Matthew Holt

Carleen Hawn debuts HealthSpottr and a list

Photo-carleenhawn Carleen Hawn’s new site HealthSpottr is up and she’s starting with a list of the Top 100 random people in health care. Well it’s supposed to be innovators, but it mashes up a bunch of Health 2.0 folks with some biotech people, some health policy types (Berwick & Wennberg are close to the top), some health system types, and some academics. And yes, a certain Harvard Business School prof who’s one step ahead of the SEC is ahead of Uwe Reinhardt, with Enthoven not on the list. Perhaps most amusing is that Microsoft’s Peter Neupert is #1 while no-one from Google is on the list (Although Adam Bosworth is in there).

As you know I think lists and awards are tosh. But they are the US Weekly of the online world—trashy, you can’t admit to reading, but very good fun. Special prize for the THCB regular who can find the wrong photo attached to a name swiped from these very pages (hint, a mix up between two people who write together a lot),

So dive in and enjoy, and I think Carleen will be back with something a little more substantial soon.

Meanwhile, perhaps THCB should do one–I’m thinking “worst people in the healthcare world”. Votes for who I’d put on top please…

Categories: Matthew Holt

Tagged as: ,

29 replies »

  1. universal health care would be a great idea, providing you can trust the implementer of the plan. I am almost sure this will be the Public Health Service. Here is a link that might shed a little light on the past preformance of the P.H.S.
    now if you think this is a one time deal read this
    after reding about this , you could not pay me enough to go take a free flu shot. I think it has something to do with not trusting the government.

  2. What some of you may be unaware of is that the EHR guy IS in that list.
    Just an FYI.

  3. Carleen. I guess putting Regi on the list will stop the flow of letters from her lawyers… and no I don’t belong anywhere near the list. I just comment about stuff. I don’t actually do anything!

  4. Dear Darling,
    I said “glamorous fortune circus” and it was not meant to relate to a magazine or such. Some folks just have fixations, don’t they.
    But now that you did, yes, AIG was a Fortune 500 company. Countless others “too big to fail” also make it into glamorous lists. So it is.
    I am not nominating anyone to a list I merely find amusing. I did suggest.
    I anticipate your website to be much more. I understand you wanted to draw attention by creating a debatable list. Somehow you must get readers flocking to your site. Great marketing strategy, congratulations!
    There are many folks in the list that have not proved themselves beyond being in the right place at the right time or working for an “Aircraft carrier” type of organization, that is, one with big pockets but no true creativity, albeit they once were a product of a creative “individual”. But that comes to an end when they go public, right?
    Well, if McKesson sold whiske and milk then why can’t Wal-Mart get into healthcare and become an innovator? Just a side thought.
    On the other hand, I sincerely wish you success in your endeavor and don’t take my words as harsh criticism but as mere suggestions.
    So, get some content out there. We are anxious to follow you!
    The EHR Guy (humbly sarcastic at times)

  5. Hi EHR Guy,
    Would you like to nominate Halamka? No one has (I won’t waste space hear on why we suspect this is so), but we’d welcome you to do it now – if you like. Also, our list will be open for polling in near future, as our plans do include publishing reader lists to accompany our own. Might be a great opportunity to share your heros with us, make up for other of the heavyweights you believe we missed. We’d welcome that, too.
    But do your homework: is Forbes, not Fortune.

  6. Kibbe and Klepper,
    That’s why you should consider using an avatar.
    You see, you can hide a few details from public scrutiny and criticism 😉
    BTW: I should expound my own healthcare heroe list to include some I have named. Shame on me!
    I don’t accept sponsorship, advertisement, or anything that can lead to a non-objective stance. My personal bias does remain, of course.
    The EHR Guy

  7. OK, then where’s Dr. John Halamka?
    I think he outranks 95% of the tosh list.
    And no, just in case anyone is wondering, none of the folks that I have suggested have the slightest idea of who I am. So, sucking up is non-applicable.
    Oh well, David Clunie may know who I am, and so may Peter Kuzmak from the VA. Why are they not in that list? They have contributed so much to healthcare IT way before this “modernization parade” had started.
    If you want that list to have true significance and not just be a sucking up for a new magazine then you should do your homework. This is healthcare darling and not the glamorous fortune circus.
    The EHR Guy

  8. Hi Matt,
    Thanks so much for the coverage. And I appreciate you using the correct picture of me. We truly hate to mix up any two faces. (My apologies to Kibbe and Klepper.) But, heck, confusing pics of two middle aged white men in beards – even with the best efforts it’s bound to happen once in a while.( I think we may owe the correction to one of your readers, so thank you for this, too.)
    For one of your readers, above: happily we do have Regina on our list. As to those we missed, we’re very grateful for additional names, and welcome all nominations. But alas, a nomination is required for consideration (hint, hint).
    You are quite right that we pull from a wide swath of disciplines – this is
    intentional, to reflect the breadth of contributions that are required to innovate the industry. Would that biotech or policy or Health2.0 types could do it alone! As to George: we just see no reason to penalize a big contributor to the industry’s forward march, merely because his organization has also decided to support our little endeavor.
    Good news: Matt has now been nominated to fh100, by Brian Klepper. Now I know Brian writes here, and that they’re partners in a consulting practice, but that doesn’t necessarily mean it’s sucking up, or a conflict of interest of any kind, whatsoever.
    Just FYI: It’s
    all best,

  9. Any honest list with Donald Berwick included but missing Regina Herzlinger is defective.

  10. Among the top 100- Ommissions were-
    Steve Schroeder- UCSF- Preventive Medicine
    Ira Byock- Dartmouth- Palliative Medicine
    Dr. Rick Lippin

  11. dear renatam,
    No, the President of the United States is not on the list.
    Only those that can be “sucked up” and become sponsors are on the list.
    Unprofessionalism at its max.

  12. I like the list like i like Us Weekly, and take it about as seriously. I think Carlee’s problem is that she’s mixing and matching across too many disciplines. But there’s no way I should be on anyone’s top 100 anythings, unless ranting is a category….
    Nate, are you nominating yourself for worst person in teh world of health care? 🙂

  13. Interesting list but missing some really obvious names (Ginsburg and a few others jump to mind right away), some overlooked and upcoming ones (Chernew) and full of too many self-promoting, chest-bumpers and things are that really are off in the more on the distant horizon (e.g., personal genomics).

  14. Not sure lists are that great of a threat to the future of civilization myself. From an editorial perspective, lists are great things. (I’ve always loved the top teams lists in baseball and the top new ideas. ) They get people talking, they get them arguing, and they build excitement. Sure, they cause controversy, but that’s the whole point. Some are lame. But there are plenty of great ones. I think you’re probably being unduly influenced by the sucky ones that proliferate in the healthcare trades .. which are admittedly frequently godawful ..
    On the other hand, I’m not so sure about some of the names on this one – my list would have looked slightly different. But that’s another story.

  15. hmmmm….a hard-core imitator….cool….and genuinely inchoate

  16. Why can’t I post a comment without being personally “attacked”?
    The 3 people I mentioned have been influential leaders in healthcare. And I don’t necessarily agree with everything they have to say.
    For those of you who may not know the “sucking up” art too well, here is Guy Kawasaki’s blog titled “The Art of Sucking Up”:
    The EHR Guy

  17. dear EHR guy,
    sucking up will get you – well, probably everywhere….

  18. Since I never make any of these lists, I agree with Matt Holt, totally Tosh! Actually, unless Eckart Tolle is at the top of any healthcare list you need to be very cautious. And doubly so if he were to be there.
    Actually whom ever gives you the right care/answer at the right time is the person who should head any healthcare list.

  19. That would be Brian Klepper where David Kibbe’s photo should be. Prize? Round trip ticket to Paris next spring would be nice ;–)

  20. I was only able to find a few true healthcare thought leaders in this list.
    It seems to be complaisant to corporations (e.g. Wal-Mart, Kaiser Permanente and mogul vendors who have kept healthcare tied down to inneficiency and similar).
    There are some people that are truly admirable in the list. But not that many.
    Where are the true thought leaders that are making real changes in healthcare, such as Dr. David Kibbe, Dr. John Halamka, and Mathew Holt?
    Well, please go back to the whiteboard and come back with something a little more objective!
    Thank you,
    The EHR Guy

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *