You know what doesn’t make sense? How we board airplanes. Oh yes, you know what I am talking about. You see, the traditional method of boarding airplanes, often referred to as the "zone" or "group" boarding process, is our standard for allowing folks the opportunity to board their flight. If you’ve ever watched how we seat people, it’s hard not to criticize this process for its inefficiency and utter inconvenience.
Boarding groups are determined based on factors such as seat location, frequent flyer status, or ticket class. However, and this is what I feel we all experience at some point in our lives, this method results in long queues, overcrowded gate areas, and unnecessary delays as we all look for that coveted overhead bin space. Simply put, there’s no steady flow here that really works.
By boarding in a seemingly random order (though the airline undoubtedly has its reasons, including customer loyalty), what ends up happening is a chaotic and congested process. Consider all the other boarding options as outlined here in this decade old Vox article. There are a lot more than I would have thought of! Oh, and there have even been scientific articles on the topic.
At the heart of the different strategies laid out in the article is the need to prioritize efficiency, simplify, and lead with passenger convenience. This simply can’t be done with the current model. Putting people first, bucking the trends and legacy processes and methods, and adopting boarding strategies that optimize the flow of passengers and minimize congestion would be a great place to start. But alas, even as I board my plane this week, I am in the line of people waiting to get on, waiting while people are in the aisle, waiting and waiting.
There are a lot of things we simply always do because that’s the way we’ve always done them. I bet you can name other examples from your own life.
Transitioning from the airplane aisle of inefficiency to the realm of mental health care, it becomes evident that legacy processes and methods are not exclusive to the airline industry. Just as the traditional boarding process has become ingrained despite its flaws, so too have legacy mental health programs persisted, often without critical evaluation of their efficacy and impact. Similar to the frustrations experienced in crowded gate areas, individuals navigating the mental health system may encounter barriers and delays stemming from outdated approaches that fail to prioritize efficiency and patient well-being.
While I don’t have any sway in the airline industry, I do know a thing or two about mental health, and think there’s some things we can do now to better assess how well what we are doing works (or doesn’t!).
Challenge Legacy Assumptions: For me, it seems like a good place to start by simply reassessing the effectiveness of legacy mental health programs. These are the programs that have inherited. At one point, perhaps, these programs were someone’s big idea or pet project. There are a ton of these, and rather than assume they work because they exist, we should deploy thorough evaluations to determine their efficacy, impact, and alignment with community needs and best practices.
Promote Innovation and Flexibility: Embracing innovation and flexibility is essential for overcoming entrenched legacy programs and systems in mental health care. We have to be open minded to new ideas, including our willingness to explore alternative approaches, such as community-based interventions and non-traditional provider models, that prioritize accessibility, effectiveness, and patient-centered care.
Harness Data for Informed Decision-Making: Better utilization of data is crucial for assessing the quality and outcomes of mental health programs. If we don’t have the right kinds of data, it’s hard to be informed on what’s working and what’s not. By leveraging data analytics and performance metrics, leaders can gain insights into program effectiveness, identify areas for improvement, and allocate resources more strategically to meet the evolving needs of individuals with mental health conditions. I’ve written about this topic here ad nauseum.
By challenging legacy assumptions, promoting innovation, and harnessing the power of data, we can pave the way for a more responsive, effective, and person-centered mental health system. Just as optimizing the boarding process improves the travel experience for passengers, reimagining mental health care delivery holds the promise of enhancing outcomes and accessibility for those in need.
This needs to start at the top.
Redirecting federal funding away from legacy programs for mental health that serve a limited audience, frequently yield ineffective outcomes, and rely heavily on continuous federal support is a good place to start. These legacy programs often fail to address the evolving needs of a diverse and dynamic population, rendering them inadequate in fostering meaningful and sustainable change. In addition, their reliance on federal funding perpetuates a cycle of dependency, hindering innovation and inhibiting the emergence of more effective solutions.
By reallocating resources towards initiatives with proven efficacy and scalability, the federal government (and states!) can maximize its impact, reaching a broader spectrum of individuals in need while fostering long-term sustainability within the mental health landscape. We can create a new way to board the plane. Prioritizing investments in evidence-based, scalable interventions over legacy programs that simply may not have the data to support them is so important and allows us to ensure the efficient allocation of resources and ability to positively impact on outcomes.
Boarding group 7.
Oh man, Ben. I loved this, especially on the heels of writing about my preferred seat (exit row, window seat).