How Will Microsoft Become a Top Player in Health IT? Through Partnerships, Providers, and Pluck, Says GM Michael Raymer

5/21/10Follow @gthuang

(Page 2 of 2)

the need for free flow of information between systems.”

It sounds obvious, but free-flowing data is hard to find in healthcare. Instead, administrative staff, nurses, doctors, mid-level managers, and chief medical officers, even in the same organization, often can’t share information efficiently or collaborate on problems a patient brings to light after being discharged, say, because of incompatible silos of data. Microsoft’s Amalga platform tries to unify all those data systems. Then Eclipsys builds software applications—clinical, financial, and administrative—on top of that platform. That’s the alliance, in a nutshell.

Microsoft and Eclipsys share three customers so far: New York-Presbyterian Hospital, Johns Hopkins Health System, and El Camino Hospital in Silicon Valley. Raymer says that because sales cycles are typically 9-18 months, it’s a little early to assess the financial impact of the partnership. But, he says, “We have been able to increase the number of deals both companies are in.” He says their pipeline has about 15 new customers as a result. What’s more, he says, other companies have since approached Microsoft about forming similar alliances.

Raymer also responded to Microsoft’s skeptics more broadly. He says the company’s healthcare customer base, which includes big hospitals like Mayo Clinic, “wouldn’t invest in the platform unless they thought Microsoft was serious about healthcare. Microsoft was wise enough to realize that being a great technology company was not enough in healthcare.”

Given his deep experience in the industry, he’s able to clearly differentiate Microsoft’s approach from that of other big companies. “Our strategy and Google’s are very different. They’re more of a portal strategy. Ours is more a personal repository,” Raymer says. As such, he says, Cleveland Clinic uses both Google Health and Microsoft HealthVault—the latter to do home monitoring of cardiac patients. As for one of his former employers, he says, “GE’s business model is not optimized around construction of software. It’s primarily acquisition of the latest technology and putting the GE brand on top of it, and pushing it into the GE sales channel. Microsoft is a finely tuned machine in terms of building software. But GE has a longer track record in healthcare.”

I asked Raymer how much impact healthcare will ever really have in terms of revenues for Microsoft, and how it will interact with the company’s other product areas. He wouldn’t make any specific predictions, but he said, “Most affluent societies spend a tremendous amount of money on healthcare. It’s an important platform for Microsoft to come in and solve big problems. We think the investment we’re making in cloud technology will pay off in healthcare.”

The bottom line is about sharing data and reducing costs. Raymer’s broader vision is that “in five to 10 years, Microsoft will be seen as the organization that enables free flow of information across the silos that exist today in healthcare,” he says. “We are the one company to ensure that data flows between citizens and governments and patients [and providers]. We think IT in 5 years will do what it has done in other industries, and will drive down costs of healthcare delivery.”

Gregory T. Huang is Xconomy's Deputy Editor, National IT Editor, and the Editor of Xconomy Boston. You can e-mail him at gthuang@xconomy.com or call him at 617-252-7323. Follow @gthuang

Single Page Currently on Page: 1 2 previous page

By posting a comment, you agree to our terms and conditions.

  • Pingback: How Will Microsoft Become a Top Player in Health IT … – Xconomy | Personal Health Record Software

  • healthITguru

    Hmmm.. MS has now spent four years working on this and gotten no traction. Mayo doesn’t count because they gave them the software as an “early adopter” which is code for “free.” I hear the same mantra from CIO at healthcare facilities all the time re: MS: products are too expensive and sales force is too arrogant. At some point when this is all folded into another division with better leadership and vision they may meet some success.