Care Model Engineering at Advocate Health: A Product Lens on How Care Gets Built

 In this episode of The Strategy Catalyst Dispatch, Shoeb Sitafalwalla, Senior Executive Vice President and Chief Strategy Officer at Advocate Health, walks us through care model engineering, Advocate's approach to designing care models with a product lens across one of the largest health systems in the country. We cover how a post-merger discovery process led his team to rethink what a health system's core product actually is, what it looks like to run care models through a product pipeline with stage gates and a 100,000-patient pilot minimum, and how the reusable architecture they've built took them from a 10-month first product to launching every three to four weeks. 

Transcript

Shoeb Sitafalwalla 0:00

So our pilot prototype, we said it has to be at least 100,000 patients. you can't

Anika 0:04

Wow

Shoeb Sitafalwalla 0:04

100,000 patients, you have no business scaling to six million patients. it forces people to think, how do I build this, in the right way?"

Anika (2) 0:18

Welcome to the Strategy Catalyst Dispatch, a podcast from the Strategy Catalyst team at the Health Management Academy. I'm your host, Anika Rashid Senior Analyst, and each episode we'll explore The trends and insights shaping healthcare strategy today. Let's dive in.

Anika 0:40

Every health system talks about transforming care delivery But what does transformation actually mean? Here's what often happens. Someone has a good idea, they pilot it with a few hundred patients at one site, and then they spend years trying to figure out how to scale it At Advocate Health, they're figuring out how to break out of that cycle And really transform and redesign care delivery. I'm joined today by Shoaib Sattawalla. Shoaib is the Senior Executive Vice President and Chief Strategy Officer at Advocate Health, one of the largest health systems in the country After the merger that formed Advocate in 2022, He and his team took the opportunity to ask, what is their core product? And answering that has changed how the organization builds and delivers care. Today, Shoaib walks us through what Advocate calls care model engineering, how they design care models the way a tech company might design products, how they went from a ten-month first build to launching a new product every three or four weeks, and why they won't even consider a pilot unless it can reach 100,000 patients Shoaib, thanks so much for joining us today. so tend to find that, health system CSOs often wear a lot of different hats in their organizations, and your current role combines, both strategy and operational responsibilities. could you tell us a little bit about that?

Shoeb Sitafalwalla 2:04

Yeah. So, in my role at Advocate Health, I kind of wear two hats. The first is a strategic hat, which is really understanding and helping architect the global strategy of, of our organization, and then I matriculate that strategy down to the market level. So my team also oversees our market strategy i- in all of our respective markets, and then in a second kind of parallel role, I also oversee clinical operations, for our three what we call national service lines. So all of cardiovascular, neurosciences, and oncology, across the entire enterprise from the frontline clinicians, the technicians, and the office staff in our ambulatory and acute settings all collect under one set of national service lines for those three respective fields. And it also includes, our academic, work in those spaces as well, and that also flows under me. And so it's a really interesting opportunity for a strategist to come up with a theory but also put it into practice and create a good feedback loop between strategy and operations.

Anika 3:07

and you're also a physician by trade,

Shoeb Sitafalwalla 3:08

Yeah, no, I'm a cardiologist and, so far still see patients, just to keep it real. But, it's a great opportunity for me to get back to my clinical roots and, I'm fortunate to have the opportunity

Anika 3:19

a lot of leaders that we talk to can sometimes describe a gap between setting direction and executing on it. So it sounds like, your role is designed to help close that gap as well. in setting up for the conversation that we're gonna have today, I would love to talk about how Advocate got to where it is. So can you talk to me a little bit about how bringing together two legacy organizations, Advocate, Atrium, and the integration work that followed kinda set the stage or gave you the opportunity for what you're doing now with enterprise care models?

Shoeb Sitafalwalla 3:51

Yeah. Advocate is obviously the amalgamation of two legacy organizations, which in and of themselves had a number of integrations, our two CEOs at the time, Jean Woods and Jim Skogsbergh, really had this idea, what could you do to bring these two non-contiguous health systems rather, together? Both had experienced the value of integration, the value of scale, but the question is, could you take this to the next level and really create something new for the communities that we serve? And that's how Advocate Health was born, roughly three years ago. And, in that process, I was fortunate enough to be chief strategy officer of Advocate Aurora Health and then, assume the position of chief strategy officer for the new entity, the combined entity, Advocate Health. But, I have to say that, of all the chief strategy officers, I was probably the luckiest because there's always eagerness to run right into strategy, in the setting of a merger and acquisition. And, under the guidance of our leadership what we decided to do was actually take a breath much of healthcare in that country was still recovering from the pandemic. And what we really decided to do is spend a year really focusing on, how could we bring these two organizations together in their current form in the right way. and that obviously has generated well over a billion dollars in synergy savings for the organization but also gave us a chance to culturally come together. And so as I got this front seat view at our integration, I had a chance to really gut check a lot of assumptions, right? How do we think about the future of our revenue? How do we think about the future of consumer needs? what do we even mean when we say the word transformation? and then most notably, the question I would ask fairly repeatedly and annoyingly, I think, to some of my colleagues was, what is our core product or service? because what I realized is everybody defined it separately. hospital operators said, create the most efficient hospital operations and reduce length of stay and improve quality. ambulatory operations talked about access. Academic operations talked about research and, extramural funding and discovery and innovation. And so this was really a fascinating opportunity for me to see how everything came together. And then it was after that one year of discovery that we went into a very deep, strategic formulation phase in twenty twenty-four, and then in twenty twenty-five, we officially launched the strategy

Anika 6:19

Yeah, so it sounds like, it was an opportunity to really think through, what do we want this to look like? How do we want to, really deliver the best care so ultimately I think that kind of brings us to, what I think is the heart of the conversation, which is what you decided to build. can you talk me through that?

Shoeb Sitafalwalla 6:37

yeah, the crack I made at the CSO forum was, you know, you can ask 10 different healthcare leaders what your core product or service is, and you're gonna get 12 different answers. And, so much about strategy is about asking the right question, right? And I found that question was not only illuminating for me, but it was actually illuminating for a lot of my colleagues as well. It's like, well, what is our core product or service, right? And how do you reconcile the tension between where hospital operators wanna go versus where medical group operators wanna go versus where our academic and innovation, leaders want to go? it allowed us to take a breath and say, Maybe we're all right and all wrong at the same time," our core product or service the ability to take the academic enterprise, the clinical enterprise, the operational, capabilities, the technical and technology, the data, and bring it all together into a care model? care model is fundamentally the who, where, and how we deliver care to our patients that take a patient diagnosis to treatment, screening to prevention, acuity to stabilization. And if we can all work together knowing that the patient's at the center of what we do, And our job is to take them from point A to point B in their clinical journey, and that is the care model, right? it gives us a table, a space to all sit together and co-create with. And that was both, I think, illuminating to my strategy team, but illuminating to, I think, my counterparts as well, and set us on the journey that we've been on since.

Anika 8:08

for the care models, it sounds like it's really thinking about that end-to-end experience, who's using it, how they're moving through it, how they're gonna experience it. I think a lot of systems might hear that description of, care model engineering and think, "You know, we do that, too." So what do you think is the gap between how most systems approach this and what Advocate is doing, and, like, how you really, differentiate that?

Shoeb Sitafalwalla 8:35

and we had those same conversations in the organization, like, "Well, we have care models." And I was like, "No, It's kind of standard operating procedure. and clearly, you want your care models to be standard operating procedure. If you build the right care model, then everybody's g-going to want to use it. But a care model, what it forces you i-in the way we con-contextualize it, is really a product, right? it designs around a set of consumers, a set of resources, And the engineering com-component is a set of constraints, right? Because if you think in the regular product world, I'm sure we would want to make every pen out of the highest end material, but sometimes you just need a pen to write a quick note, and so you can't afford to spend a hundred dollars on a pen, right? and so there are economic constraints in what we can do. There are logistical constraints in what we can do. But then within those constraints, you're able to really question, the who, where, and how care is delivered. So maybe the easiest way for me to break this down is through some examples. I think we all agree that, memory care, cognitive, issues are an increasing, higher clinical issue for a lot of our clinicians, right? We have, Americans overall are growing older, right? And, they're living longer. And if they survive their heart disease, which was a big thing that used to kill people in the past, they're now suffering neurological issues, and symptoms of dementia. Well, currently, if you have signs of cognitive impairment or dementia, it can take you nearly ninety days to see a cognitive specialist in this country. We don't have enough of them how do you solve for that? We have a standard protocol, like many health systems do, of, what you should do like, can you accept the fact that it still takes ninety days, right? And statistically, we probably underestimate the number of individuals who have th-this condition and need this treatment by eighty percent because you're rate limited by what your primary care doctor can see, and people have limited access to primary care in this country. So we fundamentally question the who, where, and how you diagnose and treat cognitive impairment. And we said, "Let's not just wait for the primary care doctor," although we need to give the primary care doctor an easy button on this. But we started, again, through our Wake Forest School of Medicine research capability, we built a, learning algorithm that helped identify patients early through our electronic medical record. Once you've identified those patients, how do you reach out to them? Do you just send a note to their primary doctor and say, "Hey, bring them along"? No. You can actually reach out directly to them or their families through electronic means, through the either the EMR or text message or what have you. Great. And then once you've activated that patient, what do you do with them? How do you screen them You know, we worked with different vendors and partnerships to build digital screens so that in the convenience of that patient's own home, we can screen them. Then from there, we put them into virtual care capability, then from there into more highly specialized care capability. And as a result of that, as we re-engineered that process, we went from taking ninety days to see one patient to in the first three weeks, we were able to process eight thousand patients. And so it fundamentally flips the who, where, when, and how you deliver care.

Anika 11:54

I kinda wanna understand, how is this different from patient journey mapping?

Shoeb Sitafalwalla 11:58

I think patient journey mapping is a key component of this, right? But often what it doesn't do is it doesn't question the tools you have to meet that patient's journey needs, right? and what we're saying is let's expand That we don't have to bend the patient's journey towards us, we can meet the patient where they are, but that changes a lot of things, because this actually forces you to rethink the way you look at cost and revenue. It has questions on legal and compliance, and we have to make sure we stay within the confines of the regulatory framework we're in. it has, fundamental questions, particularly when you build scaled products of, where do you want to send that patient? How is that gonna have secondary and tertiary effects on your more traditional methods of care delivery? it doesn't live on the side, it's fully integrated into the business planning of the organization.

Anika 12:51

okay. So I know that you've already talked us through an example of what care model engineering looks like. What does it look like from the moment someone says, "We should do something about XYZ," to the moment that patients are flowing through it at scale?

Shoeb Sitafalwalla 13:07

our Caremodel engineering process is really driven by a pipeline process, right? phase one is really a, a concept, right? does the concept make sense? Does it hold water? then you go into right? How do you build prototype that's appropriate, small, contained? And, and I say small in a relative sense, right? Like I said, our prototypes, uh, need to have sufficient scale that we can scale it across our entire enterprise. And then what do you learn from that prototype? You need to have very specific questions and measures of success. And then if the prototype works, then it really gets into a, a scale and launch phase, right? with close monitoring. you need a lot of ideas before you get to a good idea, right? way I often frame is that there are a lot of good ideas out there, but there's a finite number of right ideas for us that are consistent with our strategy. so we use a top do-down and a bottom-up approach, right? There is clearly clinical operational issues that we need to solve that we're seeing globally across the enterprise. And so there's a lot of ideas that come from our executive level leadership. then you never want to shortchange the power of innovation of your frontline, And so there are a lot of interesting concepts that we see there, and then we bring that all together into what we call, our care model engineering steering committee. And our care model engineering steering committee is quite large. It's it's almost 50 people, which, if you've ever had to do meetings with 50 people on Zoom, you know that you know, it's not always the easiest thing to do. But, the-these 50 people represent a true cross-section of Advocate Health. We have academics and translational scientists, legal and compliance and regulatory, finance, operations at the local level, at the enterprise level, clinicians, our service line leaders, strategy, everybody kind of represented, at this table. And we have people throw their concept in front of this group, and we beat it up, people throw errors at it and say, "Well, did you think about this? Did you think about that?" we actually vote, as a whole on whether this concept is worthy of resources from all of the different, parties that need to be there, finance, legal, IT, what have you, to actually develop the prototype. 'Cause too often we're so busy creating a pilot that you almost become married to it and whether the pilot is good or not. So we, this allows us to de-risk, across the pipeline We need to be able to say no to something. If we say yes to everything, then, it doesn't work. so that's how we source our ideas from all over, right? So primary care was a enterprise issue that we were having. Everybody has issues with access to primary care. Ours was like most of the country, 26, 24 days to first appointment, for a new patient get to primary care. And one of the first products we built out of the gate was virtual primary care. And, we built it, to scale right away, right? So our pilot prototype, we said it has to be at least 100,000 patients. you can't

Anika 16:04

Wow

Shoeb Sitafalwalla 16:04

100,000 patients, you have no business scaling to six million patients. So it has to be 100,000 patients, which was a tall order, and it forces people to think, how do I build this, in the right way?" that's something that came from the enterprise. Virtual primary care went from 100,000 visits to now it, it's on track to do five times that for us, this year, right? And that's less than two years.

Anika 16:29

I'm curious if you could tell me, a little bit more about the learning curve. I think we've sort of touched on this a little bit. so with Virtual Primary Care, that first product, how was setting that up different from the ones that kind of came after?

Shoeb Sitafalwalla 16:43

I, I think the first product, took time, right? Because forces everybody in your organization to think differently about the work they do. IT, legal, finance, everybody needed to create new assumptions. with virtual primary care is, how do you think about your cost structure in a virtual primary care? Because this was a true virtual primary care. This wasn't a primary care doctor that does virtual care. This was doctor that's dedicated to the virtual practice alone. how do you attribute like enterprise costs to, you know, or corporate overhead, if they're living in a particular market, do they have to share the cost of the brick-and-mortar facilities in that area? There, there are all these interesting debates that you have, right? and so we worked all that out, if you will. but IT, from a build perspective, needed to think of a different cadence of how they work. Because often, I can't speak for every health organization, but often when you get a window where everybody's paying attention to you, you wanna make the most perfect product possible. And sometimes perfection gets in the way of progress, like things then go super slow. And one, one of the things we do with care model engineering is you need to work in quick intervals, like 90 days to go from one phase to the other, max. And so the idea isn't to be perfect, but create version 1.0. to be safe, has to be quality, but what's the minimum viable product? And then you'll have another chance to create 2.0 and put more bells and whistles on it. But this keeps momentum going. It helps people learn together. And so I would say our first product, by the time we got all, everything figured out, it took us like 10 months. it was exhausting, right? But now we are at a point where we are either launching, scaling, or upgrading a product every three to four weeks. And that 50-person steering crew meets on a monthly basis, they all show up. It's been an amazing cultural concept for the organization because people know if they wanna make a change clinically, this is the place to be.

Anika 18:42

it's really fascinating to hear how everything has come together, and especially that point about, when people think they have a finite window and they feel like they have to get it all perfectly done that first time, and that kind of can be a barrier in a way. And that when people know there is a 2.0 version and they're gonna have, this process of iteration, how that accelerates it. and so it sounds like, you know, the work from one product, the learnings, they do carry over, do you have a shared template for care model redesigns? Were you able to templatize it a little bit?

Shoeb Sitafalwalla 19:13

So for example, one of the products that we developed was our virtual weight management, weight management is obviously hot across the consumer market, we weren't trying to compete against, the consumer, products out there, right? But we know that just within the confines of our clinical enterprise, we have people who need weight management services. our primary doctors were looking for a bit of an easy button on that work as well, so they could focus on other issues, as well as supplement the chronic disease, work that they already do. And so we actually spent a lot of time building the virtual weight management chassis, And we wanted to build it right because what do you need to do to do virtual weight management? You need to have clinical interaction. You need to titrate medicines. You need to monitor weight, right? those are the same three things you need to do heart failure management. which we just launched a few weeks ago, Only difference is you're titrating, instead of titrating one medicine, you're titrating five. But the other principles stay the same. And so we were able to build products on top of each other, and that's what allows us to go faster and faster.

Anika 20:15

Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. And I heard you use the word chassis. Is that something that you often use to

Shoeb Sitafalwalla 20:20

yeah.

Anika 20:21

that?

Shoeb Sitafalwalla 20:22

we- when we're having this debate about what product should go next, right? We're always asking ourselves kind of two questions. The first question is, are we gonna be able to move faster on this because it fits on top of an existing chassis? it, right? if it doesn't, is this the product or is this the care model I wanna build a new Chassis for, more rigorous debate because there is just a net new level of investment that has to go into developing that.

Anika 20:49

That makes sense. I'm so fascinated by, if using language like care model engineering, product chassis, like really productizing the way we think about things, that kinda change how people show up to the table?

Shoeb Sitafalwalla 21:02

I think it really threw people off at first, you know, we had some detractors at first. They're like, "Well, I'm a clinician. I'm a physician. We're trying to deliver care." my counter to that was, one, I'm a clinician too, and We're trying to give you more tools so you can deliver that care, you're a primary care doctor. You only have 20 minutes to see that patient and take care of everything. let's find a way to build products that give you more tools to do that work, right? so that was the first unlock, I think, for maybe some of the skeptics out there. and then the second unlock was, I would say, when you think of things in product form, you give yourself far more latitude again, the components of that product, the who, where, and how. Does it have to happen in the hospital? Does

Anika 21:47

Right

Shoeb Sitafalwalla 21:48

to happen in the, in the clinic? so it just gives people a sense of flexibility. then the engineering component was this interesting, what I would say intentional use, because I think the word transformation has been overused in healthcare and transformation means many things to many people. And so we just decided to create a new word in our corporate lexicon to say, this is transformation, but it's transformation under a set of preconditions. And my background prior to medicine was I'm an engineer, so that, that appealed to me too. But, engineers, are creative, but they're creative under very set constraints, right? There's like freedom within a framework, right? you can't make a million dollar pen,

Anika 22:25

I can totally understand the point about there being skeptics at first, but how this sort of allows you to expand your thinking and be more flexible, but also with, this clear framework as well. so I also kinda wanna ask, a lot of systems organize around service lines, departments or specialties, and then, when you're organizing around products instead, what kinda happens to those traditional structures? do they coexist? bit? Talk me through that.

Shoeb Sitafalwalla 22:50

I think service lines are often are organizing structures on kind of the where clinical care exists, right? Or where it's organized, if you will. But, product mindset is what those service lines do. maybe another way to think about it is the service lines are their shelf, right? The products are what goes on the shelf, our heart failure, care model was built, between our product strategy team, our clinical virtual team, and our cardiovascular service line. They work together. The cardiovascular service line was able to provide, I think, the clinical insight and the pathway, the true evidence-based pathway. That's the what you do, The product team and the virtual team then were able to add in the who, where, and how you execute on that pathway, And so it actually marries very well together. And so now we have multiple service lines that are actually working now to figure out what their product schedule is gonna look like over the next number of years.

Anika 23:51

Okay, that's really helpful to understand how, they're complementary to each other. I also want to go back to something that you mentioned earlier. you've set a minimum of 100,000 patients for a pilot, which I think is a pretty striking number. How did you land on that, and what does it force you to do differently?

Shoeb Sitafalwalla 24:11

One of the things that we were dealing with is when people were thinking pilots, everybody had a different definition in mind, they were all fairly small. And when you design a pilot for, let's say, five hundred patients, you don't actually build your IT structure or your revenue cycle structure to s- to handle more than that, right? You're just trying to test the concept, does it work, right? But That's when, you get this pilot purgatory, right? Where, things stay in constant pilot mode, and they can never actually be applied across multiple geographies. And so we thought we'd just put a, big, hairy, audacious goal out there and say that, "Look, if your pilot can't hit a hundred thousand patients by the end of the year, if you're not designing for that, then you're creating something that never has any potential to break out of pilot mode." So it changes the way IT will resource the project. It changes the way the clinicians think about the implications of that project, right? If I'm gonna build a screening product, then I need to have the downstream capability to take on the screens, right? it forces you to think about the downstream capital of it, right? it just forces everybody to think about the next step. otherwise, the pilot stays the pilot. could it be fifty thousand? I guess. I wish I could tell you there's some science behind a hundred thousand, but it just, it's a crystallizing number. There is the Advocate way for us, and if we're gonna do something in a particular way, then we need to make sure all of our patients have appropriate access to it.

Anika 25:39

I think you're capturing something that's pretty im- important, with the traditional pilot model and how that might set you up in a way without you meaning to, to just never scale, because that's not what you're designing it for. so what do you do when something isn't working?

Shoeb Sitafalwalla 25:55

we do kill ideas, if you will, But because we do it as a collective, and we all agreed at the beginning what success looks like for these products, and when you don't hit those success metrics then it's easier to say, "Look, I tried, I couldn't do it," right? and what we've done, interestingly enough, is we've been able to put those on the side and going back to that chassis concept, we've had opportunities to like reintroduce them not necessarily as products, but as features on an existing chassis. So one example is we wanted to find a way to make smoking cessation work as a care model, right? But we couldn't make it work. And then, some almost a year later, we built a product around lung cancer screening and realized that the product, the chassis was good on its own, but it had an infrastructure that could absorb, for those patients that in the intake that screen positive as smokers, we could actually add smoking cessation counseling and therapy on top of that. So we actually resurrected it, but in a much more economically and operation sustainable manner

Anika 27:00

Yeah. Okay, so it sounds like, even if something doesn't work, you're able to repurpose it later down the line perhaps. I think having that discipline of, being a, being willing to stop something, is really important, I think it's probably easier to start things than it is to kill them. so I know we're coming up on time, but I kinda wanna pull a little bit on that technology thread a little bit. and this is, a little bit of a pivot, but how do you think new technologies like agentic AI are gonna change how health systems design care models and products? would love to ground this in, what you're seeing, but feel free to be a little speculative as well

Shoeb Sitafalwalla 27:35

so my basic construct behind AI and Advocate is very forward-leaning on the promise of AI. But we wanna do it in the most responsible way possible. just by way of background, we have a dedicated leadership team to our AI strategy, we're big believers in responsible AI utilization. So, uh, we published what is considered an industry standard for AI evaluation called Fair AI, which is a, very, important kind of use of ethics and IT evaluation to make sure that agentic solutions are done in the best interest of our patients. But with all that background in mind, I think the way I think of this is that for the last 40-plus years, healthcare transformation has been defined by scarcity, right? Everything from HMOs retail revolution to, you know, the ACA has all been built around this idea that we don't have enough doctors, we don't have enough clinicians, we don't have enough time, we don't have enough access to take care of the growing Uh, disease burden of our population. I think AI introduces this concept of abundance. for the first time, we have an opportunity to solve for abundance, solve for the idea that, we may have the ability to solve for time One example is, recently we were looking at hypertension management gaps in We have, I think, about a hundred and thirty something outpatient care managers that call a number of patients to close quality gaps in, you know, hypertension being one of them. And we recently incorporated an agentic solution to help us do that, to call patients. we're able

Anika 29:14

Yeah

Shoeb Sitafalwalla 29:14

thousands of patients at the same time parallel, in multiple languages, seven, and these calls can last ten to twenty minutes, and that's okay. Having a human stay on hold for ten to twenty minutes is sometimes difficult, right? 'Cause they have a list to go through. so there is an opportunity to solve for abundance in a fundamentally new way, which I think changes the way we do primary care in the future, changes the way we do chronic disease management in the future. us to put more resources in the hands of patients and take the finite resources we have, our clinicians, and use them at the best possible way, right? so that's my quick, three-minute, r- answer to your far more complicated question.

Anika 29:56

Yeah, no, thank you for getting a little speculative with me. I think that's, really interesting to hear your perspective on things. I think it'll be really interesting to see how things play out over the next few years last question for you. for, a peer chief strategy officer who kind of wants to try, care model engineering but they don't have you know, a recent merger to be a force function, or they don't have advocate scale, for example, what's some advice you would give?

Shoeb Sitafalwalla 30:21

you cannot transform your way in a silo, right? So if at minimum you don't have your clinical counterpart and your IT counterpart with you on this journey, it's a no-go. I think then, you need to have a very clear focus. What is the problem you're trying to solve for? And then the last I would say is you need to have a process, right? You need to have like a pipeline process, and you need to have dedicated time for that. This isn't something you do on the side while also trying to figure out, know, how we're gonna open up the next, you know, clinic on the corner of First and Main, right? you need dedicated time and then you need to have the willingness to disrupt yourself and say, "Maybe we don't open the clinic on the corner of First and Main because we're doing this." that's kind of like three or four basic things I would say to start with. It's not easy. there's been a lot of challenges and difficult conversations along the way, but there was a commitment to do something different because that was always the hypothesis behind Advocate, that we were gonna do something different with our scale, and that's what we're trying to do.

Anika 31:21

Shoaib, this has been a really great conversation. I think the way you're thinking about care models as products is really fascinating. It's gonna resonate with, a lot of the listeners. So thank you so much for being so generous with your time and your thinking

Shoeb Sitafalwalla 31:33

Yeah. Thank you

Anika 31:35

That was Showup Satafalwala, Chief Strategy Officer at Advocate Health. if this conversation sparked something you wanna dig into further, you can reach us at strategycatalyst@hmacademy.com And if you know a health system leader doing something worth talking about, send them our way. We're always looking for the next conversation

Anika (2) 31:54

That wraps up this episode of the Strategy Catalyst Dispatch. If you found this episode valuable, please like and subscribe on your podcast platform of choice and leave us a comment. If you have other thoughts or questions, we'd love to hear them. Email us at Strategy catalyst@hmacademy.com. You can also find more of our resources on HM academy.com/strategy-catalyst. That's it for this dispatch. Thanks for listening.