http://www.insidehighered.com/sites/default/server_files/styles/blog_landing/public/green.jpg?itok=D8D3DXB7By G. Rendell. Two recent conversations are in the process of melding in my mind.  (No Vulcan required.)  One of them was with an MD, and the other with a university sustainability officer. Chatting with the MD, the subject of "quality" came up.  She's a solo practitioner, working with and in -- but not as an employee of -- a large hospital.  Apparently, the hospital is intent on absorbing most or all of the solo and small group practices associated with it, under the pretext of improving quality.  I say "pretext", because their argument is that quality is a function of the number of ways a hands-on practitioner's activities get recorded and scrutinized.  The number of forms that get filled out.  The number of non-MDs passing judgment on what MDs do.  Without apparent reference to what outcomes are produced or what needs and expectations satisfied.  "Quality", in such a context, sounds perilously close to economic efficiency; the concepts aren't inherently in conflict, but neither are they inherently identical. Read more...