Fable
Two kinds of prescriptions in the pharmacy: the full name and abbreviation of the same medicine
The old apothecary had three consultation rooms and one central pharmacy. The old doctor wrote full names on prescriptions—"Rehmannia raw," "Rehmannia prepared," "Scutellaria wine-fried"—not omitting a single character for fear the pharmacy worker would grab the wrong herb. The young doctor, seeking speed, wrote "raw rehmannia," "prepared rehmannia," and "wine scutellaria," all abbreviations fellow practitioners could understand. In the same medicine cabinet, the old doctor's prescription had "Rehmannia raw" on one line, while the young doctor's prescription wrote "raw rehmannia" for the same herb, and the pharmacy worker could tell at a glance that it was the same drawer.
The problem was in the pharmacy department. The department head received two procurement reports at once—under the old doctor's name, medicine consumption read "Sheng Dihuang used one and a half jin this month," and under the young doctor's name, "Sheng Di used one and a half jin this month." The procurement manager saw the two reports and thought they were two different medicines, ordered separately under "Sheng Dihuang" and "Sheng Di," and doubled the quantity. When the goods arrived, they discovered it was the same medicine, and the warehouse had three months of stock piled up.
The bigger trouble came with auditing. The provincial medicine inspection team came to check inventory, requiring every herb to have a correspondence between purchase records and prescription consumption. The old doctor's full name and the young doctor's abbreviation were not linked by the system, and in the prescription consumption records "Rehmannia raw" and "Rehmannia" were two independent entries, each unable to trace the other's usage. It took the audit team two full days to match the two rows of data.
The pharmacy department later reformed its naming conventions. On each prescription, an abbreviation could be written for a medicinal ingredient, but the ingredient's unified code had to be checked off at the same time from a standard reference table. The unified code ran through the prescription, procurement, inventory, and audit systems. The old doctors still wrote "Rehmannia raw" with code A037; the young doctors wrote "Rehmannia" with the same code A037. The procurement manager placed orders only by code, and the audit team reconciled accounts only by code.
Three months after the reform, a small incident showed why it mattered. The pharmacy hired a new purchasing manager with no background in traditional Chinese medicine. The new manager saw two names for the same medicinal ingredient in the system. Following the rules, the manager checked only identifier A037 and was unaffected by the naming difference. In the weekly report, the pharmacy director wrote: “Put a term’s aliases inside the same identifier, and people are free to work.”
The pharmacy later turned the reference table into a public standard — the full names, abbreviations, and codes of all medicinal materials were posted on the bulletin board, and newcomers memorized them for three days first. The argument between the old doctor and the young doctor about whether to write the full name or the abbreviation died down from then on — once the code was filled in, whatever was written matched. Those who argue about the length of names are arguing about habit; those who solve name confusion use a system.