How to negotiate it all: An employed position that allows entrepreneurship
Why smart contract strategy can protect your income, ideas, and independence in a changing medical economy.
-
02/01/2026
When I finished training, I, like many new physicians, was faced with a familiar fork in the road: take an employed position versus work for yourself in an independent practice. This already challenging decision was further complicated by the fact that the landscape in which physicians practice medicine and generate revenue has dramatically changed. In order to navigate this and potentially have it all, an employed position that allows entrepreneurship, I had to strategically negotiate my contract. In this article, I will review the evolving practice of medicine, highlighting the benefits of having an employed contract that authorizes entrepreneurship and the steps to obtain this contract.
For generations, physicians entered partnerships or built small-group practices, but the profession has shifted dramatically. According to a 2025 report, only 42% of physicians now work in private practice, down from 60% in 2012.1 The remaining majority are employed by health care systems, hospitals, corporate groups, or private-equity-backed entities.
The appeal of the employed model is obvious: predictable income, minimal administrative burden, paid time off, and institutional support. For early-career physicians with loans, it can feel like the safest and most rational choice, especially if the employer will pay off educational loans. However, this stability often comes at the cost of autonomy, creativity, and long-term financial upside. While the startup journey carries risk, the data suggests the risk is worth it. By mid-career, private-practice physicians typically out-earn their employed peers; figure one suggests that single specialty group practice physicians earn about 8.5% more than employed hospital physicians.2 Beyond finances, there is an intangible reward in building something aligned with and authentic to your vision.
As physician reimbursement continues to decline and regulatory pressures increase, more clinicians are exploring side ventures. In a 2025 survey, 38% of physicians reported that they already run or are seriously considering starting an entrepreneurial endeavor outside of their clinical work (Figure 2).3 I count myself among them.4
Interviewing for an employed position and pursuing my own venture required thoughtful boundaries. I wanted to honor my commitments as an employed physician while protecting my right to build something outside that ecosystem. That is where the negotiation process — and the lessons learned — became invaluable.
In medical school and residency, we learn how to diagnose and treat diseases, not how to read contracts or evaluate business risk. Few of us receive formal training in the legal, financial, or operational realities of employment. So when that first job offer lands in your inbox, thick with indemnity clauses, productivity bonuses, and intellectual-property provisions, it becomes easy to feel overwhelmed. The truth is your employment agreement is one of the most consequential documents of your career. It governs not just your pay, but your freedom to create, consult, and innovate. Given this, I put together some helpful tips to help you manage the contract negotiation process and best position yourself for success.
Step 1: Know yourself before you negotiate
Before you even think about red-lines or legal clauses, take an honest inventory of your own temperament. Entrepreneurship and medicine require very different muscles.
Physicians are trained to eliminate uncertainty; entrepreneurs learn to live inside it. As Voltaire famously wrote, “the best is the enemy of the good.”6 If you wait until you have every answer, you will never take the leap.
Ask yourself:
What is my risk tolerance?
How much time and capital am I truly willing to invest?
What does success look like if this venture never replaces my clinical or research income?
Your clarity on these questions will shape how firmly you negotiate and whether you are willing to walk away. For me, protecting my ability to build my own venture was non-negotiable. That conviction made every contract conversation easier, because I knew where my line was drawn.
Step 2: Enter the negotiation strategically
Academic centers, health care companies, hospitals, and private equity firms negotiate contracts every day. You probably do not. That imbalance alone means you must approach the process strategically, and do not underestimate your ability to modify the contract; contract terms are often not fixed. The time of hire is your single strongest moment of leverage — you have not yet signed, and they have already invested resources into recruiting you.
A few strategic tips:
Do not rely on verbal assurances. You are not negotiating with a person; you are negotiating with an institution. If it is not in writing, it does not exist.
Understand their interests. Administrators care about compliance, revenue, and reputation. If your requests reduce perceived risk in those areas, the employer will be more willing to compromise. For example, if your side venture involves providing health care to patients, be prepared to cover your own medical malpractice for your business that is separate from the medical malpractice the employer provides.
Bring professional help. Hire an attorney experienced in physician employment contracts. The few hundred dollars spent could save you hundreds of thousands later. Remember, your attorney not only can read your contract and offer suggestions, but they also can talk directly with the future employer’s attorneys. While this can be expensive, this tactic works well in modifying contract language that the future employer is initially resistant to changing.
Understand if there is a person that the future employer has hired with a similar ask, as you may be able to take that contract and modify it to meet your needs. This works well because starting with a template that has previously been approved is easier to push through the system with modifications than starting from scratch.
Step 3: Protect your entrepreneurial interests
If you are starting, or even considering, a side venture, these are the key areas to scrutinize.
Exclusive billing clauses. Many contracts include language granting the employer exclusive rights to bill for your medical services. That is fine if you only plan to work for them. But if your startup includes a clinical component that bills payers, this could block your ability to bill. Negotiate language clarifying that you may render and bill for medical services outside of your employed hours and outside of employer-owned facilities.
Non-compete and geographic limits. Non-competes are standard, but their scope is often negotiable. Most reasonable clauses limit practice within 10-15 miles for a period of 1-2 years after termination. Ensure the exact practice address is listed; otherwise, the restriction could apply to every satellite in the system. Push for explicit carve-outs if your venture is digital or operates in a distinct subspecialty (e.g., “the non-compete does not apply to telemedicine services under your brand”). Define what constitutes “competition” before it becomes a dispute. In my case, the final language restricted me from discussing my venture or purposely trying to take a patient I encountered in the employer’s health care system from the employer; however if one of the employer’s patients found my side business on their own, I could see the patient at my business without penalty.
Intellectual Property (IP) ownership. This is one of the most overlooked — and dangerous — sections for entrepreneurial physicians. Some contracts have a “work for hire” clause, which claims ownership of any intellectual property you create while employed, even if done on personal time and unrelated to clinical work. I once received a contract with this “work for hire” clause in it. Going back to Step One, knowing yourself before you negotiate, I quickly walked away from this contract when the potential employer stated the “work for hire” clause was non-negotiable, and could not be reworded or removed. Insist that any IP created outside of your listed work hours, independent of allocated employer resources (computer, etc.) is solely yours.
Outside business designation. If you already have an established business, it should be described in an addendum to your contract, including its name, nature of work, and assurance that the business will not interfere with your clinical duties. If your venture is still conceptual, consider forming a simple LLC or sole proprietorship for “medical content and consulting services.” This creates a legal entity you can reference and protects your personal assets. Your attorney can help structure this appropriately.
Step 4: Don’t be afraid to walk away
At one point, I turned down an offer that looked ideal on paper, but contained restrictive clauses that would have made my venture impossible. It was difficult at the moment, but it turned out to be the best decision I could have made.
Negotiation is not confrontation; it’s clarification. If a future employer values you, they will find ways to accommodate reasonable boundaries. If they will not, that is useful data about the relationship you are stepping into.
Closing thoughts
If you are a resident, fellow, or early-career physician with entrepreneurial curiosity, start learning now about contracts, business structures, and intellectual property. You do not need to have the perfect idea yet. You just need to start protecting your optionality.
Push back when something does not feel right, ask questions, hire help, and remember - the best time to negotiate is before you sign.
Medicine is changing, but so are we. The future of health care will belong to physicians who combine clinical expertise with creativity, adaptability, and ownership. Starting something new may feel risky, but so does letting someone else decide your ceiling.
References
Garvey G. Smaller share of doctors in private practice than ever before. AMA-Private Practices. 2025. Accessed Nov. 2025. https://www.ama-assn.org/practice-management/private-practices/smaller-share-doctors-private-practice-ever?
Doximity 2025 Physician Compensation Report. Doximity. 2025. Accessed Nov. 2025. https://www.doximity.com/reports/physician-compensation-report/2025
McKenna, J. 'I Get to Be Creative Again - That's the Juice. Medscape. 2025. Accessed Nov. 2025. https://www.medscape.com/slideshow/2025-docs-as-entreprenuers-6017932?icd=login_success_email_match_norm#2
Shen, N. Easy Belly. 2025. https://www.easybelly.com
Doximity 2023 Physician Compensation Report. Doximity. 2023. Accessed Nov. 2025. https://press.doximity.com/reports/doximity-physician-compensation-report-2023.pdf
Voltaire. Questions sur l'Encyclopédie, par des Amateurs. 1770. Vol. 2. P. 250. Geneva, Switzerland: (publisher not named).
Summary content
7 Key Takeaways
-
1
Developed a paper-based colorimetric sensor array for chemical threat detection.
-
2
Can detect 12 chemical agents, including industrial toxins.
-
3
Production cost is under 20 cents per chip.
-
4
Utilizes dye-loaded silica particles on self-adhesive paper.
-
5
Provides rapid, simultaneous identification through image analysis.
-
6
Inspired by the mammalian olfactory system for pattern recognition.
-
7
Future developments include a machine learning-enabled reader device.
The guidelines emphasize four-hour gastric emptying studies over two-hour testing. How do you see this affecting diagnostic workflows in practice?
Dr. Staller: Moving to a four-hour solid-meal scintigraphy will actually simplify decision-making. The two-hour reads miss a meaningful proportion of delayed emptying; standardizing on four hours reduces false negatives and the “maybe gastroparesis” purgatory that leads to repeat testing. Practically, it means closer coordination with nuclear medicine (longer slots, consistent standardized meal), updating order sets to default to a four-hour protocol, and educating front-line teams so patients arrive appropriately prepped. The payoff is fewer equivocal studies and more confident treatment plans.
Metoclopramide and erythromycin are the only agents conditionally recommended for initial therapy. How does this align with what is being currently prescribed?
Dr. Staller: This largely mirrors real-world practice. Metoclopramide remains the only FDA-approved prokinetic for gastroparesis, and short “pulsed” erythromycin courses are familiar to many of us—recognizing tachyphylaxis limits durability. Our recommendation is “conditional” because the underlying evidence is modest and patient responses are heterogeneous, but it formalizes what many clinicians already do: start with metoclopramide (lowest effective dose, limited duration, counsel on neurologic adverse effects) and reserve erythromycin for targeted use (exacerbations, bridging).
Several agents, including domperidone and prucalopride, received recommendations against first-line use. How will that influence discussions with patients who ask about these therapies?
Dr. Staller: Two points I share with patients: evidence and access/safety. For domperidone, the data quality is mixed, and US access is through an FDA IND mechanism; you’re committing patients to EKG monitoring and a non-trivial administrative lift. For prucalopride, the gastroparesis-specific evidence isn’t strong enough yet to justify first-line use. So, our stance is not “never,” it’s just “not first.” If someone fails or cannot tolerate initial therapy, we can revisit these options through shared decision-making, setting expectations about benefit, monitoring, and off-label use. The guideline language helps clinicians have a transparent, evidence-based conversation at the first visit.
The guidelines suggest reserving procedures like G-POEM and gastric electrical stimulation for refractory cases. In your practice, how do you decide when a patient is “refractory” to medical therapy?
Dr. Staller: I define “refractory” with three anchors.
1. Adequate trials of foundational care: dietary optimization and glycemic control; an antiemetic; and at least one prokinetic at appropriate dose/duration (with intolerance documented if stopped early).
2. Persistent, function-limiting symptoms: ongoing nausea/vomiting, weight loss, dehydration, ER visits/hospitalizations, or malnutrition despite the above—ideally tracked with a validated instrument (e.g., GCSI) plus nutritional metrics.
3. Objective correlation: delayed emptying on a standardized 4-hour solid-meal study that aligns with the clinical picture (and medications that slow emptying addressed).
At that point, referral to a center with procedural expertise for G-POEM or consideration of gastric electrical stimulation becomes appropriate, with multidisciplinary evaluation (GI, nutrition, psychology, and, when needed, surgery).
What role do you see dietary modification and glycemic control playing alongside pharmacologic therapy in light of these recommendations?
Dr. Staller: They’re the bedrock. A small-particle, lower-fat, calorie-dense diet—often leaning on nutrient-rich liquids—can meaningfully reduce symptom burden. Partnering with dietitians early pays dividends. For diabetes, tighter glycemic control can improve gastric emptying and symptoms; I explicitly review medications that can slow emptying (e.g., opioids; consider timing/necessity of GLP-1 receptor agonists) and encourage continuous glucose monitor-informed adjustments. Pharmacotherapy sits on top of those pillars; without them, medications will likely underperform.
The guideline notes “considerable unmet need” in gastroparesis treatment. Where do you think future therapies or research are most urgently needed?
Dr. Staller: I see three major areas.
1. Truly durable prokinetics: agents that improve emptying and symptoms over months, with better safety than legacy options (e.g., next-gen motilin/ghrelin agonists, better-studied 5-HT4 strategies).
2. Endotyping and biomarkers: we need to stop treating all gastroparesis as one disease. Clinical, physiologic, and microbiome/omic signatures that predict who benefits from which therapy (drug vs G-POEM vs GES) would transform care.
3. Patient-centered trials: larger, longer RCTs that prioritize validated symptom and quality-of-life outcomes, include nutritional endpoints, and reflect real-world medication confounders.
Our guideline intentionally highlights these gaps to hopefully catalyze better trials and smarter referral pathways.
Dr. Staller is with the Division of Gastroenterology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston.