Organizations risk becoming irrelevant and detached from their members.
Wynne’s attack on doctors puts the Ontario Medical Association in a bad spot. Front line docs will resent government initially. But unless they see the OMA as their champion, physicians will eventually turn against their association.
Relativity grates on doctors every time they drive in to do a case at midnight or try to wake up a cushier specialty at 3 in the morning. Invariably, the cushy guys generate a much bigger income. Everyone knows it, but no one can fix it. Docs give it less attention when times are good.
Repeat failed contracts weaken the OMA. People forget the totalitarian approach government took in ‘negotiations’. Doctors just see failure. Physicians do not suffer fools lightly. MDs believe serving in leadership is half as hard as clinical practice. Many think they could do a better job if they were in leadership but just don’t have the interest or time to spare.
Disruptive technology pops up when the status quo gets too big, expensive and unwieldy. Personal computers took over when mainframes became more powerful than necessary and too hard to access.
Is the OMA risking a disruptive innovation?
The Ontario Coalition of Family Physicians formed after family practice nearly died in the 1990s. Many of the coalition members got on the OMA board and improved things for family practice in the early 2000s. They saved family practice from extinction.
Family doctors now face a 25-30% income cut by 2017 from 2012 levels. It’s not the OMA’s fault. Premier Wynne slashed doctors to finance Liberal debt and scandals. But doctors won’t remember that. They’ll just see that their collective bargaining agent didn’t come through for them.
Crucial Conversations
The OMA faces a critical juncture. It needs to ask some hard questions.
- Why does the OMA exist?
- Who does it serve?
- Where does it draw the line between serving members and partnering with government?
- Does the OMA take members for granted?
- Does the OMA resist change and avoid competition?
- What political philosophy does it espouse?
- How does OMA policy and bureaucracy help or hinder its mandate?
- What needs to change?
- Can the OMA improve member involvement and if so how?
The late Brenda Zimmerman inspired us to ask ‘wicked questions’ that include seeming opposites. For example, how can we increase services AND spend less? Love of wicked questions aside, we often struggle to hold onto more than one thing at a time.
OMA Mid-Life Crisis?
Billy Crystal played Mitch Robbins in the 1991 Movie, City Slickers. Mitch has a mid-life crisis and signs up for a cattle drive on a ranch in New Mexico to clear his head. An old cowboy, Curly Washburn, played by Jack Palance, offers Mitch some advice.
Curly: Do you know what the secret of life is?
[holds up one finger]
Curly: This.
Mitch: Your finger?
Curly: One thing. Just one thing. You stick to that and the rest don’t mean sh**.
Mitch: But, what is the “one thing?”
Curly: [smiles] That’s what *you* have to find out.
What is the OMA’s one thing?
Without member support, the OMA loses relevance. It can have the best leadership, policies and bureaucracy, but without support, it’s weak and lost. How can front line physicians help the OMA through to find its one thing, to continue being relevant, strong and connected?
