But examine the lifestyle of the PGA executive and you might consider that there ought to be a bit more of a “bang for the buck” for the PGA members who are partly supporting this lifestyle through membership fees, along with 10 percent commissions paid for managing government grants.
Nice work if you can get it.
As we have previously pointed out in earlier articles around this subject, a “bottom up” approach is required to solve pharmacy infrastructure problems, rather than the “top down” model that is currently in place.
The new pharmacy organisation proposed above would prefer to evolve as a national organisation, but broken down to semi-autonomous regions, each region approximating a natural catchment, rather than being constrained by boundaries such as state borders.
Much work has yet to be done on establishing the balance of power between regional and national executive.
It is believed that many services are better developed and provided at the regional level in a similar manner that the Divisions of General Practice is structured for doctors.
Local input and management can help to sustain local employment and services suited to a particular region.
Emphasis would be placed on developing research into pharmacy practice if a suitable level of funding can be obtained.
One would like to think that this could be thought of as the “bottom up” component that may work in alliance with a PGA, but for the moment I am not holding my breath.
Company structure would be encouraged for those pharmacists wishing to attract capital from non-pharmacy sources.
Community pharmacies have virtually shot themselves in the foot with the paranoid approach of having only pharmacist directors and shareholders.
This means virtually no exposure to outside capital.
Provided a company has majority directors and shareholders as pharmacists, up to 49% of the control of these companies can be vested in venture capital or other capital source, not tied to pharmacy wholesaler guarantee.
And cross-investment by these companies in each other, could see a national network develop with the financial resources to deliver valued pharmacy services with minimal government intervention and eventually having a structure of a public company.
This leads to an ability to create wealth using the stock exchange.
The past decade has seen the PGA squander most of the opportunities originally envisaged and formulated through the Wilkinson Report.
Pharmacy deregulation is still on the agenda for 2010, yet few have the confidence they have developed a survival strategy leading to a growth strategy.
Pharmacy proprietors need to develop their infrastructure, firstly through acquiring corporate management skills and secondly, to present an infrastructure friendly to professional alliance relationships.
The professionals involved in these relationships need not be pharmacists (they could be nurses, naturopaths or even GP’s), but they should all be balanced to deliver a totally integrated package that provides a pharmaceutically flavoured health system attractive to patients residing within the local regional catchment area.
Pharmacies that foster an image of good management, high-level professional skills and a range of retailing choices will have a sure-fire presentation that will survive.
As an alliance it will be able to deliver all that a single proprietor pharmacy could never hope to achieve.
Any pharmacist who is already involved in a professional service delivery (e.g. providing a locum service, HMR service) or a pharmacy proprietor with an alliance orientation who would like to be involved with the development of a new pharmacy political organisation leading into new investment opportunities should email me at firstname.lastname@example.org to register interest on a confidential basis.