I recently tried to hire a city bike in Liverpool.
It didn't go well.
To be fair its never gone well. I use it infrequently, so each time I do I need to find my log in and password (worryingly described as card number and pin), take out a contract, add credit, then actually get my bike out of the stocks, which last time failed to happen.
I occasionally take out a "Boris Bike" in London.
There's no app, just use the card, take the bike, ride. That's it.
The difference is not the technology, the app is arguably more "modern" but arcane in its workings.
The difference is not the bike, they both work in the same way, indeed you might observe that the Liverpool bikes are pristine clean in the white and green livery.
The difference is in the user experience, the UX as technologists call it.
Recently our practice has had some concerns regarding comments on Facebook. Apparently being accessible enough to provide people with a GP contact 3 hours after they decide to come in isn't good enough for some.
In context of course we have over a thousand patients a week generating a contact with us, so one or two a month is small, but we think significant.
We are still implementing our new model, redesigning and shaping access, long term conditions, self care and data mining to offer a personalised proactive and sustainable healthcare to the residents we serve.
But those one star and no comment reviews are worrying.
Currently we offer phone and two apps as means of contacting the surgery.
Currently we offer phone or face to face as means of appointment booking.
Currently we use text, letters and app notifications to contact people.
From the UX perspective we are still fragmented.
I appreciate we will never be able to meet all demand, two people wanting to see the same GP at the same time, when that GP is not available, are both going to be disappointed, but still we can make it easier, better and more joined up than our current process.
We just need to partner our IT systems with a UX focussed front end.