Transforming Academic Medicine Is Easy. Just Google It.
Nov 8, 2013 1:00 PM
What might Google and the University of Utah have in common?
Last weekend, a team of faculty, students, and staff from the University of Utah, attended the annual meeting of the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) in Philadelphia. This year’s event drew nearly 5000 attendees representing medical schools and teaching hospitals that share a passion for and commitment to improving medical education, research, and patient care. We talked about funding more residency slots, managing bundled payments for patient care, designing new medical school buildings, advancing interprofessional education, and much more. For those of us who want to see academic health sciences centers flourish, the stimulating exchange of ideas at the AAMC annual meeting is unmatched.
The University of Utah had a banner year at the AAMC, on all fronts. Our faculty and administrators contributed meaningfully and garnered well-deserved recognition for the outstanding work of our entire institution. We were a catalyst for discourse around some of the most “Impossible Problems” facing health care and education. Our cracker jack public relations and communications team moved the conversation forward. We interviewed attendees from all over the nation about the challenge of transforming academic medicine and posted online in near real-time. And Twitter? We owned #AAMC13. Sean Mulvihill, M.D., the Chief Executive Officer of the University of Utah Medical Group and Associate Vice President for Clinical Affairs was tweeting. Need I say more?
It was hard work, but it was teamwork at its best and we made a difference.
For the plenary sessions, the AAMC brings some of the most inspiring and cutting-edge thinkers. This year we heard Adam Grant, known as the youngest tenured professor at Wharton College and author of a new book called, “Give and Take: A Revolutionary Approach to Success”. The premise of his book is that there are three categories of behavior and the world is divided into the three groups who tend to prefer each of those behaviors: the givers, the takers, and the matchers. The first two categories are relatively self-explanatory. The last category applies to those who seek fairness—they give but expect something in return. Research from Grant’s group and others have shown that the givers tend to dominate both the upper echelons of success as well as the lower ranks of failure. Grant seeks to understand why.
When he delivered a similar talk at Google—which I highly recommend you watch below:
Grant was asked an important question:
Does the culture of an organization, giver, taker, or matcher, predict its success? For example, does Google’s strong sharing and helping (“giving”) culture help explain its ability to deliver better products for its customers?
Grant’s answer? An overwhelming, “Yes!”
The give and take-away: So too does the culture of the University of Utah—where once again at the AAMC, we demonstrated how a culture of giving makes our health sciences center and Utah such a wonderful place to work and to live.
Visit Grant's Web Site to take the test and see where you fit in.comments powered by Disqus