Beyond turnaround time: What laboratory leaders are prioritizing next

August 20, 2026

By Erica Daulton, MedSpeed Vice President, Sales 

As health systems face mounting margin pressure, workforce shortages, expanding care networks, and the complexity of mergers and acquisitions, labs are increasingly expected to demonstrate value at the enterprise level. That means looking beyond operational efficiency to a broader question: How should the laboratory network be designed to improve clinical decision-making, strengthen organizational performance, and advance the health system’s strategic goals?

At this year’s Executive War College, I had the privilege of moderating a discussion with two of MedSpeed’s valued customers who are confronting that question firsthand: Justin Cox, System Laboratory Director at Hospital Sisters Health System and Tyler Witges, Vice President of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology at Essentia Health.

Despite differences in geography and scale, they described the same leadership imperative — standardize and centralize where doing so creates value, while preserving access, quality, and patient care.

Enterprise strategy requires a different way of thinking

Both leaders agreed that labs are making decisions in a fundamentally different healthcare environment. Examples include:

• Health systems have expanded through mergers and acquisitions, creating networks of laboratories with duplicative capabilities and equipment but differing workflows and historical practices.
• Care has shifted beyond the hospital into ambulatory clinics, physician offices, and rural settings.
• Financial pressures, staffing shortages, and supply chain disruptions are forcing organizations to rethink where testing is performed and how laboratory resources are deployed.

Against that backdrop, the need for right-sized standardization and centralization becomes critical.

Standardization begins by challenging long-held assumptions

Throughout the discussion, the panelists challenged long-held assumptions about laboratory decision-making.

Volume does not equal value

For years, increased testing volume was often viewed as increased contribution. Today, that assumption is being replaced by a broader focus on value. As Tyler noted, “Not all growth is good growth. Volume does not always equal dollars.” Rather than simply tracking volume, laboratory leaders must evaluate the cost to produce a result and the value that testing creates for patient care and the health system.

Turnaround time is only part of the story

Even the laboratory’s most familiar performance metrics are being reevaluated. While turnaround time remains important, the panelists emphasized that it’s only one part of a larger picture. Quality, equipment utilization, transportation, staffing, and patient population all factor into determining whether a testing model is delivering value.

Just because you can doesn’t mean you should

This shift is also changing how leaders decide where testing should occur. Many community laboratories historically performed nearly every test they were capable of running locally. Today, leaders are asking what truly needs to remain local, what can be consolidated without compromising patient care, and what approach creates the greatest value across the system.

As Tyler observed, “In my world, unique is a dirty word. If everything is unique, nothing is truly unique.”

He shared an example from Essentia where specimens collected in northern Minnesota were traveling past several Essentia hospitals before reaching the designated testing site. Instead of accepting the existing model, Essentia is evaluating whether testing could be performed closer to the patient while still making financial and operational sense.

Justin shared a practical framework that captured this overarching mindset: “Is this request a want or a need?” This question moves the conversation beyond tradition and toward more deliberate clinical, operational, and financial decision-making.

The benefits extend beyond efficiency

While standardization creates a clearer understanding of cost-to-serve across the system, both leaders pointed to broader benefits:

• Justin highlighted the role standardization plays in supporting continuity of care: “Providers may travel among multiple hospitals in a week. Standardizing test menus, reference ranges, and critical values helps clinicians treat patients consistently.”
• During supply chain disruptions, standardized platforms allow organizations to move consumables and reagents between facilities.
• Common instrumentation across labs creates greater staffing flexibility.

Realizing these benefits requires more than selecting common platforms; it demands disciplined planning and organizational alignment.

Standardization succeeds through planning and partnership

Success requires a clear road map, enterprise alignment, and governance structures that sustain change.

Build the road map first

HSHS has moved to a structured long-range planning model that provides visibility into capital investments and operational priorities.

“Now we have a 10-year plan. We know when we are addressing hematology, chemistry, and other categories based on equipment age, contract timing, and GPO recommendations,” Justin said. “Having a strategy gives me peace of mind. It’s no longer a fire drill.”

Tyler echoed the importance of disciplined planning, noting that organizations should avoid concentrating capital investments too heavily in the early years so priorities can be adjusted when unexpected needs arise.

Align stakeholders around shared goals

But planning alone is not enough. Both leaders emphasized that decisions about standardization and consolidation affect clinicians, operations leaders, finance teams, supply chain partners, and executive leadership. To illustrate, where laboratory leaders may see an opportunity to reduce costs, clinical leaders may see implications for patient care, provider workflows, or hospital operations.

Bringing those stakeholders together early helps organizations balance priorities while building the trust needed to sustain change.

Tyler summarized this perfectly: “If you want to know the real impact of the lab, think about a test you are considering consolidating. If you made that decision without telling anyone, how fast would your phone ring?”

Create structures that sustain change

Both leaders emphasized the need for formal governance to support these decisions.

At HSHS, they have established stewardship committees and tiered communication channels that allow issues and ideas to move efficiently from front line teams to executive leadership. These forums help evaluate test utilization, spending, and clinical need while maintaining transparency across the organization.

At Essentia, the lab works across departments to examine utilization patterns and challenge long-standing practices when the data suggests a different approach. For example, teams may evaluate whether routine tests are being ordered more frequently than clinically necessary and whether those ordering patterns are meaningfully influencing patient care.

These governance structures build trust. That trust makes it possible to have difficult conversations about changing test menus, consolidating services, and rethinking long-standing practices while maintaining alignment around patient care.

The laboratory is an enterprise asset

The lesson is clear; laboratory strategy is enterprise strategy. Decisions about testing, resources, technology, and operations shape clinical performance and the economics of the entire health system.

Organizations that pair right-sized standardization and stakeholder alignment are better positioned to support clinicians, strengthen performance, and improve patient care.