Are You a Square Peg in a Round Hole?

They may have a strong product, credible leadership, and promising early results. But they are still determining which specialties, practice sizes, patient populations, and operating models they can serve successfully.

That can make your clinic part of the experiment.

Experiments are not automatically bad. The problem is when the vendor presents an unproven use case as an established capability and the practice assumes it is buying a mature solution.

That is when clinics get “burned” and experience buyer’s remorse.

Are you inside the vendor’s proven model?

A vendor may perform well with large primary care groups but struggle with an independent specialty practice. A service designed for health systems may not translate cleanly into a five-provider clinic. A technology platform may be effective when the client supplies internal staff but underperform when the practice expects a fully managed service.

Before signing, determine whether the vendor has succeeded with organizations that share your most important characteristics.

Ask

• Has the vendor served practices with a similar size and operating model?
• Has it worked with comparable patient and clinical needs?
• What results has it produced, and over what period?
• What parts of the proposed model remain untested?
• What work and infrastructure must the clinic provide?

You do not need an organizational twin. You do need evidence that the vendor’s model can reasonably translate to your practice.

Part of the responsibility belongs to the clinic

Vendors should be honest about their experience and limitations. Clinics must also complete enough diligence to identify when they are stepping outside the vendor’s proven capabilities.

Leadership should not assume that a persuasive presentation, prominent advisor, or successful client in a different environment guarantees fit.

If the vendor cannot clearly explain why its model fits your practice, your clinic may be helping it discover the answer.

Being the experiment can create leverage

There can be real advantages to becoming an early client in a new specialty or market.

The vendor may be more willing to customize workflows, prioritize product development, provide executive access, and dedicate additional implementation resources. The clinic may also influence how the service evolves for similar practices.

But those benefits should be negotiated. If your clinic is helping the vendor validate a new use case, consider requesting:

• Reduced pricing or waived implementation fees
• A defined pilot period
• Measurable performance milestones
• Dedicated implementation and executive support
• Customization commitments
• Frequent operating reviews
• Flexible termination rights
• Protection from long-term commitments until the model is proven

The vendor is receiving value from the relationship, including experience, feedback, market validation, and potentially a future reference. The commercial terms should reflect that.

Set expectations according to the evidence

Do not apply mature-client expectations to an experimental relationship.

Expect slower implementation, workflow adjustments, product changes, and a more collaborative operating process. Begin with a controlled patient population, provider, or location rather than launching across the entire organization.

Define what must be proven before the program expands.

A square peg can sometimes fit a round hole, but forcing it usually damages both.

If the vendor’s model has not been proven for your practice, acknowledge the risk, lower the initial expectations, improve the commercial terms, and structure the relationship as a deliberate pilot.

Being the experiment is not necessarily the problem. Paying full price and accepting full risk while pretending you are not the experiment is.