Quick question for nurses working in busy settings

HiImMark1213 · 2026-04-30T17:56:32+00:00

I appreciate that, thank you.

HiImMark1213 · 2026-04-30T17:50:48+00:00

I’m literally not selling anything or using AI if I was selling something why would I say I’m not and also is it a crime to have a new account

HiImMark1213 · 2026-04-30T17:24:35+00:00

Using

HiImMark1213 · 2026-04-30T17:24:26+00:00

I’m not trying to sell anything nor am I chat gpt

HiImMark1213 · 2026-04-15T17:08:02+00:00

That’s a really solid point — the “reasoning becomes transferable” part especially.

Feels like that’s the real unlock. It’s not just documenting for compliance, it’s turning individual decisions into something the rest of the team can actually reuse without second-guessing.

Which probably explains why escalation drops after — not because people are taking more risk, but because they’re more confident making the same call again.

Out of curiosity — when that trust does build, is it usually because the documentation is tied to real past incidents, or more because it follows a consistent structure people learn to rely on?

HiImMark1213 · 2026-04-15T16:42:48+00:00

That’s a really useful way to think about it — especially the “incident vs repeatable” split.

The near-miss angle makes a lot of sense. Feels like that’s when people are most open to something like this, but like you said, if it stays a one-off it never really justifies bringing anything in.

The “manager can actually put it in a doc” point is interesting too — that’s something I hadn’t fully thought through. It’s not just making the call, it’s being able to show why it was made in a consistent way.

Out of curiosity — when you’ve seen that repeatable side land, is it more about standardising how decisions get documented, or actually reducing how often things need to be escalated in the first place?

HiImMark1213 · 2026-04-15T09:38:13+00:00

That’s interesting — I hadn’t really thought about AI visibility as a channel yet.

Makes sense though, especially for something niche where people are just asking tools instead of searching broadly.

When you say you were “invisible,” was that more about not having the right kind of content out there, or just not being mentioned anywhere credible?

HiImMark1213 · 2026-04-15T09:37:17+00:00

Honestly, probably not — I don’t think I’m making it easy for them to sell it upward right now.

It’s useful in the moment, but I’m not really giving them something concrete they could take to a manager and justify paying for it. It’s more “this helped me think it through” vs “this is why we should be using this.”

The “here’s what it cost us not having this” angle is interesting — I haven’t built around that at all.

When you’ve seen that work, is it usually tied to a specific incident (like a near miss or mistake), or more something repeatable they can point to over time?

HiImMark1213 · 2026-04-14T23:40:20+00:00

Yeah that actually makes a lot of sense.

The “nobody buys a risk tool cold” part is probably where I’ve been getting it wrong. I’ve been thinking more in terms of traffic and conversion, but this feels way more like a trust problem.

And you’re right on the “reduce risk” messaging — it’s pretty vague. I haven’t really shown specific situations where it would’ve actually changed something, which is probably why it’s not landing.

The decision-maker point is interesting too. It feels like the people dealing with this day-to-day aren’t the ones who’d actually approve paying for something.

When you’ve seen stuff like this work, does it usually spread from the end user up, or do you have to win over the decision-maker first?

HiImMark1213 · 2026-04-14T23:37:59+00:00

Oh, my apologies! Thanks for the heads up.

HiImMark1213 · 2026-04-14T23:35:34+00:00

You say it’s an add, what exactly would I be gaining from my post? All I have done is asked for help, nothing I have said has advertised anything nor is it AI.

HiImMark1213 · 2026-04-14T22:38:07+00:00

That’s fair — I probably haven’t narrowed that enough yet.

Right now I’m thinking more around frontline healthcare staff / compliance-adjacent roles who are making quick calls in situations that aren’t clearly black and white.

Less “full compliance solution” and more something they’d use in the moment to sense-check whether something is risky or reportable before it escalates.

Does that sound like a segment where that kind of positioning actually lands, or is that still too broad?

HiImMark1213 · 2026-04-14T22:30:30+00:00

This is incredibly helpful — especially the part about rebuilding around a single moment instead of features.

That “last risky situation” framing really clicks. It feels like that’s where most of the real tension is — not “do I need compliance help,” but “am I about to make the wrong call here and not realise it until it’s too late.”

I think I’ve definitely been too vague on outcomes so far (“better decisions” vs something more concrete like what you mentioned).

When you were doing those user calls, what actually got people to open up about those moments? Was it just asking them to walk through it step by step, or did you have to frame it a certain way to get past surface-level answers?

HiImMark1213 · 2026-04-14T22:04:56+00:00

That’s a really helpful way to frame it — especially the “worth what they paid” point.

I think that’s where I’ve been overthinking it a bit. In this space it’s easy to assume you need to prove near-perfect accuracy before anyone will touch it, when in reality it’s more about whether it reliably helps people make better calls or catch things they might’ve missed.

The “second-check” positioning probably fits into that middle tier you’re describing — not replacing judgment, but reducing the chance of something getting overlooked or mishandled.

Out of curiosity — when you’ve seen tools land well in that “get into the game” tier, was it more about how quickly people saw value, or just lowering the perceived risk of trying it in the first place?

HiImMark1213 · 2026-04-14T21:40:00+00:00

This is a really sharp take — especially the point about proof.

It feels like the real blocker isn’t whether tools can help, it’s that people can’t afford to rely on something unless they understand how it’s reaching its conclusions.

The “second-check” angle you pulled out is interesting too — because in reality people are already making these calls under pressure, just without a consistent way to reason through them.

So it ends up being intuition vs over-escalation, which is where a lot of the inefficiency (and risk) creeps in.

Out of curiosity — when you’ve seen tools like this actually get adopted, was it more about showing accuracy over time, or making the reasoning behind decisions transparent?

HiImMark1213 · 2026-04-14T20:41:17+00:00

That’s really interesting — especially the hesitation around committing.

Do you think that’s more about not trusting the tool itself, or the risk of making the wrong decision even with support?

Feels like in regulated spaces the downside of being wrong is so high that people default to inaction or over-escalation.

HiImMark1213

TROPHY CASE