skip to Main Content
Written by: Vester Gravley on Thursday, August 20, 2015 Posted in:

Strategic Staffing Part Two

In my part one blog discussing approaches to strategic staffing I observed that assigning therapy by total procedures is like staffing apples to oranges in that there is no direct relationship between scheduled workforce minutes (FTEs) and distributed workload minutes. Realizing this, some may take another approach.

Based on subjective departmental values all or some orderables are allocated a number of minutes based on a general consensus of the activities involved; a ventilator takes this many minutes, a neb takes such and so…etc. Rather than established values founded on updated and validated time/motion studies, the associated procedural minutes are relative values based on collective experience or explanation. Over time the values are tweaked to comport more closely with productive budget numbers, providing less variability in due course than total procedures. However, still retaining some level of staffing to workload mismatch shift to shift. Moreover there is not a direct benchmark on a state or national level with other departments of similar size, volume and procedure mix. Data collected for productive budget numbers does not directly compare with data collected for productive benchmarking analysis.

While staffing based on these allocated time values hits closer to the mark it is more like comparing apples to pears. Pears look something like apples but don’t make for really good apple pie. When the judging at the fair takes place for apple pies, the blue ribbon goes to the one made with the best apples.

Back to top