Sure, that does sound like an individual solution, which seems appropriate. I will agree that at the residency level most problem residents (unless the whole residency class is miserable) may benefit from individual solutions. I think the discussion points being made (unwieldiness of EMR, insurance/pre-auth requirements, documentation minimums for billing, etc.) likely affect attendings more so than residents, albeit likely field specific - for example, covering an inpatient service for a surgeon means you deal with patient care (good) and EMR documentation (may require certain amount of PE or ROS checkboxes to get paid), but not insurance authorization for the surgeries, figuring out billing requirements, etc.)
However, FM residents that I know have to do pre-auths and insurance appeals for their own stable of outpatients, have to place initial billing codes which are signed off by the attending (and thus need to know what needs to be included in the note to bill at what level), need to know quality of care (MIPS?) criteria mentioned in their own notes to ensure their patients are being screened appropriately. I'm not saying that all of this inevitably leads to burnout for every single FM resident - however, I can't imagine doing pre-auths is fun or stimulating for doctors who primarily want to treat patients, and is an impediment to patient care. I get why they are necessary, but these are the systematic issues that can be fixed. Having an insurance not cover a life-improving (even life-saving sometimes) medication despite pre-authorization application is an impediment to patient care.
That's not to say there is an easy solution to all of this, because it all comes down to the cost of healthcare. But I believe the video was taking the first step of trying to get people to define what the problem is, on a systematic level. First step to fixing a problem is to admit there is one.