Trust doesn’t happen by chance. When dealing with protected health information, prescription files or anything insurance related, people have to believe their information is safe. But more than just good intentions is required – organizations must show they’re serious about security.
Fortunately, those organizations that do are finding better business opportunities when it comes to patient trust, B2B relationships, and community relations. They’re not just getting compliance audits done but are providing the means to verify security effectiveness through documentation that actually means something.
Why It’s Not Enough Just to Say
How often do you hear an organization promote “top-notch security” or “industry-leading protection”? It happens so often that the rhetoric no longer holds any value. From the local clinic to the insurance company and the medical billing services, the words are good – but they don’t mean a thing.
Yet documentation does. And not the kind that goes straight into a locked filing cabinet but instead validation that what’s supposed to work is actually working.
This is especially true when dealing with information that could make or break someone’s future. A breach at Old Navy is unfortunate; a breach dealing with someone’s HIV status or psychiatric care medication is detrimental. People know this, if only subliminally; they need reassurance beyond the marketing pitch.
The Documentation That Actually Means Something
Healthcare organizations serious about accountability and transparency often pursue accreditation audits which can be reviewed by third parties. These are not internal check-ups where someone grades their homework; instead, they’re examinations from auditors who know just where to look and how to find problems.
It’s an intrusive process. Auditors look at access control, how encryption works, who sees what info and whether or not policies are being upheld. For organizations working with hospitals or providing services for clinics, getting a soc audit for healthcare firms creates documentation for business partners to trust.
Most outside people don’t realize how critical this documentation is. When a hospital wants to move forward with a new electronic health record vendor or a telehealth application, they’re not merely looking at pricing and capabilities. Instead, they’re asking if they can trust this company with their patients’ information. The organizations that can hand them a recently completed audit from a credible company have already answered the question before it’s even asked.
What Happens When Healthcare Companies Open Up Their Books
There’s something inherently backwards about transparency concerning security. You’d think that revealing your security measures would expose vulnerabilities. In reality, it works in the opposite direction.
When a company allows for an independent audit, it’s essentially opening its doors for someone to find its weaknesses. That’s confidence in the authenticity of its controls and implies an ability to have other work substantiated.
From there, the audit report is a talking point. Business development isn’t complicated by someone getting vetted through their own extensive security review. The documentation does all the heavy lifting in terms of upfront FAQs, streamlining contract negotiations due to legal not having much to debate after verification exists.
And it’s not just business partners who benefit; patients do, as well, although they rarely ever see these documents. When their care provider has its proper security controls in place, the potential for breaches that disclose their information is lowered. Transparency holds everyone accountable – those who’ve been audited know they’ll be audited again down the line and maintain standards instead of letting things slide.
The Difference Between Compliance and Trust
Where healthcare organizations get it wrong is the assumption that if they’re HIPAA compliant, they’ve done enough. HIPAA is the floor – the legal minimum when dealing with protected health information. It’s necessary but doesn’t breathe trust into the relationship.
It’s like being a good driver; as long as someone follows traffic laws, they should have no problems on the road. Following traffic laws makes one a legal driver – not necessarily a good one. The same thing goes for healthcare compliance; as long as one upholds HIPAA adherence, they’re not breaking the law. But it doesn’t mean they’re doing a great job protecting data.
Organizations who build trust go above and beyond. They uphold controls that exceed minimum requirements and document them, allow outsiders to verify them and then disseminate that verification to those who’ve requested it.
The benefits of this extra effort provide returns on investment in unanticipated ways; when organizations have proper security practices in place and can prove it, insurance premiums decrease; when auditors find proper controls in place, breach notification costs decrease because incidents are prevented; when general employee morale increases because people want to work for organizations that do things correctly.
Why Some Healthcare Organizations Don’t Want Transparency
It’s understandable why some organizations resist formal audits; three reasons come into play – costs, fear of the unknown and assumptions about what transparency requires (when it really doesn’t).
Costs are real; audits aren’t cheap – and for small healthcare organizations, it’s an expense that may prove hard to swallow in the moment. But when doing the math – one high-quality contract can pay for an audit three times over when it comes with necessary documentation to obtain larger contracts or enterprise-level partnerships that would otherwise not be afforded to non-audited contractors – the costs become more justified.
Fear of what the auditors will find is understandable – what if they learn something horrible? This is the whole point; if an organization can find weaknesses while everything is internal, it’s better than discovering them post-breach. Organizations who get 40% on their first audit fix what they need to fix and have great success on their second attempt; even a report that shows improvement from a low score is better than no effort at all.
The misunderstanding comes from thinking transparency means posting one’s security architecture online for hackers to view and access; that’s not what’s done. Audit reports go to actual business partners under confidentiality agreements – they’re selectively transparent for people who’ve earned the right, not published broadly online.
What Transparency Looks Like
Those organizations that treat security documentation as an asset vs. a burden do it best; they keep it current; they use it in sales conversations and they leverage it for talent acquisition (good security engineers want to work somewhere where there are good controls).
When things go wrong – and they will at some point – they’re documented differently when an organization is transparent vs. one attempting to sweep things under the rug. If something goes sideways and others find out about it before the organization did anything, it’s far worse than an organization acknowledging something went wrong, explaining how it’s fixed it, updated controls and appropriately adjusted moving forward.
The best healthcare organizations develop feedback loops; if auditors note certain security aspects require improvement or adjustments can be made based on industry standards, those improvements get documented, trust gets built with partner relationships and revenue comes in that can generate even more security investments.
It’s compounded.
The Long Game
There’s no quick fix for security transparency; it takes a long time to develop proper controls in place and audited up front – and even longer to maintain them daily instead of shortcutting quarterly efforts – a best practice of those healthcare organizations who want faster success over time-tested processes.
But success compounded makes success easier every time. After one audit where security controls were upheld successfully making things easier next year down the line becomes inevitable. Each successful partnership makes the next one easier – even if patients don’t read audit reports on their clinical websites or receive emails with attachments about master reviews, they notice when their healthcare providers never land on breach headlines.
The industry is bound to become transparent whether it’s forced upon them or they’re proactive about it; people are asking patients about data security more than ever; partner relationships want proof of proper controls and regulators are watching more frequently – those organizations who build credibility will thrive while those playing catch-up will struggle.
Security transparency isn’t about showing off – it’s about selling trust people can’t get from empty marketing promises or intentions without proper follow-through backed by outside examination. The organizations willing to develop this kind of credibility not only save data – but create reputations that cultivate competitive advantages in an industry built on trust.”
