of the scenarios would be suitable to use? What are the repercussions of each? So, when you have to choose sides, which do you choose?

*UPON COMPLETION MUST RESPOND TO 3 CLASSMATES ANSWERS!!!!

Atisha King posted Mar 24, 2019 2:52 PM

 

In the interest of sustaining the success of the healthcare industry, less is best for marketing strategists, and emphasis should be placed on demonstrating the facility’s commitment to quality of care over quantity. The background material states that a “more is more” strategy to healthcare marketing focuses on quantity of information distribution, at the expense of producing quality material aimed at attracting the most appropriate population segment. But there is never an instance where patients will choose a medical institution that seemingly places greater importance on volume of patients over quality of healthcare delivery. Thus, healthcare marketing should properly reflect the intent of the medical organization, and marketers need to invest time into knowing and understanding their patient population. As Julie noted, the marketing objectives should emphasize the facility’s priority for quality care delivery, like what is shown by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. This approach underpins Aaron’s belief that hospital efforts should be geared at yielding the best patient outcomes and positive patient experiences. Gloribel stated that a “less is more” design is only successful when it’s applied to the greatest number of patients. Hence why an adequate patient-driven marketing strategy must be supported by adequate research of the targeted population, to include their greatest medical needs and desires (Orchard, 2015). Subsequently, marketers should develop strategies to best exhibit the ability of their institution to satisfy those requirements. This approach strengthens the public’s trust in the medical facility and accordingly will adequately target, attract, and retain those patients most likely to seek continuous, long-term care.

Orchard, C. (2015). 8 Challenges to Customer-Driven Healthcare. Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. Retrieved from https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/ecpe/8-challenges-to-customer-driven-health-care/

Gloribel Torres posted Mar 19, 2019 7:11 PM

 

In my opinion, regarding health care marketing, more is more. Healthcare care marketing intent to highlights how robust marketing content works to good impact in a setting which is interested in the comfort, stability, and welfare of the consumers.  According to Lukas (1995) in the article Classifying health care offerings to gain strategic marketing insights, in the healthcare settings quality keep on declining, “but what is most significant is the fact that consumers start getting better health care standards which are encouraging for the health care regimes in this day.” Differing to the public perception that more choice is always better, decisions made from large collections can lead to weaker preferences. Base on literature quantity and quality work together, According to Boonekamp (1994),  “less is more” would be appropriate in health care especially when the “less” helps the patient bringing quality, the downfall is that these do not apply to all. The need is to comprehend where the health care field benefits the most.  When this happens, we can merely assume that health care advertising is doing its job satisfactory and that there are improved and more vigorous developments in place (Boonekamp, 1994).

 

Boonekamp, L. (1994). Marketing for Health‐care Organizations: An Introduction to Network Management. Journal of Management in Medicine, 8(5)

Lukas, B. (1995). Classifying health care offerings to gain strategic marketing insights. Journal of Services Marketing, 9(2)

Julie Youngquist posted Mar 20, 2019 9:02 AM

Subscribe

This page automatically marks posts as read as you scroll.

Adjust automatic marking as read setting

The age of value-based healthcare is here, and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has taken the lead in healthcare delivery and reimbursement reform. The strategy is driven by a three-part aim to offer better quality health, to improve patient healthcare experiences, and to deliver services at lower costs (Mohammad, 2014). Quality-over-quantity reform takes patience and time, and providers will be affected in three significant areas—compensation, collaboration, and data collection and reporting—as they transition into this new era of value-based care.  Quality and efficiency are the goal of every value-based payment model, and CMS’s intention is to eventually transition every provider from fee-for-service to value-based care, linking provider quality performance to provider compensation (Mohammad, 2014). In this new strategy, an increasing amount of provider compensation is based on quality performance in areas of patient and caregiver experience, care coordination and patient safety, preventive health, and clinical care for at-risk populations. The value-based healthcare environment is one of collaboration, a team mentality where providers are expected to work together to engage with patients, to provide care appropriate to each individual’s circumstances, and to align their efforts with multiple partner providers across the healthcare continuum (Mohammad, 2014). This strategic shift in quality healthcare is extremely beneficial to patient populations because it delivers a connected care experience where patients receive more coordinated, appropriate, and effective care. Value-based care recognizes quality, not quantity, as the key to better care, better health, and reduced costs (Schwartz & Woloshin, 2019). For most providers the transition to value-based care will take substantial time and perseverance, but success is achievable if providers will embrace the principles behind this focused quality approach, commit to the ongoing process of learning and improving, and strive for excellence in efficiency and quality achievement (Schwartz & Woloshin, 2019).

‍References:

Mosadeghrad A. M. (2014). Factors Affecting Medical Service Quality. Iranian journal of public health, 43(2), 210-20.

Schwartz L., Woloshin S. (2019). Medical Marketing in the United States, 1997-2016. JAMA, 321(1), 80–96. doi:10.1001/jama.2018.19320

Reply to Thread