May is Mental Health Awareness Month. Innovation Health Chief Medical Officer Sunil Budhrani urges Virginians to start a conversation about mental health. Budhrani moderated the Digital Health panel at NVTC’s Health Care Informatics & Analytics Conference on May 5.


Even for a medical expert, mental health can be a difficult topic to talk about.

I know the terminology, proper treatment plans and resources. But as a society (even among health providers), we often don’t know how to talk to those in need of mental health support – sometimes including ourselves. It’s uncomfortable. It’s emotional. It’s personal. So we don’t share. Don’t ask. Don’t act. And suicide rates across our nation skyrocket.

We need to talk about mental health.

When I joined Innovation Health as Chief Medical Officer last month, I sat down with my team and we made a collective decision. We decided to speak from our own personal experiences with mental health, however imperfectly. Because talking about mental health is the best way to truly help remove the stigma associated with mental health conditions.

Working as an ER doctor, I frequently saw patients whose anxiety and depression had gone unmanaged and ultimately led them to attempt suicide. Some I was able to help. For others there was nothing I could do. I realized that many times these patients weren’t getting the help they needed because they feared being labeled or misunderstood. Time and again, I saw that the cost of not treating these symptoms could be fatal.

Now, after so many years, so many news reports, and seeing so many of my colleagues and friends struggle, it is clear to me that we must confront the topic of mental health head-on if we are truly going to make a difference.

May is Mental Health Awareness Month and I hope it will be a catalyst for this critical conversation, which impacts so many Americans.

The proof is in the numbers: according to the National Institute of Mental Health, nearly one in four adults and one in five children in the U.S.  has a diagnosable mental health condition. In Virginia, more than 230,000 adults – roughly 3.8 percent of the population – have experienced a serious mental illness. These facts tell me one thing; we are not alone. We all know someone, work with someone, or love someone who struggles with mental illness. We may struggle with it ourselves. The fact is that anxiety, depression and substance abuse touch every community. The time to accept this is now. The time to speak up and reach out is now.

Many people don’t get the services they need because they don’t know where to start. If you or someone you know is struggling, you can start the healing process by following these three steps:

  1. Talk to a primary care physician about your mental health. They can help connect you with the right mental health support. If you do not have a PCP, I highly recommend you select one for your general health care needs.
  2. Educate yourself. Visit the Innovation Health website to take a depression or anxiety assessment or call 703-289-7560 to schedule an in-person assessment with a trained counselor.
  3. Be proactive about mental well-being. If you know someone who may be experiencing symptoms related to a mental health condition, encourage them to get the help they need.

It is never easy or comfortable to approach situations like this, but as a community we can’t let our fear or doubts stop us from helping others or ourselves dealing with mental illness. Talk about metal health with your family, friends and colleagues not just this month, but all year.

Together we can work to build a healthier world. But first, we have to start the conversation.

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

John Wood of Telos Corporation provides an inside look into the Virginia Cyber Security Commission, established by Gov. Terry McAuliffe in 2014.


Shortly after taking office in 2014, Gov. Terry McAuliffe signed an Executive Order establishing the Virginia Cyber Security Commission “to bring public and private sector experts together to make recommendations on how to make Virginia the national leader in cyber security.”  It was my privilege to serve as a member of the Virginia Cyber Security Commission for the past two years, and I want to commend my fellow commissioners for their contributions, particularly Co-Chairs Richard Clarke and Secretary of Technology Karen Jackson, as well as our executive director, Rear Adm. Bob Day (Ret.).  With the Commission’s two-year authority ending this spring, it’s a good time to look back on what was accomplished and to see what’s next.

Being on the Commission was an eye-opener in many ways. The Commonwealth faces numerous and evolving challenges in the battle to secure state and local government networks, and to help protect the private sector and citizens of Virginia.  I was incredibly impressed with how open and honest our discussions were as we explored many complex issues.  This includes not only commissioners but the Governor’s appointees and other state employees who were party to our discussions – they were remarkably candid with us about the serious threats Virginia faces in cyber space and what actions are needed. We heard from and worked with representatives from state and federal law enforcement, the Virginia chief information officer, and other state government information security professionals. It was refreshing to hear such blunt assessments of our vulnerabilities – there was no “bureaucratic” caution, probably because the threat is so real and so immediate.

The Commission served to shine a bright light on the challenges facing Virginia. We made a number of recommendations that led to subsequent actions by the Governor and General Assembly, improving Virginia’s cyber security posture.  Moreover, our activities have better positioned Virginia’s cyber security sector to be a vibrant national leader. These results are consistent with the Governor’s desire to “grow this key industry, keep Virginia’s cyber assets safe and create new, good jobs here in the Commonwealth.” 

I urge everyone to read the report issued last summer by the Commission.  It notes some of the recommendations that were already accepted by the Governor and adopted by the General Assembly, such as new laws to help prosecute cyber crime and put in place other policies to better protect Virginians.  More importantly, the report raises a number of issues that require further work.  The effort must continue – there is much to be done, and Virginia’s public and private sectors must continuously work together to illuminate the changing threats we face and to swiftly take appropriate actions to address them.

It was gratifying to see how easy it is to get things done when people work together to find consensus.  The Commission explored problems and made recommendations, and the Governor and General Assembly took action.  That’s the way government is supposed to work.

At the same time, I saw how difficult it is to get things accomplished when competing agendas battle for the same limited pool of resources. That was my biggest disappointment.  In our report, we identified a real need for dedicated funding to promote collaborative cyber security research and development between the higher education community and private sector. That course was endorsed by the members of the General Assembly’s own Joint Commission on Technology & Science (JCOTS), which recommended $5 million to fund this effort. But this bi-partisan recommendation was set aside in Richmond, at least for now, because there were simply too many R&D agendas fighting for the same pool of money and attention.  I am hopeful the Governor and General Assembly will return to this because I firmly believe, as do many of my fellow Commissioners and the members of JCOTS, that collaborative R&D will be a key element in our drive to grow the industry and make Virginia THE leader in cyber security.

One final note: cyber security does not recognize man-made, political boundaries.  In that light, we in the technology sector should be looking at where other companies and other states are making investments (like in R&D), and see where we might do the same. Similarly, I hope the Commission’s work will set an example for other states, and help to chart a path for Gov. McAuliffe to pursue greater cooperation among the states.  I know he is interested in making intrastate and interstate cyber security a major focus during his upcoming term as chairman of the National Governors Association, and Virginia’s cyber security leaders in the private sector should support his efforts in any way we can.

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

Kristin D’Amore of Dovel Technologies provides a look into how Virginia is supporting student innovation, an essential asset to the Commonwealth’s economy.


New businesses account for nearly all net new job creation and almost 20 percent of gross job creation as well as being responsible for a disproportionate share of innovative activity in the United States.* There is an enormous amount of entrepreneurial activity occurring at institutions of higher learning throughout the country, and Virginia is taking strides to strengthen student innovation on its campuses. On April 14, 2016, Governor Terry McAuliffe signed into law legislation that directs the Boards of Visitors of public colleges and universities to adopt intellectual property (IP) policies that are supportive of student entrepreneurship. The legislation, which was sponsored by Del. Charniele Herring, was supported by NVTC and a broad coalition of higher education and business community organizations across Virginia.

The legislation reduces some barriers to entry for student entrepreneurs by clarifying existing university IP policies to specify the conditions under which institutions of higher education own intellectual property as opposed to student ownership. Current policies at some institutions of higher education create uncertainty about IP ownership, which discourages students from launching new ventures, starting businesses, or commercializing research based on their own ideas. The bill encourages a campus culture that supports entrepreneurship and motivates Virginia’s universities to be hubs of creativity and innovation with the potential to drive regional economic growth through research commercialization and new business formation.

The issue of student entrepreneurship and IP rights was raised by the Governor’s Council on Youth Entrepreneurship, which was formed in August 2015 to study and recommend ways to support young business owners and innovators in the Commonwealth. The group is comprised of leaders in higher education, business, innovators and entrepreneurs. As a member of the Council, I was pleased to see an early win for young entrepreneurs and students across Virginia.

Increased student innovation and promoting IP commercialization and new patents by students is critical to growing Virginia’s economy.  Statistics from the Council on Virginia’s Future show that although Virginia’s rate of patent formation has improved in recent years, it is still well below the U.S. average. Furthermore, Virginia universities generated 1.94 startups per one million residents in 2013, measurably below the national rate of 2.38 startups and ranking the Commonwealth 27th in the country.

The Council on Youth Entrepreneurship is continuing its efforts assessing resources and opportunities in Virginia for young entrepreneurs and will be presenting additional recommendations to the Governor later this year.  The Council will make additional recommendations on areas including financial incentives for business formation, improving regulatory processes for entrepreneurs, strengthening academic programs for student innovators in K – 12 and higher education, and marketing the assets of Virginia’s education system to students, faculty, and business leaders across the country.  The Council’s efforts are focused on providing the next generation of entrepreneurs and innovators a solid foundation from which to launch their ideas, ultimately leading to further growth in the economy.

* According to the Kauffman Foundation, the largest foundation in the world devoted to entrepreneurship.

Kristin D’Amore is Director, Market Development and Strategy at Dovel Technologies and a member of Governor McAuliffe’s Council on Youth Entrepreneurship. 

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

 This week on NVTC’s blog, George Lavallee of NeoSosytems offers five challenges and solutions to help customers receive the most out of CER.


Deltek Costpoint Enterprise Reporting (CER) provides customized, data-driven business intelligence (BI). Fueled by the IBM Cognos 10 analytics engine, CER enables organizations to mine their Costpoint data to provide consistent snapshots of performance, view historical trends and predict results.

CER is the king of BI. With state of the art capabilities, there are also potential roadblocks (employee turnover, user experience levels and changing data/accounting needs, other systems within the enterprise) that can keep companies from fully reaping these benefits. Unresolved, these challenges can cause inaccuracies, consume months of time and erode leader confidence.

1.   Powerful Customization Capabilities

While running CER reports is simple, developing them can be challenging  for users unfamiliar with Costpoint’s underlying data structure. To solve this problem, Deltek created standard reports (CER Reports) covering everything from project management to payroll to procurement. These prebuilt templates enable users to quickly generate reports that capture the most commonly used  fields across a wide swath of businesses. However, they may not include user-defined fields or specific metrics that you have implemented for your specific needs.

To capture these data, enterprises will want to build custom reports or modify existing standard reports. Creating or modifying Cognos reports requires a strong working knowledge of both the Cognos tool as well as the structure of the Costpoint database. For example, you can’t simply click a button to tailor a report to your accounts payable process or labor management structure. You will need to understand where the pertinent data elements reside and how to access them using the Cognos toolset. Many intermediate users lack the skills to effectively craft custom reports.

2. Complexity of Government Contracting Accounting Data

Costpoint uses more than 1,800 inter-related data tables that capture a wealth of information about your company. Access to this complex store of data can be of great benefit to your organization, but creating a report that captures the data relevant to your needs challenges many organizations. Many users are unsure about which data to query and how to convey it on a well-designed report. Common questions include:

  • What data tables do I access?
  • How do I arrange the data?
  • Which charts do I use?
  • What rendering options are best?

Additionally, most organizations have budgets and forecasts and want to integrate this data with actual results within their reports. You may have used another system to create your budgets, such as TM1, Adaptive or even Excel. Accordingly, integrating this data into reports generally means pulling data from systems outside Costpoint, further compounding complexity.

3. Robust Security

Increasingly in today’s world, data breaches are affecting companies in all sectors. Breaches tarnish a company reputation, expose data and sabotage audit requirements. Fortunately, Cognos and CER deliver robust and highly configurable security controls. The hundreds of available settings, however, can stymie many organizations.

Novice and even intermediate users may not realize that out-of-the box Cognos installations may not incorporate security settings that are optimal for their company’s situation. Organizations could inadvertently expose proprietary data and confidential employee information. For instance, you might assume that granting access to the projects package would only enable users to see project-related data but close examination of that data reveals that confidential employee information may be included if it is not properly secured by appropriate user-specific security profiles. The default security settings may not be sufficient to provide the degree of security required in rapidly changing environments.

4. Analytics Development and Optimization

Unless you have a dedicated analytics staff with the required expertise, individuals developing your reports may not be effective. Why? Developing reports and maximizing efficiency requires experience with both Costpoint and Cognos.

Often, employees tasked with reporting business intelligence have other duties. CER management is a part-time responsibility. They may have deep functional knowledge, but minimal understanding of Costpoint data structures and Cognos query and reporting requirements.

If you are caught in this situation the results can be challenging. Inexperienced users take 10 to 20 times longer to develop a report than an expert. Reports can be late compressing the time available for meaningful analysis as well as diverting time away from other business-critical duties, which may better align with their hired skillset.

5. Meaningful Results

Inexperience can also cause inaccuracy in reported results. Novice users may query the wrong data or omit data that would dramatically improve the reports usefulness. Such mistakes could put contracts at risk or result in poor or ill-informed business decisions. You want your reports to carry the most meaningful data possible.

Imagine you’ve tasked your logistics manager with developing an incurred cost submission report. That individual skillfully maintains your supply chain. But he or she doesn’t use Costpoint every day and may not understand which direct and indirect cost tables to query. Your report might miss critical costs or include unallowable items.

Errors like these erode leader confidence. Just one inaccurate report, and senior managers may mistrust all your data outputs. You’ve damaged your reputation and possibly jeopardized your contracts simply because you didn’t fully understand the data structures and how to best capture the data that conveys the most meaning.

Signs You Need Help

How do you know if these challenges are hindering your data analytics? Talk to your users and business managers. If you hear the following, you are probably underutilizing the power of CER or you might need a CER tune-up.

  1. Reports are consistently late.
  2. More time is spent collecting data than analyzing it.
  3. Executives don’t trust data accuracy.
  4. Significant manipulation is required to analyze data.
  5. Reports have unusually long run times.
  6. Project managers lack administrative visibility (i.e., they can’t see unpaid invoices, approaching funding ceilings, missing bill rates, etc.)

Consequences of Inaction

Inexperienced users waste time collecting the wrong data and not enough time analyzing results. Inaccuracies cause executives to doubt the validity of all your reports. Poor security can expose proprietary data and compromise audit results. Depending upon the number of users, solving these challenges could save your company months of labor and lead to better, more timely business decisions.

If you owned a Telsa, you would make sure you were trained and educated in how to fully utilize it. At a minimum you would take it to experts to make sure it was operating efficiently and effectively.

What You Need to Know:

To fully benefit from Deltek CER, companies should routinely assess their CER configurations, processes and output. A CER tune-up is easy and should be a standard operating procedure within all Deltek organizations. Maximizing the power of CER will allow companies to reap substantial benefits, overcome any “obstacles” and enable their organizations to succeed.

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

Who Owns the Data?

March 22nd, 2016 | Posted by Sarah Jones in Guest Blogs | Member Blog Posts - (Comments Off)

The greatest meaning of “big” in Big Data is the role of data in the digital economy. The question who owns the data is big too. With IoT and cloud, data ownership will matter soon even to those who don’t care now. Svetlana Sicular of the Gartner Blog Network explores this issue in this week’s blog post. 


The greatest meaning of “big” in Big Data is the role of data in the digital economy. The question who owns the data is big too. With IoT and cloud, data ownership will matter soon even to those who don’t care now.

And there is no universal answer — data ownership is culture-specific. In some cases, nobody wants to own the data, in other cases, everybody wants to grab a piece (“it’s mine!” although the “owner” didn’t even know before you asked that this data existed). With participating external parties, things are even more complicated: for example, one party might learn that it does not have rights for the data it considered its own.  To solve ownership — but not alleviate the problem! — some organizations decide that data belongs to their customers, citizens or third-parties, and the company is only a custodian.

What successful approaches to data ownership have I seen?

The universal first step is establishing an institute of data governance.  I just published a research note on how to do this: EIM 1.0: Setting Up Enterprise Information Management and Governance. You don’t have to call it “data governance.” It could be “data advocacy” or simply a name reflecting the nature of taking care of data. It should resonate with a specific organizational or ecosystem culture.

The next steps would be specific to the culture and the nature of the business: figuring out what data is most vital. This will narrow down data ownership to the decisions that matter (which will save a lot of grief and lots of hours).

The versions of data ownership I have seen:

  • Information governance mechanism resolves it through top-down decision making.
  • Subject matter experts make a step forward to own the data on which they are SMEs (bottom up).
  • Application business owners are offered to own the data, accept it and take it (unexpectedly) seriously, which is fruitful to everyone.
  • Data operators become de-facto data owners (which could be a solution, but could be a greater problem). Transparency in what is being done with data and explicit data access rules make it a solution.
  • When data ownership is hard to resolve on the high level, going more granular, and resolving data elements’ ownership (which is usually more obvious), answers the question.
  • A business executives assumes data ownership. The worst case is when such ownership belongs to an executive who has control, but has no idea about data. E.g. the executive owns the data, but does nothing because executives are busy doing other things. The best case is when this executive is a sponsor of data-related work.

The ownership is just part of taking care of the data. Look at the root of the issue: who can do what with which data without stepping on each other’s toes, avoid troubles with regulations and ensure you put data to work ethically. Data governance often starts with compliance and ownership, but — unavoidably — it ends up finding value in the data, which is big in the digital economy.

Follow Svetlana on Twitter @Sve_Sic. For more on Big Data, check out NVTC’s Big Data and Analytics Committee.  The NVTC committee is hosting its first conference on May 5 which will explore health care informatics and analytics.

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

Overcoming Obstacles in Entrepreneurship

March 14th, 2016 | Posted by Sarah Jones in Guest Blogs | Member Blog Posts - (Comments Off)

This week on NVTC’s blog: on Feb. 18, the NVTC Small Business and Entrepreneur Committee sponsored a fireside chat entitled “Journey to Success: Overcoming Obstacles in Entrepreneurship.” Nate Miller, an assurance intern at Aronson LLC, shares the top tips from that event, which featured a fireside chat with Gary Shapiro, president and CEO of the Consumer Technology Association, and Scott Case, the founding CTO of Priceline.com and founding CEO of Startup America. 


On February 18, the NVTC Small Business and Entrepreneur Committee sponsored a fireside chat entitled “Journey to Success: Overcoming Obstacles in Entrepreneurship.” The event was moderated by Gary Shapiro, President and CEO of the Consumer Technology Association, who interviewed Scott Case, the founding CTO of Priceline.com and founding CEO of Startup America.

The discussion focused on Case’s experiences throughout his lengthy career as a key member of several startup companies; Case also shared his thoughts on the potential pitfalls startup companies can fall victim to. Some of Case’s key points to attendees included:

  • The time commitment required to be a successful entrepreneur.
  • The importance of creating and expanding connections in a growing area such as the D.C.
  • Overcoming failure repeatedly is a necessary trait to success.
  • The importance of maintaining a valuable network with the appropriate resources.

Case’s entrepreneurial journey started with part time jobs as an assistant for a plumbing company and a well driller, and running a local lawn-mowing business, where he gained an understanding of mastering his trade, servicing customers, and constantly looking for the next opportunity. While attending college at the University of Connecticut, Case spent his free time developing an advanced flight simulator with fellow classmates only to discover that the startup could not generate sales due to a lack of marketing. As a result, a key lesson that Case carries with him to this day is the need to supplement a great product with a sales and marketing team and other supporting functions.

Undeterred, Case shunned more secure employment opportunities to continue working with startups and, following an introduction to Priceline.com Founder Jay Walker a few years later, joined Priceline as the founding CTO. During his tenure, Case’s team at Priceline developed a “name your own price” system in the early days of the internet that allowed the company to grow significantly and successfully undergo an IPO with an initial market capitalization of more than $12 billion. Case attributes his success at Priceline to his understanding of the available technology, as well as the ability to effectively market it and while creating a team willing to try a number of ventures without fear of failure.

Since leaving Priceline in 2000, Case has co-founded or led several other ventures focused on technology, entrepreneurship and philanthropy such as Main Street Genome, Startup America Partnership, Malaria No More, and most recently, Potomac Innovation, a new business travel purchasing company. Case stressed the need for entrepreneurs to remain connected to advisers, financiers, peers and customers if they are to be successful, and noted that incubators, such as 1776 in D.C. and others in startup hubs such as New York City and Silicone Valley, can greatly help a new entrepreneur. Case also stressed the importance of minimizing government regulation to allow new business owners to focus on their core activities, but noted that government can help by listening and responding to entrepreneurs’ needs – such as the recent decision by the city of Nashville, Tennessee to significantly increase its broadband access, which appears to be attracting entrepreneurs to the city.

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

As companies try to keep employees healthy and lower the overall cost of care, it is important that employers bring back the tradition of the primary care physician (PCP). Whether you are the HR director in charge of selecting health plans for your company or the CEO who is paying them, Amy Turner, executive director and COO of Innovation Health, provides the top four reasons you should be advocating for your employees to engage with a PCP. 


We all remember the days of the HMO plan – limited care options that left many employees looking for more choice and access to care for themselves and their families. To help meet this employee request many HR directors began looking toward PPO plans, which offered larger networks of doctors and specialists, but at a higher cost than the HMO plans. Today, employees want the same options, but with the increase in high-deductible health plans, many of them are also taking a closer look at cost.

As someone who has been in the health industry for more than a decade, I have seen a lot of changes take place, but one that strikes me as imperative to address is the lack of people who have, and engage with, a primary care physician (PCP). Plan options and policy changes aside, in the past people relied on family doctors for everything. Doctors intimately knew a family’s history, often treating several generations of family members. As we try to keep our employees healthy and lower the overall cost of care, it is important that we bring this tradition back with the PCP.

Whether you are the HR director in charge of selecting health plans for your company or the CEO who is paying them, here are the top four reasons you should be advocating for your employees to engage with a PCP!

They are focused on preventive care

A PCP can be your employee’s main health care provider for their most common medical problems. But they also look out for your employee’s overall health, recommend screenings, make referrals and encourage healthy habits.

They help maintain good health

A PCP provides employees with continual care. And that’s what good health maintenance over a lifetime requires. PCPs can treat the whole person, taking into account both your employee’s history and existing conditions.

They serve as an important point of contact and resource

PCPs are personal doctors who can coordinate care. That takes stress off your employees as their doctors are ready to make sure their best interests are met. Furthermore, they are often the first people  your employees can contact when they have a question or a problem. He or she can provide answers and care, or recommend a specialist when needed.

They help keep costly ER visits down

Because they will be your employees’ first line of defense, PCPs can answer questions, call in a prescription or even suggest the action your employees should take.  This will help them to avoid costly ER visits as they are able to manage any health issues before they escalate.

Once your employees select a PCP, make sure they are aware that under the Affordable Care Act they’re entitled to one, free yearly checkup. You read that correctly – every single employee you have can receive one free check-up a year.  This is something all of them should take advantage of. So, if you aren’t doing it already, please express to your employees the importance of building a PCP relationship and getting a yearly checkup. Not only will their health likely improve, but it could save your company and themselves valuable dollars.

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

Ignoring Innovation Means Getting Left Behind

February 23rd, 2016 | Posted by Sarah Jones in Guest Blogs - (Comments Off)

According to this week’s blog post from member company Social SafeGuard, in today’s highly competitive marketplace, innovation is what ultimately sets a company apart from the rest of the market. Innovation is an essential part of any business that does not want to be left behind, and it can come in many forms when it comes to how a company communicates with its customer base.


Social media is currently the most powerful and effective communications tool available. Twenty five years ago the concept of a globally available, user-generated content platform didn’t exist. Today, the utilization of this platform is a key to success for any business. In today’s highly competitive marketplace, innovation is what ultimately sets a company apart from the rest of the market; it is an essential part of any business that does not want to be left behind. Innovation can come in many forms when it comes to how a company communicates with its customer base.

free_social_media_icons_image_ubersocialmediaIn order for a company to effectively satisfy their customer’s wants and needs, they must constantly communicate and listen to them; furthermore, companies must use the findings of this communication to adapt their product or service accordingly. 72 percent of adult internet users in the U.S. are now active on at least one social network, up from 67 percent in 2012 and just 8 percent in 2005. It is obvious that social media is the most effective way to reach and engage with today’s consumer. History is littered with companies that were once dominant players within their industry, but failed to effectively engage and listen to their customers, which eventually led to their demise. Two prime examples of this are Kodak and Blockbuster.

1. The Last Kodak Moment: Kodak was the primary player in the camera industry for almost a century. Kodak was the American technology company known for inventing color film, the handheld movie camera, and the first digital camera. In the late 1990s, Kodak began to struggle financially due to its sluggish transition to digital photography, regardless of the fact that they invented the core technology used in current digital cameras. After 132 years of business, Kodak officially filed for bankruptcy in 2012 due to their inability to adapt to the changing camera industry. All Kodak had to do was communicate with their customers to discover that preferences were changing, but instead they chose to stick with what they had always done, which resulted in a loss of competitive advantage and economic failure.

2. Blockbuster: For many years, Blockbuster was the dominant player in the movie rental industry. Once Netflix, Redbox, and On Demand Cable Services entered the market, trends quickly changed to customers wanting videos instantly and conveniently. Blockbuster chose not to adapt to the changing marketplace until it was too late. In 2010, the company filed for bankruptcy after 25 years of business and the majority of their stores closed shortly thereafter. While Blockbuster still attempts to mimic their competitors in an effort to regain any possible market share, they are now chasing the industry instead of leading it.

Every company must adapt and embrace social media if they do not want to become the Kodak or Blockbuster of their industry. Social media allows people to create, share, or exchange information and ideas in virtual communities and networks. Unlike traditional communication tools, social media has unmatched reach, frequency, and usability. Social media is the medium in which today’s consumer chooses to communicate. It would be foolish for any company to not adopt a platform that provides a free flow of information with a global reach, where all of their current and potential customers are present, and openly telling the companies exactly what they want.

If Blockbuster would have been proactive and engaged their customers, it is possible they would now have 57 million subscribers streaming videos in over 50 countries, and Netflix would be nothing but a failed startup.

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

This week on NVTC’s blog, Michael Canes, senior consultant at LMI, shares why smart energy usage fundamentally improves the way companies do business, and the five steps agencies can take to help their energy management.

energy

Today’s government facility energy managers face the enormous challenge of meeting goals set through legislation and executive order (EO). For the past several years, managers have needed to increase the energy efficiency of buildings by 3 percent annually. But now, agencies also must utilize increasing proportions of renewable energy, 30 percent or more by 2025.

Meeting these benchmarks is necessary to comply with legislation, or EOs, but progressive agencies know that smart energy usage fundamentally improves the way they do business. Operating more efficiently increases program effectiveness.

We follow a five-step approach to help agencies improve energy management:

1. Assess current energy consumption
2. Identify opportunities to improve efficiency and add renewables
3. Analyze the economics of the alternatives
4. Budget and manage the finances of energy investments
5. Ensure the investments are in compliance with applicable environmental standards.

We analyzed alternate means to curb fuel consumption for the U.S. military’s theater of operation, reducing resources needed to supply fuel over hundreds of miles of terrain. Energy efficiency freed up vital resources to be used for other mission-oriented purposes, creating savings in fuel, equipment, and manpower; and increasing operational effectiveness.We currently are working with the Facilities Management and Engineering Directorate at U.S. Customs and Border Protection to provide consistent, up-to-date guidance on how to mesh legal mandates with Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) standards to assure sustainability measures are of value to the government.The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) publishes an annual energy scorecard detailing federal agencies’ progress towards federal benchmarks. The most recent report shows that, while some agencies are progressing, others are lagging behind. The challenge to gain greater energy efficiency can be met, but it requires thorough assessment, a detailed plan of attack, and continuous implementation efforts.For more information, check out LMI’s book A Federal Leader’s Guide to Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy (EERE), which equips federal leaders with a succinct guide to specific energy issues in the federal government—the nation’s largest consumer of energy.

Michael Canes, PhD, is an internationally recognized economist with an extensive background in the economics of energy and climate policy. He has published a number of studies related to energy economics and policy. His PhD in economics is from the University of California, Los Angeles.

 

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

Most countries have a centralized model for managing healthcare supplies, but there is room for other options. This week on NVTC’s blog, LMI’s Taylor Wilkerson outlines three models that can help you choose the best option for your national healthcare system.


Most countries have a centralized model for managing healthcare supplies, but there is room for other options. The following decision tree can help you choose the best option for your national healthcare system. Note that all three models assume that contracts with vendors have been centrally negotiated to ensure bulk pricing. Determine the best model for your healthcare supply chain with three questions.


If your best option is a Vendor-Managed Inventory Model, vendors own and maintain the medical supply inventories at facilities around your country and are responsible for inventory fulfillment. Pricing is based on pre-negotiated bulk contracts.

Key Benefits

  • You don’t have to manage transportation or storage of supplies.
  • Since inventories are stored in facilities around your country, your healthcare supply system may be more flexible in times of disaster.

Key Disadvantages

  • To ensure standardized levels of care across the country, this model requires clearly defined management processes and data systems.
  • Analysis is needed to know whether vendor delivery costs would be more and less than one managed by your administration.

If you choose the Vendor-Managed Delivery Model, vendors manage delivery of supplies around your country. Districts, counties, or facilities place direct orders with vendors, with pricing based on pre-negotiated bulk contracts. The pricing includes delivery costs.

Key Benefits

  • You don’t have to manage transportation of supplies.
  • In case of disaster, the flexibility of your healthcare supplies depends on the resilience of your vendor’s delivery systems.

Key Disadvantages

  • To ensure standardized levels of care across the country, this model requires clearly defined management processes and data systems.
  • Analysis is needed to know whether vendor delivery costs would be more and less than one managed by your administration.

If your best option is a Centralized Inventory Model, you hold all inventory in a central warehouse and ship to medical facilities as needed.

 

Key Benefits

  • With all supplies are in one location, you can easily track inventory, even if you have not been able to invest in sophisticated data systems.
  • You may be able to negotiate the least expensive warehouse costs, since you need only one facility.
  • There is lower risk of running out of one type of supply, since overall inventory is larger than when it is stored regionally.

Key Disadvantage

  • In times of disaster, having all supplies in one location could make your healthcare system vulnerable.

Mr. Wilkerson heads the Global Health group at LMI. Mr. Wilkerson co-chairs the Supply Chain Risk Leadership Council and chairs the Penn State Center for Supply Chain Research advisory board. He has an MBA from the University of Maryland, and BE in mechanical engineering from Vanderbilt University.

Mr. Colaianni works in the Global Health group at LMI and manages supply management systems and policy. Formerly, Mr. Colaianni was an Army officer and managed the medical equipment program for Walter Reed Army Medical Center. Most countries have a centralized model for managing healthcare supplies, but there is room for other options. This week on NVTC’s blog, LMI’s Taylor Wilkerson outlines three models that can help you choose the best option for your national healthcare system. 

 

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS