If you are about to be flambeed for some screw ups of your organisation, do not panic. It is not the end of the world, although you could feel the noose tightening and the horse beneath you bucking. All you need to do is go to "Dealing with an Angry Public", a Program on Negotiation offered by Harvard Law School.
I guess the PR people of the giant automobile corporations and failing banks the world over should go for it. It offers to help you communicate effectively when you are, "Confronted by the need to take effective action in the face of public anger (e.g., over a devastating accident, the failure to regulate products or services adequately, or the siting of a controversial facility)".
Endorsed by many. Look at some testimonials below.
“A great program! I’m walking away with a principled approach to deal with an angry
public.”
Col. Boykin Jordan, Jr., Commander, 55th Communication Group,
U.S. Air Force
“ . . . more than thinking ‘outside the box’. You learn to stand on top of the box.”
Brian Hague, Communications Director,
County of Bergen, NJ
Perhaps then you won't have to worry about being lynched (or at the very least, tarred and feathered) by the angry mob.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Monday, April 13, 2009
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Pride Without Prejudice
Well, apparently denial/The Nile is not merely a river in Egypt; it is also a coping mechanism.
Go figure.
Go figure.
Love is a Splendiferous Thing
To love and be loved unconditionally is the penultimate gift, no?
Please don't wait until that person is no more for you to show your love, even if you never say it.
Please don't wait until that person is no more for you to show your love, even if you never say it.
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Learning Sans Ego
It was reported at a meeting of the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America in San Diego on Saturday that something as simple as balling up your paper gown and stuffing it in your gloves prior to disposal has a 26 - 62% rate of success at reducing hospital acquired infections. This measure has been included as one of three "Positive Deviance approaches that the CDC has found reduced infection rates at hospitals. PD is based on the premise that in any group there are natural problem-solvers".
The innovator: a humble patient escort named Jasper Palmer.
I'm glad to hear that august surgeons, clinicians as well as other hospital staff are willing to learn from Mr Palmer. Many a time people are not willing to learn from those they deem to be beneath them, no matter how egalitarian the society. It is nice to hear that people are serious about the problem of nosocomial infections that they are willing to listen to sensible solutions proposed by someone without a PhD.
Lovely.
The innovator: a humble patient escort named Jasper Palmer.
I'm glad to hear that august surgeons, clinicians as well as other hospital staff are willing to learn from Mr Palmer. Many a time people are not willing to learn from those they deem to be beneath them, no matter how egalitarian the society. It is nice to hear that people are serious about the problem of nosocomial infections that they are willing to listen to sensible solutions proposed by someone without a PhD.
Lovely.
Monday, March 30, 2009
Robbing Peter to Pay Paul ... The Good Version
The economic crunch is hurting pretty much everyone. You can't help but feel your blood boil when you read about how the AIG execs are still getting their bonuses (after screwing up other people's life savings, thank you very much) and the President of the Royal Bank of Scotland keeping his USD 1 million pension (also after screwing up other people's life savings).
And then you read how the doctors at the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Centre in Boston is giving up part of their pay to help support their departments and stave off lay-offs. It appears that each of the heads of department are willing to contribute $27,000 of their annual salary to the cause. I have no idea whether this would suffice to bolster the financial woes of the hospital, but I think a contribution of $350,000 would make a dent to reduce potential redundancy.
Your faith in human nature is restored.
And then you read how the doctors at the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Centre in Boston is giving up part of their pay to help support their departments and stave off lay-offs. It appears that each of the heads of department are willing to contribute $27,000 of their annual salary to the cause. I have no idea whether this would suffice to bolster the financial woes of the hospital, but I think a contribution of $350,000 would make a dent to reduce potential redundancy.
Your faith in human nature is restored.
Paging Dr No ...
Huh. Apparently in Sweden even convicted murderers can be accepted into medical school. I guess the 6 and a half years in prison gave him plenty of time to study and get awesome enough grades to get in.
But seriously, wouldn't you worry if your physician is a convicted felon? So he's smart, brilliant etc etc, but if he has race issues and you are definitely too coloured for his taste? A bit iffy, no? Vetting for entrance into medical school has always been a hotly debated issue, ranging from scholastic performance to extra curricular activities and even mental and psychological aptitude for the work. I guess now the Swedes will have to include query of legal issues in the application forms. In Malaysia, if you were ever in trouble with the law (say, you used to boost cars in your misspent youth or was busted during a nightclub raid), you can kiss your university entrance goodbye, much less the august medical schools.
So what makes good doctors? How do we make sure that the ones with the right stuff to become good doctors are given the chance to get into medical school? Should we allow a brilliant Nazi sympathiser (and every other colour of this sort) to get in because of his/her scholastic excellence?
*rubs chin thoughtfully*
But seriously, wouldn't you worry if your physician is a convicted felon? So he's smart, brilliant etc etc, but if he has race issues and you are definitely too coloured for his taste? A bit iffy, no? Vetting for entrance into medical school has always been a hotly debated issue, ranging from scholastic performance to extra curricular activities and even mental and psychological aptitude for the work. I guess now the Swedes will have to include query of legal issues in the application forms. In Malaysia, if you were ever in trouble with the law (say, you used to boost cars in your misspent youth or was busted during a nightclub raid), you can kiss your university entrance goodbye, much less the august medical schools.
So what makes good doctors? How do we make sure that the ones with the right stuff to become good doctors are given the chance to get into medical school? Should we allow a brilliant Nazi sympathiser (and every other colour of this sort) to get in because of his/her scholastic excellence?
*rubs chin thoughtfully*
Friday, March 20, 2009
Unwitting Participants of a Ponzi Scheme?
Man, I'll bet three months ago you would not know what is a Ponzi scheme. But thanks to Bernard Madoff, we understand that a Ponzi scheme is a "fraudulent investment operation that pays returns to investors from their own money or money paid by subsequent investors rather than from any actual profit earned." (per Wikipedia).
It seems that with the economic downturn afflicting the global economy, a great deal of attention has been placed on issues that previously are never really caught the limelight. One of them is the health insurance issues plaguing the United States. Physicians on the Medscape's Physician Connect have alleged that "commercial, for-profit health insurance is one of the greatest Ponzi schemes ever foisted on the public". As I understand it, patients do not pay directly to the doctors for treatments and prescription, but the insurance will handle it. Dubbed to be consumer driven health care, the American health insurance is a billion dollar industry. What this means? Read here.
I would like to believe that good health care should be the rights of all, especially in the self-dubbed greatest country on Earth. But it does look like the basic economic principle of "those who can afford, gets it; those who can't afford, forget it" is still at play here. Many have hung their hopes that the Obama administration will do their utmost to resolve this issue. I sympathise with the Americans who skimped on drugs that their insurance companies balked to cover or those who can't afford it, as they are the ones who are the greatest hit by the economic downturn and hope that Mr Obama and his crew will manage a miracle on this.
Malaysians should be grateful that they can get decent health care at Government hospitals with minimal payments for treatment and prescription. Even those who work in the private sector is still partially subsidised by the Government even though they pay more than civil servants. Those with diabetes and hypertension who needs long-term medication to control their condition, should they know the true price of the drugs they consume, would be a little more appreciative of the efforts of the Goverment.
Granted there is room for improvement, especially in terms of service delivery and time turnovers, but at the very least, you do get treated. Unless of course, if you decide to trust the medium/bomoh/tok dukun who promised you the cures of all ailments from cancer to baldness. Then, by all means, go to them. Let other people benefit from the Government hospitals.
It seems that with the economic downturn afflicting the global economy, a great deal of attention has been placed on issues that previously are never really caught the limelight. One of them is the health insurance issues plaguing the United States. Physicians on the Medscape's Physician Connect have alleged that "commercial, for-profit health insurance is one of the greatest Ponzi schemes ever foisted on the public". As I understand it, patients do not pay directly to the doctors for treatments and prescription, but the insurance will handle it. Dubbed to be consumer driven health care, the American health insurance is a billion dollar industry. What this means? Read here.
I would like to believe that good health care should be the rights of all, especially in the self-dubbed greatest country on Earth. But it does look like the basic economic principle of "those who can afford, gets it; those who can't afford, forget it" is still at play here. Many have hung their hopes that the Obama administration will do their utmost to resolve this issue. I sympathise with the Americans who skimped on drugs that their insurance companies balked to cover or those who can't afford it, as they are the ones who are the greatest hit by the economic downturn and hope that Mr Obama and his crew will manage a miracle on this.
Malaysians should be grateful that they can get decent health care at Government hospitals with minimal payments for treatment and prescription. Even those who work in the private sector is still partially subsidised by the Government even though they pay more than civil servants. Those with diabetes and hypertension who needs long-term medication to control their condition, should they know the true price of the drugs they consume, would be a little more appreciative of the efforts of the Goverment.
Granted there is room for improvement, especially in terms of service delivery and time turnovers, but at the very least, you do get treated. Unless of course, if you decide to trust the medium/bomoh/tok dukun who promised you the cures of all ailments from cancer to baldness. Then, by all means, go to them. Let other people benefit from the Government hospitals.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)