As an alternative to the rocky and underfunded progress of some companies to date, this would seem at first sight to be no bad thing. However, this does not mean that the public and private sectors share the same views on how these ends should be achieved. Most suppliers, for example, have an ambivalent attitude towards the standards on which any integration needs to be based. This aim of building a power base amongst customers can produce very effective standards, but does not guarantee that they will have all the features that might be thought to serve the public interest. Where such conflicts arise, the NHS should in theory be able to wield its collective purchasing muscle, but it has traditionally lacked the means or the will to do this very effectively.
Integration is also all the rage in respect of medical services to patients.
In UK Primary Care, it has been promoted first in Community Care and now via the assortment of people being hauled aboard the PCGs. In the United States, integration has proceeded in a variety of ways, most of which have been much more commercially driven. The HMO must be able to offer a good portfolio of services, and run them efficiently. Rather like Direct Line Insurance moving into car repairs, or banks diversifying into almost every aspect of personal finance, the business aims are to take control of costs and create a captive customer base. Integration, in the sense of keeping track of every patient's interaction with the providing institutions, becomes essential for the management of the total enterprise.