Awards for Sale
OK, the KLAS “Top 20 Best in KLAS Awards: Software & Professional Services 2009” report was released today (December 15, 2009). Of course, as a radiology information system vendor, I went straight to review the radiology winners. Before I go further, you should understand how KLAS works. KLAS surveys customers of various healthcare information systems. A product must have at least 15 customer surveys in order to meet KLASs’ minimum requirement for the “Best of KLAS” award. Products with fewer than 15 surveys are asterisked and are not eligible for the award. KLAS will survey a few customers at no charge in order to list them on their site. But, in order to have the asterisk removed, a vendor must pay KLAS to do more surveys. KLAS also requires there be at least three non-asterisked vendors in a given category before that category is eligible for the “Best in KLAS” award. Thus, KLAS encourages vendors to pay to have the customers surveyed of, at least two of their inferior competitors, in order to remove their asterisks as well. It should also be noted that KLAS charges vendors an annual fee to view their own data. The fee is calculated as a percentage of that vendor’s annual revenue. Thus, larger companies pay more than smaller companies to view KLAS data.
KLAS first contacted Swearingen Software back in July of 2003. At that time, there was just ONE Radiology category (not three as there is today). They said that if we ‘pushed’ our customers to their website to fill out the surveys, they would not charge us since they didn’t have to pursue them. I liked the concept of KLAS, agreed to the offer and notified our customers to go to their website and complete a survey. Swearingen Software immediately achieved the highest scores in the Radiology category and was poised to be the sure-fire Best in KLAS winner for 2003. Two months before the 2003 Best in KLAS awards were to be revealed, I was contacted by KLAS who informed me that, due to Swearingen Software, they were splitting the Radiology category into a Small (<200 Beds) and a Large (>200 Bed) categories. Since most of my customers were under 200 beds, they were moving our data to the Radiology Small category where no other vendors currently existed, thus, making us ineligible for the Best in KLAS award.
Fast forward to March 2004. In order to get Swearingen Software relisted in the Radiology Large category, I informed KLAS that I had over the required minimum of 15 large customers. I further told them that 14 of those hospitals were part of one large IDN. They said they have a policy that if you have a written contract with an IDN, that their scores will only count as one. I told them we had no such contract and that each hospital in that IDN could pick whichever RIS they wanted. They were satisfied and agreed to survey my larger customers. A couple months later, I received another phone call from KLAS. This time, informing me once again, that due to Swearingen Software, they have created another new policy. The new policy was that it didn’t matter if you had a written contract or not with an IDN, they all counted as one score. Again, we were knocked out of the Radiology Large category.
Fast forward to December 2009. KLAS now has an award titled “Segment Leader” for those categories where there are not at least three non-asterisked vendors. The “Segment Leader” in the Radiology Ambulatory category this year went to a vendor who happens to be asterisked. Upon receiving the KLAS eblast, I contacted one of my customers and asked them to compile some KLAS data for me. Turns out that the winning scores slightly edged out those of Swearingen Software. I then turned my focus to the Radiology Small category. Swearingen Software had the highest scores in the Radiology Small category in all three sections (PRIMARY INDICATORS, DETAIL INDICATORS and BUSINESS INDICATORS) but the “Segment Leader” award was given to a vendor whose scores ranked 7th out of the10 vendors in all three sections! In the KLAS eblast, they did not disclose how the “Segment Leaders” were selected. I, along with most readers of the report, assume it was the vendor with the highest scores in that category. WRONG!
My customer informed me that upon closer inspection of the Top 20 KLAS report on the KLAS website, a small note is shown below the “Segment Leader” chart which states: “Other solutions must have at least two products that meet the KLAS minimum for statistical konfidence in order for a product to earn category leader status.” OK. So let me get this straight. It’s possible for a vendor to have two non-asterisked products (even if they are the absolute worst scores in their respective categories) AND they can have the absolute worst score in a different category AND they can still win the “Segment Leader” award for that category. Hmmm. Does anybody else hear the clanging of lots of coins? That means that a vendor with the absolute best scores in a given category can be beat by a vendor with far worse scores. Isn’t the purpose of KLAS to identify and reward the best vendors on the basis of customer satisfaction? KLAS certainly wants you to believe this but clear and undeniable evidence tends to paint a different picture.
Simple questions: Who monitors KLAS? Who audits them? What independent source verifies their data to make sure it is accurate and fairly represented since they seem to have influence over some buying decisions. Answer: Nobody. My conclusion is just four words… Wanna buy an award?
If you have any stories about KLAS that you would like to share with us please feel free to post them in this blog. Maybe, together, we can make a difference.
Randall Swearingen
Survival of the Fittest
RSNA has a long history serving the industry with both educational sessions and technical exhibitions. It dates back several decades and with many years of successful growth in both attendees and exhibitors. But while the official show statistics are reportedly available in January, (albeit long after our attention span has lapsed) even to the casual observer this year’s RSNA was lean. The fact the annual rad-fest drew 100 first time-exhibitors is interesting but doesn’t necessarily compute to an industry growing. I mean, after all, wasn’t one of those first-time exhibitors was a therapeutic massage company?
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not bashing the industry I’ve dedicated my company and my career to. Overall, I see some significant changes at the RSNA this year that reflects a ‘thinning out’ of the RIS and RIS/PACS marketplace. There was a lot of empty floor exhibit space that was historically fully booked. This is primarily a result of the current economic times (companies going out of business or cutting back on their unnecessary expenditures).
It is now, more than ever, a ‘survival of the fittest’ world in the radiology field. The companies, like Swearingen Software, with years of experience, solid products and services and a significant recurring stream of revenue, are surviving. The others, who depend upon new sales, are slowly but steadily disappearing or being absorbed by the more successful companies.
The fittest in the industry should weather the economic storm and continue to invest in their products and their customers, and survive. Whether you’re considering replacing a RIS, PACS or both, I encourage you to look for a survivor - a vendor with passion and one who is fit for the challenge. The last thing a buyer needs is to invest hundreds of thousands of dollars on a RIS or RIS/PACS only to find that company out of business soon afterwards.
I welcome your comments.
Randall