Diwas KC

Goizueta Foundation Term Professor of Information Systems & Operations Management

  • Atlanta GA UNITED STATES

See my website for up-to-date research information: https://diwaskc.com

Contact

Social

Biography

I teach and conduct research in areas of Data Analytics, Operations, and Healthcare. My research topics include workforce productivity, capacity management, technology adoption, policy formulation, and the design and organization of healthcare delivery.

My research has been published in leading journals including Management Science, Manufacturing and Service Operations Management, Operations Research, Marketing Science, and Production and Operations Management. I serve as Senior and Associate Editor at M&SOM and POMS.

I received my PhD in Applied Economics and Managerial Sciences from the Wharton School of Business, MS in Management Science and Engineering from Stanford University, and ScB in Electrical Engineering from Brown University. Prior to doctoral studies, I was a Principal Software Engineer for Oracle Corporation.

Education

The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania

PhD

Managerial Sciences and Applied Economics

2008

Stanford University

MS

Management Science and Engineering

2003

Brown University

BS

Electrical Engineering

1999

Areas of Expertise

Workforce Productivity
Technology Adoption
Capacity Management
Quality Management
New Models of Care Delivery
Health Care Management
Policy Formulation

Publications

Are Patients Patient? The Role of Time to Appointment in Patient Flow

Production and Operations Management

2016

In this paper, we examine the effect of wait to appointment on patient flow, specifically on a patient's decision to schedule an appointment and to subsequently arrive to it...

View more

Does multitasking improve performance? Evidence from the emergency department

Manufacturing & Service Operations Management

2013

This paper examines the effect of multitasking on overall worker performance, as measured by processing time, throughput rate, and output quality using microlevel operational data from the field. Specifically, we study the multitasking behavior of physicians in a busy
hospital emergency department (ED)...

View more

Research Spotlight

3 min

Is hospital advertising actually good for our health?

Hospitals and healthcare organizations in the U.S. spend $1.5 billion on advertising every year. It’s a topic that provokes lively debate and a certain amount of controversy.Medical bodies, policy makers, and scholars alike question the ethics and efficacy of using (constrained) budgets to promote hospitals to patients. Diwas KC, professor of information systems & operations management at Emory University’s Goizueta Business School, and Tongil Kim, an assistant professor of management at Naveen Jindal School of Management in Texas, conducted a large-scale study of hospitals and patients in the state of Massachusetts to better understand the impact of hospital advertising.What they found is striking: Not only does television advertising work, it significantly drives demand, attracting patients living far from the hospital and beyond its regular area. And that’s not all. KC and Kim discovered that limiting hospital advertising or imposing an outright ban, as some groups have called for, might actually have serious negative effects on patient healthcare.“There has been a lot of discussion about banning advertising over recent years because of uncertainties around wasting money and resources,” KC said.In the paper “Impact of hospital advertising on patient demand and outcomes,” KC shows that there is a correlation between the amount spent on TV advertising and the quality of the hospital in question. Healthcare facilities that invest more in advertising tend to be “better” hospitals, he adds; they offer higher caliber care and services and, as such, they see much lower patient readmission rates—a key quality metric in healthcare.To get to these insights, KC and Kim looked at more than 220,000 individual patient visits to hospitals in the state of Massachusetts over a 24-month period. Among the data they collected were things like hospital type, location, and dollars spent on advertising. Patients were documented in terms of medical conditions, insurance, zip codes (to determine residence), and median household income.They were able to contrast those hospitals that invested in television advertising and those that did not. With the former, they uncovered a significant uptick in patient visits, with people coming from far further afield. This was particularly true of wealthier patients.Then there’s the question of patient outcomes.Here the data showed unequivocally that it’s the high-quality, low-readmission hospitals that advertise more—something that KC attributes to the natural tendency to get “more bang for the advertising buck when the quality of your product or service is better.”As for banning advertising, this would negatively impact these hospitals, he argues, limiting their ability to attract patients. It could also lead to an increase in population-level readmission rates.“Patient readmission rates are one of the key metrics along with mortality rates that tell us how well a healthcare facility is working,” said KC. “If a patient gets discharged but has to come back to a hospital in, say, 30 days, unless it’s a chronic condition or ongoing treatment, it’s a good indication that the patient didn’t get the level of care they should have the first time.”Indeed, “when we looked at all of the data, we found that the hospitals where there were fewest revisit rates were those that advertised more,” he said.KC finds that a blanket ban on hospital advertising could lead to an extra 1.2 readmissions for every 100 patients discharged.It’s a significant and “surprising” finding. And one that should inform the debate around healthcare advertising spend in the U.S.“There’s also the idea that this is a zero-sum game because if a patient doesn’t go to hospital A, they’re just going to go to hospital B—the one that advertises more—splitting the pie in different ways but not increasing that pie,” KC said.“What our study finds is that yes, advertising does draw patients away from one facility and towards another, but that the latter generally delivers better patient outcomes,” he said. “So, there is a social welfare benefit right there that suggests that you should not ban hospital advertising. There are real health benefits in allowing [advertising] to happen.”If you are a journalist looking to cover this topic then let our experts help.Diwas KC is a Professor of Information Systems & Operations Management at Emory University’s Goizueta Business School. He is an expert in the areas of  Data Analytics, Operations, and Healthcare. If you are interesting in arranging an interview simply click on his icon to set up a time today.

Diwas KC

1 min

The impact of behavioral bias on decision-making

For business leaders, the ability to make critical decisions in a dynamic work and industry environment is essential to the success of an organization. However, Diwas KC, associate professor of information systems & operations management, and coauthors Francesca Gino (Harvard U) and Bradley R. Staats (UNC) note that behavioral traits can sometimes impact the ability to weigh new information and make a logical decision, even in the face of negative news. KC, Gino, and Staats analyze 147,000 choices made by cardiologists during a six-year period when they were presented with negative news from the FDA about drug-eluting stents used in angioplasty. The experienced cardiologists were more likely to continue using the questionable stents than their less-experienced peers, even after being informed of the problem. The role of influence also played a factor in the decision-making. They add, “Given that those who feel they are expert are less likely to react to negative news, those around them show the same tendency, thus making worse decisions than those in groups with less perceived expertise.” The seasoned cardiologists were better able to “generate counterexamples to the negative news and thus be susceptible to confirmation bias.” The authors note managers should be aware that more experience and the perception of expertise may bias decision-making.Source:

Diwas KC

1 min

The effect of multitasking on worker performance

Diwas KC, associate professor of information systems & operations management, completed an in-depth investigation of the impact of multitasking in a complex work environment by analyzing patient flow and clinical data of physicians in a large hospital ER. The study provides important findings for understanding multitasking and its “implications for a knowledge economy, where attention and focus are significant drivers of productivity and quality.” The research indicated that multitasking starts out as a positive influence on work, giving physicians the “ability to utilize idle time between tasks.” Additionally, lower levels of multitasking actually improved the quality of care, since “low levels of stress can aid cognitive function.” Once multitasking behavior became excessive, productivity declined dramatically due to a variety of factors, including work interruptions and coordination costs. A higher level of multitasking also led to a drop in detected diagnoses and an increased rate of revisits in a 24-hour period for patients initially treated in the emergency department. Physicians spent less time with patients and their overall focus suffered. Source:

Diwas KC

In the News

Your Desire to Get Things Done Can Undermine Your Effectiveness

Harvard Business Review  online

2016-03-22

In unpublished research with Emory University’s Diwas KC and Northwestern University’s Maryam Kouchaki, we examined the completion bias of physicians in the emergency department (ED) of a busy hospital, where patients arrive unscheduled...

View More

Powered by