Earlier this year, I published a couple articles detailing how compliance officers can effectively communicate with physicians and healthcare leaders about compliance matters. If you happened to miss those, you can find those articles here.
Another component of effective compliance communication is vetting the accuracy of what you are saying to your audience. To be clear, I’m not suggesting that all your communications need to be vetted. For example, if a coworker asks you for the date of the upcoming holiday party and you get it wrong—that’s probably not going to end your career.
What I’m talking about are the communications that involve a higher level of risk. In this article, we’ll take a look at what types of communications need to be vetted, I’ll share some tips for vetting them, and why doing so is important to navigating the politics of healthcare.
The Types of Communications that Need to be Vetted
Let me give you three common examples to help illustrate the types of communications that need to be vetted for accuracy:
Any communications with an external party, such as a patient/family member, government agency, organizational business partner, or the media.
Any discussion with others inside the organization where you are analyzing or making a conclusion about a potential compliance concern.
Any communications where you are providing an opinion that is interpreting a regulation, internal policy, or other formal guidance.
With these specific examples, there are some common denominators that signal a need to vet your communication. First, you could be discussing a matter of high risk to the organization. Second, you could be discussing a matter that is sensitive in nature (e.g., confidential, controversial, potential for conflict). Finally, you are communicating to an audience who is relying upon what you are saying, for purposes of making a significant business decision affecting the organization.
Tips for Vetting Your Communications
Regardless of the type of communication that I described above, there will be times when it is critical to double or even triple check your facts. For example, if you find yourself in a meeting, or another situation where you are having to verbally communicate about facts and you’re not 100 percent sure, then let your audience know. Be transparent that you are not 100 percent certain of the facts and that you will verify and follow up. Taking such an approach will help you in maintaining trust with your audience vs. relying on inference and professional judgment.
Some additional tips for vetting your compliance communications include:
(Fairly obvious), check with your point-of-contact who is closest to the facts that you’re relying upon to validate the accuracy of what you are communicating to others.
During times when you are drafting a written communication, reach out to someone you trust so you can get a “2nd set of eyes” to look at what you’ve written. Having this fresh perspective can help you spot typos or identify any gaps in the communication or analysis that may raise a question.
Run the scenario by a trusted colleague who has no knowledge or background of the matter being discussed. This can also help provide a fresh perspective and identify any questions that need to be answered.
With these tips, you should’ve noticed a trend—checking in with someone else. We often get so close to our work that we can’t see what’s right in front of us—which is to say, words we think are there, information that’s not accurate, or a gap in logic that needs to be filled.
(Note: For Tips #2 and #3, your supervisor may be the best option available to you.)
Vetting Communications and The Politics of Healthcare
Vetting your communication is critical to navigating the politics of healthcare for three reasons. First, it’s a hallmark of communicating diplomatically because your communication is rooted in fact and not opinion. This creates a more defensible position as you communicate with others, especially those who may have a competing self-interest. Second, it helps you establish credibility with others in the organization as a trusted resource. Finally, taking this approach helps establish rapport with others in the organization, which leads to gaining buy-in to the compliance program.
Pulling it All Together
While vetting your communications does involve extra work, the time and energy spent will be less than the time it will take you to explain why your communication was originally inaccurate. Yes, we’re all human, easily capable of mistakes. You just don’t want to make it a practice. Taking the time to vet your communications will help guard against making inaccurate communications a practice.
