The great industry debate: should the value of audiology care be nationally marketed?

By: David Smriga, M.A.,  

Founder & President, AuDNet, Inc.

In her “President’s Message” published in the May/June 2010 issue of Audiology Today,  AAA President Kris English rightly pointed out that the public does not know what distinguishes an audiologist form the more generic moniker “hearing health-care professional”.  Recognizing as she does that the education, experience and the multi-disciplinary approach embodied in audiology care brings significant value for those seeking hearing and/or balance care, Dr. English argues that evidence-based practicing, includes careful patient education as a key tool that will establish a “tomorrow when patients are quite clear about the difference between audiologists and others.”

Although evidence-based treatment including careful patient education are critical tools in the ongoing process of delivering and distinguishing audiology care, the fact still remains that these efforts will only influence the perceptions of those within the public that happen to actually get to an audiologist.  Let’s hope that these individuals are no longer in that segment of the public that remains so unknowing of the difference receiving audiology care makes. 

But, why is it that the general public, who have yet to experience the benefits of audiology care, don’t know what audiology care is?  The key reason is embodied in the primary way the public gets its information – through the media.  It is estimated that nearly $400 million was spent last year in the United States marketing various products and services related to hearing health care to the consuming public and to those who work within the hearing care community.  What are these marketing dollars teaching the public about hearing care?  Well, let’s look to the internet for a potential answer to this question.

When people look for information on the internet, they generally do so by typing words into a search engine tool.  These words define what they are interested in learning about. 

According to Google, U.S. search engine users type the words “hearing aid(s)” into search tools 550,000 times a month.  They type in the words “hearing care” 12,100 times a month, they type in the words “hearing treatment” 6,600 times a month, and they type in the word “audiologist” 110,00 times a month. 

This data suggests that, in an overwhelming way, the media has taught the public that if you have a hearing loss, you need to get hearing aids.  Using this reference, it could be argued that the public is 5 times more likely to look for hearing aids rather than for an audiologist when seeking out treatment for their hearing problem. 

This is the result of the historic messages embodied in the industry’s advertising and marketing.  Whether it is locally created newspaper ads or advertising created for local use by a manufacturer, the general theme is often product or product brand focused.  Provider credentials are often a secondary message, and are presented in a confusing way.  White coats, letters after a name, certification and/or licensing offer no clear delineation of provider training or expertise to the public.  As a result, there is likely no delineation of credentials or expertise being demanded by the public.

If audiology is to become the focal point of the public’s attention when hearing health care is being sought, then the value and importance of audiology care must be prolifically marketed.  Considering how dominantly products, brands and the generic “hearing health-care professional” moniker are marketed in the United States, effectively marketing audiology in this environment is not a small, easy or inexpensive proposition. 

For most in the audiology profession, such a task is simply too daunting, and too distracting.  After all, audiologists didn’t earn their degree in audiology to become marketers.  They earned their degree in audiology to treat patients.    But, if audiology chooses not to competitively market itself, then the hearing health-care marketing message reaching (and defining) the public consciousness will continue to be crafted by others, and the “tomorrow when patients are quite clear about the difference between audiologists and others” may not arrive.   

Here is what many audiologists may choose not to hear or acknowledge: there is money in hearing health care.  In the United States alone, I-Data Research estimates that the hearing care industry is now over $4 billion annually.  The vast majority of this revenue is generated through the sale of hearing aids.  These sales generate the revenue that is used to market hearing health-care to consumers and industry professionals alike. 

Conservatively, 50% of this revenue passes through the hands of audiologists who dispense.  When these transactions are between the audiologist and the manufacturer, then the manufacturer controls the marketing message these transactions underwrite.  When these transactions pass through a group purchasing mechanism that is structured specifically to market the value and importance of audiology care to the public, then the audiologist controls the marketing message these transactions underwrite. 

With audiologists dispensing half of the hearing instruments sold in the United States, the potential revenue that could be directed to marketing audiology to the public is both substantial and competitive. 

In his article, “The Coming Crisis in Audiology”, Dr. Barry Freeman warns that a looming shortage of audiology professionals may lead to other health care providers stepping in or altering the existing service delivery model – in essence squeezing audiology out of such mainstay hearing care elements as hearing aid dispensing.  There is no doubt that the dramatic increase in the cost of an audiology education has not been met with a commensurate increase in wage-based earning potential.  As a result, fewer students are entering the profession than are retiring from it.   

Although the more lucrative income-earning alternative of owning a private practice exists, only a small percentage of audiologists embrace it, and much of its economic viability rests on dispensing.  So, one could argue that the audiology profession must either take the steps necessary to own hearing care, including hearing aid delivery, or watch as other entities establish their ownership of this economically vital element. 

Once again, effective and competitive national audiology marketing is the key.  If the public demands audiology care, the viability of the profession is positively affected, attracting more students into the profession, and attracting the type of students who seek and value the opportunity private practice ownership represents.  And the only way to create strong public demand for audiology care is to effectively market the value and importance of audiology care to the national public.

Marketing the value and importance of audiology care in an effective and economically viable way can only be accomplished by the audiology community itself.  Either the audiology community chooses to invest the economic resources it already controls in a fashion that underwrites this marketing effort, or it chooses to sustain its current purchasing behavior which underwrites the marketing messages crafted by others.   

Every audiologist must ask themselves the question embodied in the title of this article:  Should the value of audiology care be nationally marketed?”   The answer will have a profound impact on the future of the audiology profession. 

Tell us your thoughts? Do you believe this is an important issue?