spacer    
Blog Search
Others' posts of interest
Recent del.icio.us tags
Consumer evaluation of mental health and substance abuse providers - sharing experiences on the web
May 8

Written by: Matthew Hile
5/8/2007 9:25 AM

Amazon allows individuals to write public comments and reviews for all of the products they sell and the businesses use Amazon to sell their own merchandise. I, like most folks, religiously read these reviews and use them to inform my purchasing decisions. When I have a particularly strong opinion, I will even contribute a review of my own.

For some time I have been trying to quietly promote the idea that users of mental health and substance abuse services should have a similar ability. People who use these services should have an open forum that allows them to publically tell the world what they liked – or did not like – about a particular provider or service. Ideally, like Amazon, these comments should be available within the context of a search for a specific treatment service as in MIMH’s  Substance Abuse and Mental Health Information Online system or SAMHSA’s Substance abuse treatment facility locator. For the consumer the advantages of this are easy to see. They could select a provider based on the shared experiences of others rather than simply figuring out which provider is close to home. Like asking your friends to recommend a restaurant, you would benefit from others’ experiences.

Consumer concerns

What are the down sides of this? From the consumer perspective I think the major difficult would be authority – that is “can I trust this information.”

Authority is present if you know the individual commenter and trust their opinions. For the most part on the web it is unlikely. However, we can look at the individual’s other comments – a history of their behavior – and get a sense of whether or not we trust them. Amazon supports this sort of authority by letting you look at all an individual’s comments. If they all say “this is the best thing since sliced bread” or “this is the worst product ever foisted on the human race” you have little trust in their ability to discriminate between a good and bad product. If however, you read a set of balanced comments, some positive some negative, your level of trust in their opinions will increase. For the current topic, comments relating to mental health and substance abuse providers, I suspect that there would be relatively few comments that cross a range of provider/service combinations that authority based on user history would be relatively weak.

Authority can also be demonstrated if there are a lot of comments about a provider/service. Here the consumer perceives the general direction of most of the comments getting a sense of authority from the convergence in this wider community participation. Rather than trusting the authority of an individual commenter they trust the authority of the community. The more comments, the more authority.

Provider concerns

Providers, on the other hand, have different concerns. For example, “What if someone who was never in our care trashes our services?” Who would do this? Perhaps a unscrupulous competitor hoping to drive individuals to their own services. Could this happen – yup. Would it be a problem – well that would depend but at least two factors mitigate the potential deleterious effects of such an attack.

First, if it were only one of many comments AND if it contrasted with the trends of those comments it is unlikely that anyone would give it much authority. That is this negative voice would be overshadowed by the more numerous positive and balanced comments. Even if there was only one comment, this negative one, as described above it would have little authority on its own and therefore little impact.

Second, perhaps a more useful response toward this sort of attack, as well as the legitimate negative comments of a dissatisfied consumer, is the notion of transparency. We all know that every business and every service will have unhappy users. In the past business have tried to hide this fact and their errors but the new radical transparency movement has turned that notion on its head. Rather than hiding negatives business talk openly about them  – perhaps apologizing for a mistake or talking about practices that address, resolve, or prevent the issue. As a consumer I can learn more useful information by seeing how a problem is addressed then from any other individual comment. Have a problem – that is to be expected – deal with it in a forthright, reasonable, and ethical manner – then you are someone with whom I will do business.

So yes there are negatives in allowing individual to comment on their experiences with mental health and substance abuse providers (or really any business). However, these negatives cannot only be managed but can serve to enhance the provider in the eyes of the consumer.

Tags:

Your name:
Title:
Comment:
Add Comment    Cancel  
Disclaimer
NOTE: The ideas, opinions, and viewpoints expressed in these entries are solely those of the author.
There are no categories in this blog.
 
Missouri Institute of Mental Health    Terms Of Use    Privacy Statement