When faced with the option of either a single-sourced IT approach or 'best of breed' solution, Kestral customers are finding increasingly that the latter offers them a plethora of advantages.

In a recent article in Health Data Management, Senior Editor, Beckie Kelly Schuerenberg discussed a number of points that re-inforces our experience.

Why is 'best of breed' best? Kestral has compiled a number of considerations:

1. With a 'best of breed' approach, system choices are not limited to whatever is available from the 1 or 2 "corporately endorsed" vendor product lines. (It's a bit like putting together a home entertainment system and saying all components have to be sourced from BRAND X or Y, rather than being able to choose individually the best DVD/CD player, amplifier, speakers, tuner, T.V., etc. from the wide range of stereo component vendors on the market.)

2. Multi-application vendors may have one or a few items within their application suite that are done very well, but typically fall well short in other areas in terms of functionality, support, and ongoing development, particularly when compared to specialist or 'best of breed' vendors.

3. No single vendor can offer the best solution for each clinical or workflow need. The range of expertise and experience that would be required is way way beyond even the biggest healthcare software vendor in the world.

4. Multi-application solutions vendors are typically very large organisations, which from an Australian perspective are based "somewhere else". Local specialists almost without exception have a much greater understanding of, and support for, the special requirements of the local environment. They are generally much more accessible, especially when it comes to technical development staff. The development staff of larger multi-application vendors are almost always based overseas, and operate on completely different time zones to Australia. This creates huge communication problems, as well as limiting worthwhile support for critical issues during Australian working hours.

5. Multi-application vendors often serve a global (or at least a North American or European-based) market, and their developers are much more restricted in terms of what (if any) modifications can be made to suit Australian conditions. This is because of the undesirable effect such modification would often have on their overseas (local to them) customers. Even if no such undesirable consequences exist, they are much more motivated to attend to the enhancement requests that will benefit their typically hundreds of overseas (local to them) customers, rather than a small handful (at best) of Australian customers.

6. Simple economics dictate that businesses must look after their biggest customer base. For large multi-application vendors, this usually means their overseas (local to them) customers. For Australian 'best of breed' suppliers, this means their local Australian customers. Securing or losing the goodwill of Australian customers is life or death for local 'best of breed' suppliers, but not for large overseas-based vendors. As Allan Fels would say, this tends to "Focus the Mind" of Australian suppliers on their Australian customers, and vice versa for vendors based overseas .

7. Where organisations have gone for a single or limited vendors strategy, 'best of breed' solutions can still help to 'plug holes'. Often, the use of multiple applications from a single or restricted set of vendors can create holes that need filling, or 'voids'. Specialty vendors are usually smaller and more flexible, and can use their specialty to fill a void.

8. 'Best of breed' solutions may be more palatable to the end user. It can sometimes be difficult to get end users to 'buy in' to the new technology, and even harder if the solution does not exactly match their needs. Limiting end user choice is very alienating, and can create disastrous opposition right up front. 'Best of breed' solutions can provide clinical and ancillary staff with software that best suits their needs, making the system more attractive and reducing resistance.

9. Limiting vendor choice to one or a few vendor organisations can sometimes be the preference of IT and related infrastructure service providers (like purchasing, finance, and contracts management) because it makes their function within the organisation easier to deliver. This does not always translate to what is best for the end users they serve.

10. 'Best of breed' s can often easily integrate with other systems. (They generally have to!) Specialist solution providers usually need to interface and integrate with other systems in the health setting, and in order to stay competitive, need to do this seamlessly for the user. Multi-application vendors on the other hand, often make compromises in the interests of their internal interoperability, which adversely affect their ability to integrate with other vendors' solutions. This can have the effect of "locking in" their lesser quality components to their better offerings, and make it difficult or impossible to substitute alternative offerings from 'best of breed' vendors in those weaker areas. (Good for the vendor, but not good for the customer.)

It's easy to see why 'best of breed' applications are the winners in the Australian marketplace.

Kestral offers 'best of breed' solutions in pathology, radiology, messaging and results lookup. Please contact us should you wish for further information at contactus@kestral.com.au.