Timothy Zercher 0:00

Chris, thank you so much for joining us. We really appreciate you taking time.

Chris Seigel 0:03

Yeah, thanks for having me, Tim. I'm excited for the conversation.

Timothy Zercher 0:06

Likewise. So let's start off with what first pulled you into behavioral health leadership and how did that kind of path evolve from a more of a clinician role to more of a system builder role?

Chris Seigel 0:17

Yeah, sure. And so as you said, I did begin my career as a clinician, providing direct services. And that experience was really foundational for me. It gave me a firsthand understanding of what clients need and what frontline staff navigate every day. I think that could give me a good sense of the business. And then over time I began to see that outcomes are shaped not only by clinical skill, which is obviously super important, but also by the systems surrounding the work, the workflows, the staffing models, and really the organizational structure. So I was lucky enough to kind of recognize early on a natural ability to design systems that improve service delivery and help teams perform at a higher level. And so, of course, that created that crossroads that many of us face, right? If you continue to go down the clinical road or get into the admin side. And there's real value, obviously, in both paths, helping individuals one at a time through direct services or helping many people through building stronger systems and organizations. Both are meaningful. It just really comes down to how once to utilize your skill set. So for me, I realized that my greatest contribution to the work was helping people help people, if that kind of makes sense. So that's what drew immunity leadership is building that structure, reducing that friction, and creating organizations that can scale access and more importantly, quality without losing their mission.

Timothy Zercher 1:26

Yeah, I love that. I love that. So you talk a lot about structure, governance, and scale, which I assume all kind of come from this experience, right? What are some of the biggest operational mistakes that you often see in behavioral health?

Chris Seigel 1:41

Yeah, so I think first and foremost, one of the biggest mistakes is people forget that culture eats systems. So no matter how good the systems are, you have to have the right culture. But on the question regarding scale, one of the biggest mistakes I see is organizations that try to scale revenue and volume before they scale the infrastructure. Growth looks really exciting on paper, but if scheduling and supervision and documentation, if all those systems are out of place, growth only magnifies those cracks in your infrastructure. Second, I think many organizations hire faster than they can onboard, train, and retain people effectively. They kind of get thrown into the deep end rather quickly. So we seem to forget that in paper of health, talent is not interchangeable. And if clinicians and staff don't feel supported, turnover rises quickly, and that creates both operational and clinical strain. And then I think finally, organizations become overly focused on expansion metrics such as location, census, top line growth, especially in the non-nonprofit space. This may grow services, but you're not building the administrative and financial backbone needed to sustain them. So different sectors face different pressures, but the results all the same, which is instability. So healthy scales not about just getting bigger for growth's sake. It's about building an organization that can reliably deliver quality care at a much larger level.

Timothy Zercher 2:57

Yeah. Which is not easy, right? I mean, if any small mistake, like you said, any crack will just get expanded when you grow.

Chris Seigel 3:04

Absolutely. And we may talk about AI here in a second, but the same thing with AI, right? People think AI is going to fix broken workflows and it doesn't. It in fact enhances them.

Timothy Zercher 3:13

Absolutely. Absolutely. Yeah. So yeah, let's shift and talk more about AI because I know you've been pre vocal about AI and behavioral health. What do most leaders still misunderstand about using AI responsibly, especially in the clinical setting?

Chris Seigel 3:26

So I do speak a lot about AI because I think AI can fundamentally change behavioral health, right? I think it can fix a lot of the problems that has faced this field for decades, but it's doing more with less staffing issues. So because of that, I think we have a responsibility to steward it well. So I think the biggest misunderstanding that leaders have about AI is a treat as a decision about a tool when it's really a governance decision. So most conversations focus on the model, the vendor, the feature set. But the real risk is not the technology itself, it's where and how the inputs are allowed to influence clinical documentation, decision making, and really care overall. So without that clear governance, you start to see a diffusion of responsibility. Clinicians may over-rely on AI-generated language. Readers assume safeguards are in place and they don't find out until it's too late that they're not, right? And then it's just unclear of who's accountable for the final clinical judgment and potential error. So for me and for our organizations, is responsible AI use means using, being being very intentional about the control point. Where does AI output enter the workflow? Who's reviewing it? What becomes part of the record, right? So if these guardrails are not in place, again, like I said, AI doesn't just introduce risk, it actually scales it. So the question is not can this tool do what can a tool do? It's what are we comfortable letting this influence in a client's care?

Timothy Zercher 4:45

Absolutely. Absolutely. It makes complete sense. And I think there's a really old adage that I think plays here. And it's to err is to human, but to really screw up. And I'm paraphrasing there, it takes a machine. And I think that's I think that's unfortunately the case, right? If small errors on one clinician's side can really scale large across hundreds of accounts. Yeah, exactly. Very fast. So let's shift tact a little bit. What works best for you right now in client acquisition in growth? Since we're a marketing agency, we have to always ask some more marketing questions.

Chris Seigel 5:16

Sure. So I think, you know, one area I'm really watching closely is partner-driven co-branding and referral amplification, especially as we see these larger consolidations across national nonprofit providers. So it's organizational scale, they gain reach, but the real risk is losing the depth of relationship and flexibility that smaller and more mid-sized agencies provide. So I believe they're still a very important place for those organizations, particularly because they're often more embedded in the communities than these larger conglomerates, and they're able to provide more personal, responsive care. So, what I'm interested in is how smaller and mid-sized agencies can be more intentional about partnering in a way that amplifies that strength, not through acquisitions, but again, just through partnering and figuring out who does what best. Not trying to compete on size, but learning, leaning into trust, access, and relationships while aligning with partners to expand visibly and especially regarding those referral pathways.

Timothy Zercher 6:09

Absolutely. Well, and I think using those partnerships to focus on what they do best as opposed to just trying to do everything for everyone is one of those big strong points that I think user, uh regular listeners to this podcast are probably tired of me talking about because I nonstop in preaching about focus on what makes you different and then work with people that do other things differently, that do other things really well. Let them do those things. That's how you make good partnerships.

Chris Seigel 6:34

Yeah, absolutely. I mean, I think we probably could both agree there's too many nonprofits and we're duplicating care. My dream would be that all the agencies in the era get together and say, this is what we do, this is what we do, right? And focus on that and really stop competing for the same pieces of the pie as well. Because especially with the funding changes, I don't know if you noticed, but there's some funny stuff going on in Washington regarding funding. So if we quit fighting over the same pieces of pie and focused on what we do best to help people, that would be so beneficial.

Timothy Zercher 6:59

Well said. Very well said. Last question What is one marketing tactic or marketing strategy that you're just watching really closely in the marketplace right now?

Chris Seigel 7:08

Yeah, so like I said, we rely a lot on the referrals and word of mouth, especially on the St. Louis counseling side. Queen of Peace is a much more well-known commodity in the SED space. St. Louis Counseling is a little bit lesser known. So we're just really ramping up our we've really had no advertising to back us in the past. So FY27, one of our big initiatives is to marketing. We're running some things on local stations. We are obviously part of Cafe Cherry's St. Louis. So we're going to do a lot of stuff in church bulletins and through the parishes. And then, of course, like Facebook ads and LinkedIn ads, just to get the word out. Because, like I said, there's a lot of counseling organizations in St. Louis, right? So we really want to differentiate ourselves and speak to our core client.

Timothy Zercher 7:51

I love that. I love that. Well, thank you so much for joining us, Chris. I really appreciate you sharing your insights and all the work you're doing for your team.

Chris Seigel 7:57

No, it's my pleasure, Tim, anytime and hope you have a great rest of the day.

Timothy Zercher 8:00

Absolutely. Thank you.