Albert Einstein is credited with defining insanity as “doing the same thing but expecting a different result.” And so it goes with another EHR implementation gone bad…
Virtually every Electronic Medical Record (EMR) vendor claims their system will increase efficiencies. However, a recent study by professors at Arizona State University’s W. P. Carey School of Business will “cast doubt on some of the savings” of these systems says Assistant Professor Michael Furukawa, one of the study’s authors.
“There’s a disconnect in the policy world that assumed that with all of the records moved into the computer system, nurses and other hospital personnel could spend less time running around looking for charts and that they would have more time to spend with patients,” says Associate Professor Raghu Santanam, another of the study’s authors. “While some documentation time was reduced, a lot of time at computers may have been added, especially at organizations just learning to implement the new technology in a likely transition period. Higher levels of nurse staffing were really needed.” Continue reading
Well, it appears my fears have been realized. As I mentioned in a prior post, Lean & IT, I expressed concern on how IT organizations and consultants would respond to Forrester’s declaration that Lean is “in.” Regarding Lean, Forrester’s own blog said to, “consider it more a mindset and a culture than a guide.” It was interesting then to receive in the mail the other day, from Forrester no less, a brochure on their Business Technology Forum 2009, with the theme, Lean: The New Business Technology Imperative. However, it went downhill quickly from there. Continue reading
The recent and ongoing debate on Healthcare highlights a problem that is prevalent throughout organizations, governments, and society in general. The problem is with the thinking process, or should I say, lack of a thinking process, and an almost myopic and emotional focus on addressing only the outcomes of a process. Continue reading
In the past couple of weeks I have had the distinct pleasure of driving nearly 3,000 miles through 8 states in the U.S.A. using two different cars. When one puts that many miles on vehicles in a week, something is bound to go wrong – and it did. Continue reading
A long time ago, or at least what seems like a long time ago, in the U.S., Manufacturing was King. For companies whose primary product was manufactured, manufacturing, along with finance, dominated discussions. There was little concern for quality, cost, or customer service. The customers would get what they got (and like it), and any additional costs incurred would simply be passed along in the price of the product. Life was good! Continue reading
Over the past several months, I have written several posts about the issues facing IT Business Alignment, a need to create a dependence between IT and the Business, and an emphasis on taking a process centric approach to the issue.
I decided to consolidate that into a white paper, which is now available.
It’s not sponsored by a large software or hardware company, but does present an approach offered by my company (New Age Technologies) to help an organization move toward IT Business Alignment by focusing on a process to be improved, then understanding how it’s infrastructure and technology can help that process.
Please feel free to leave any comments about the paper at this post, or you can email me at the address on the paper.
I hope you enjoy!
Effective communication is critically important in any relationship, be it with your significant other, or your business partners. This is ever so important in the IT Business relationship. After all, if we want to improve alignment, we need to make sure we understand each other. Despite all the efforts, the issues continue to present themselves. A couple of examples from the past few weeks:
In a meeting with IT & operations leaders, a business unit VP was discussing how they needed to better understand the ‘workflow’ and be able to improve it. He asked IT to help. Since the organization had Microsoft SharePoint deployed, the IT team went back and looked at the ‘Workflow’ engine in SharePoint. Unfortunately, the ‘workflow’ he was talking about was the process the people were using to complete their tasks. Same word, different meanings.
A hospital scheduling organization allowed physician offices to fax orders into the system. The orders were converted to PDF files using “Fax-o-matic” (name changed). Indexers then labeled the orders into the email system, and linked it to the order in the scheduling system (I know, a mess, but no $$$ to change). Hospital leadership would constantly hear of issues with the “Fax-o-matic” system. When they approached IT, IT would say it was working fine. To IT, “Fax-o-matic” was the creation of the PDF file from the fax. To Hospital leadership, “Fax-o-matic” was the entire process from faxing the order to linking it to the scheduling system, as well as finding it as necessary.
Much time and effort could have been saved (as well as some nasty meetings in the case of the second example) if both parties had taken the time to understand exactly what the other was saying, what it meant to them, and explaining what they were going to do. If the IT group had said what it was going to look at when the meeting ended, the VP would have realized they were not on the same page.
When communicating, it is not only important that you understand what the other person is saying, but that you are sure they understand what you are saying.
Let me know your thoughts!
What’s wrong with your approach to IT Business Alignment is your approach to IT Business Alignment. For over 30 years, organizations have been wrestling with the IT Business Alignment issue, and according to the annual Society of Information Management survey it remains a top issue today.
Why is this so difficult to get our arms around? I’ve written previously about how defining IT Business Alignment has been an ongoing issue, and how our organizational structures make it very challenging (here). We have spent so much time struggling to figure out the right approach that perhaps we have lost our way.
Part of this struggle is due to the definition itself. ITIL v3 defines Business/IT Alignment as:
An approach to the delivery of IT Services that tries to align the Activities of the IT Service provider with the needs of the Business.
The problem with this definition is it defines Business/IT Alignment as an approach. Other definitions call it an “ongoing process” (Wikipedia). While there may be a process to achieve it, Business/IT Alignment is not an approach or process, it is an outcome.
It is the outcome of many different approaches and processes which will vary by organization and will involve varying levels of technology. Defining it as an outcome:
IT Business Alignment is the delivery of IT Services that does align the IT activities to the needs of the business.
Now looking at it as an outcome, how do you know when you’ve achieved it? Well, it’s just like in the movie Goldfinger, when James Bond is asked, “What do you know about gold 007?” His response was, “I know it when I see it.” IT Business Alignment is like this in many ways because there is no “one size fits all” solution; each organization is unique, and alignment will look different in each. This is what makes it so challenging. An attempt by Company B to replicate the alignment results at Company A will likely be disappointing, because Company B is different than Company A.
However, to achieve this outcome, there must be some fundamental pieces in place in order to drive the approaches to meet the outcome of IT Business Alignment. Fundamentally, IT and Business must be dependent on each other for success, and this dependence must be mutually recognized and acted upon.
Creating this dependence starts with creating a relationship and establishing common metrics. Many will say this already exists in their organization. Before you do, ask if the actions back it up? Remember, not only does the dependence need to be recognized, but it must be acted upon.
One way to act is to take the initiative to engage with the business in helping improve their operation. This is where taking a process based focus to the operation can provide real benefit. Using techniques like Business Process Management, or the one we’ve developed like the IT2x FrameworkSM, can help IT and Business create the necessary dependence and become aligned.
Once aligned, continue to move IT and the business closer. Whether you call this Synchronization, Convergence, or Fusion, doesn’t matter. What does matter is the continuous process of moving toward these goals.
Change your approach to IT Business Alignment. Stop treating it as an approach, and start looking at it as an outcome. Then act toward achieving this outcome, by creating a dependence on each other through relationships, common metrics, and a process centric approach to improving operations.
Let me know your thoughts!