Negotiate preferred-partner terms before board vote
Large distribution agreements can create reach and lock in assumptions at the same time.
The pressure is to move before an opportunity closes while avoiding commitments that later constrain care, economics, or trust.
“My board wants a clear answer now, but I can’t lock our employers into something we can’t measure.”
Ian Fontaine · Chief Benefits Officer
She leads benefits purchasing for a coalition whose affiliated employers want a vetted musculoskeletal care option.
What pulls against what
- distribution reach vs. channel exclusivity
- board speed vs. verified reporting
- committed price vs. uncertain utilization
- commercial ambition vs. member-access reliability
- coalition simplicity vs. contractual safeguards
What is at stake
A three-year coalition agreement offers major distribution but binds price, reporting, and exclusivity before all assumptions are proven. The decision must hold after the board vote
Why Sword Health
At Sword Health, these decisions may affect how broadly members can access care and how sustainably that access can be supported.
Written for
This is the setup. The work is inside.
Running it puts you in the room: the full situation and its constraints, stakeholders who push back in their own words, and the decisions that are yours to make. What you produce becomes a Day One Plan — work you can show someone instead of describing.