Photo Credit: Andrey Popov

Healthcare leaders must adapt swiftly, updating hiring policies and physician compensation to retain talent, ensuring satisfaction and a competitive edge.

Of all the elements contributing to a healthcare organization’s success, perhaps none is more valuable than the contributions of physicians. As such, Wisconsin-based author and management consultant Roger A. Gerard, PhD, notes that securing physicians’ compensation satisfaction is essential to maintaining a flourishing healthcare system. According to Gerard, a professional’s order is the impetus for all action in a healthcare organization. If physicians are disenchanted with their compensation, they may seek employment elsewhere, leading to a dearth of action and productivity at their former place of work.

Gerard attributes growing physician stress levels to the pressure that comes with having to provide upgraded healthcare in tandem with notably lowered costs. For instance, Gerard points out a situation in Santa Clara County, California where 450 physicians eked out an agreed-upon contract regarding unsustainable working conditions merely a few days before a planned strike that would have had severe impacts on healthcare in the area. One of the key contributors to the physicians’ dissatisfaction was the leadership’s “dismissive” attitude toward doctors, as the latter felt overwhelmingly disrespected in their workplace. Gerard notes that a follow-up survey found that 66% of physicians had no intention of remaining with the healthcare organization. Of those planning to leave, 60% cited a lack of respect. According to Gerard, this occurred while the mean physician compensation dropped by nearly one quarter, in 2022, and is no surprise considering that Gallup finds compensation to be the number one driver for employment-seeking physicians, as well as a major factor in physician retention.

According to Gerard, compensation must be principle-based. Without this setup, mayhem will ensue. Individualized compensation does not consider how one person’s pay affects their colleagues, which, in turn, can bring on conflicts of interest, divisiveness, and resentment. Gerard notes that physicians are bound to discuss their compensation, regardless of policies that forbid it. He also points out the need for physicians to feel that they are compensated, and this can be achieved by establishing transparent compensation standards. Physicians should be paid based on current needs, as opposed to what was previously required or what may be projected to be necessary.

Gerard suggests that healthcare organizations need to commit to being a physician compensation market leader, market competitor, or market laggard—all of which will have a bearing on the quality of physicians employed at a given organization. Although they come with certain drawbacks, Gerard encourages healthcare organizations to obtain compensation surveys, allowing employers to compare their compensations to those offered to comparable physicians at other organizations. Even though various factors like location and time lag might create an “apples to oranges” comparison, this information is nonetheless worth considering.

No matter the source of information, Gerard urges healthcare leaders to keep in mind that situations change at an accelerated pace, necessitating that healthcare organizations maintain a competitive advantage to secure quality medical professionals. Even if this requires altering compensation and refreshing policies, leadership must be prepared to make moves. Physicians are too critical a piece of the healthcare organization puzzle to let their satisfaction fall to the wayside.