Allscripts CEO Glen Tullman Interviewed at HIMSS

I finally had a few moments to watch the Matthew Holt interview of Glen Tullman, Allscripts CEO at HIMSS. Allscripts is no doubt a large player in the EHR industry (like it or not). This is especially true after Allscripts acquisition of Misys. So, Glen Tullman will have a large effect on the EHR industry so it’s worth listening to hear what he has to say. I’ll include a few quick comments of my own below the video.

Overall a pretty low key video. There were a few things that are worth commenting on.

The first thing that hit me was that Glen Tullman thought that the controversy over CCHIT was that CCHIT certified over 300 EHR vendors. Glen makes the argument that government wants a smaller footprint of EHR vendors and that 300 was too many. I guess I can kind of see why government might not want to certify 300 EHR providers since doctors just don’t have time to look through that many. However, it was the first I’d heard of that CCHIT controversy.

What does make a lot of sense is why the CEO of one of the largest EHR vendors would want the certified EHR vendor list to be a really small list that includes them. So, it would make sense for him to lobby the government to keep the list small.

I’m glad that Matthew Holt brought up at least another reason that CCHIT as the EHR certification is a problem. How about you just start with the controversy that CCHIT certification doesn’t provide benefit to doctors. Solve that one and we can find a way to deal with any other CCHIT controversies.

Of course, at the end Glen Tullman also said “CCHIT has done it [EHR certification] very effectively.” Effectively? Seriously? Can he provide me some data on how effective it is? It might be effective for his organization’s interests. So, maybe that’s what he meant.

Glen Tullman did make a great comment about SAAS EHR versus client server EHR. He basically said that most users don’t know the technology behind SAAS EHR and client server EHR. Glen suggested that most users just know the financing model of the two EHR options. A very fine point. I’d just add that they know the financing part AND the IT support part of the equation (ie. SAAS EHR means you [the EHR vendor] do the IT. Great!) Glen does seem to understand how to sell an EHR product to his customers.

There you go, there’s my quick comments. What can I say? I type fast.

About the author

John Lynn

John Lynn

John Lynn is the Founder of, a network of leading Healthcare IT resources. The flagship blog, Healthcare IT Today, contains over 13,000 articles with over half of the articles written by John. These EMR and Healthcare IT related articles have been viewed over 20 million times.

John manages Healthcare IT Central, the leading career Health IT job board. He also organizes the first of its kind conference and community focused on healthcare marketing, Healthcare and IT Marketing Conference, and a healthcare IT conference,, focused on practical healthcare IT innovation. John is an advisor to multiple healthcare IT companies. John is highly involved in social media, and in addition to his blogs can be found on Twitter: @techguy.


  • Interesting analysis. As a proponent of SaaS EHR, I have to ask what you meant by “SAAS EHR means you do the IT.” SaaS customers have to take care of less IT than those who use traditional on-premises solutions. Am I missing something?

  • No, that’s the point of what I was saying. I probably should have said, “SAAS EHR means you [the EHR vendor] do the IT.” I’ll correct it on the post as well.

    Of course, an SAAS EHR doesn’t mean the clinic won’t have to do IT. They’ll have to do less IT over all, but will have to learn more about their internet connection than a clinic with a client server based EHR.

    All of that said, I personally feel that both models are workable and enjoy their own specific list of pros and cons.

  • It is interesting to note that Mr. Tullman:

    1. serves as HIS advisor to the Obama administration.
    2. is a member of CCHIT’s Board of Trustees
    3. CCHIT will serve as the determining organization for EHR winners/losers.

    Does something about this not sound right to anyone?

Click here to post a comment