The vet futures project (a collaboration between the RCVS and the BVA) has just issued a press release reporting on it's latest meeting on the 26th January. One of the things it should be commended for in considering the future of veterinary professionals is that it undertook a literature review early on in the project; years ago when I first trained in marketing and market research I was told that the golden rule of market research is to do your desk research first. So well done to the project team both for doing the review and for making it public. The press release says "The literature review identified possible drivers for change, including demographic factors; economic forces; the increasingly competitive market; client behaviour; food supply and global imperatives; and, mental wellbeing.

Both research reports are available at www.vetfutures.org.uk/resources."

Looking at the www.vetfutures.org.uk/resources page I noted that there was also a report of some market research focus groups undertaken with some pet owners in November 2014. They apparently carried out two focus groups of 14 pet owners in total, so an average of 7 per group and found that all those they spoke to had visited their vet at least twice in the last year. That's a pretty small sample size and if the the majority had visited their vet in the last year I wonder whether this group were representative of pet owners in general today. That might be a group of people known to the College and perhaps more representative of the 'past'.

In the discussion that went on in 2014 around the decision of the College not to change the wording of the code of conduct (but only to change the supporting guidance) the College put out some statements to the effect that pet owners don't tend to shop around or change vets; you see similar wording in this focus group report; however, that's not my experience of veterinary practice, whether working as a veterinary surgeon in practice, or working as a supplier to the veterinary industry.

If you look at the literature review itself there is an interesting quote on page 7 from the United States concerning the industry there."In the US, veterinary leaders have described the profession as being at‘ tipping point economically’and have voiced concerns about the state of the industry (Burns, 2013). Pet owners are perceived as spending a great deal on their pets, but very little on veterinary care, reflecting a lack of understanding of what vets can offer compared with others in the lucrative pet market.....Indeed a recurring message in the literature is about vets communicating value - both as a qualitative concept of what they can offer, and also in terms of value for money".

One of the difficulties you have trying to communicate value in your veterinary practice is that one of the most distinctive parts of your value offering is your ability to deal with an emergency, particularly out of hours. I blogged about that previously here.

http://vetpol.co.uk/blogs/jeremy/22590-careful-what-you-vote-for

I certainly believe it to be true that it is critical to the future of veterinary practices to be able to communicate the value of what they do. At the same time I hope that the 'vet futures' project will be a positive initiative and will open the eyes of those at the College responsible for the Code enabling them to see how by forcing college members to give one of the most valuable parts of their service away free they actually devalue the overall veterinary offering.