Advertisement

Successful Development, Implementation, and Evaluation of Information Systems: Does Healthcare Serve as a Model for Networked Organizations?

  • Jos Aarts
  • Els Goorman
  • Heather Heathfield
  • Bonnie Kaplan
Chapter
Part of the IFIP — The International Federation for Information Processing book series (IFIPAICT, volume 41)

Abstract

The use of information systems in healthcare lags behind other business sectors. One of the possible reasons is that healthcare traditionally has been a “networked” organization with no “central command.” The introduction and use of IS has been shaped by the different powerful actors determining the delivery of care: professional groups (such as physicians, pharmacists, and, to a lesser extent, nurses), healthcare organizations, insurance companies (private and/or public) and regulating bodies (including governments). Each of the actors has different knowledge reference frameworks and knowledge that seems difficult to integrate. Private businesses are more rooted in the concept of“single line of command” and are moving swiftly into networked knowledge based organizations to meet the demands of a dynamic marketplace. What has happened in healthcare suggests that the development and implementation of IS will become increasingly difficult as businesses move toward networked organizations. The four panelists are researching IS in healthcare from different theoretical angles. They propose that healthcare as an example of a networked organization bears important lessons for the IS field.

References

  1. Akrich, M. “The De-scription of Technical Objects,” in Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change, W. E. Bijker and J. Law (eds.). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1992, pp. 205–224.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, J. G., and Aydin, C. E. “Overview: Theoretical Perspectives and Methodologies for the Evaluation of Health Care Information Systems,” in Evaluating Health Care Information Systems: Approaches and Applications, J. G. Anderson, C. E. Aydin and S. J. Jay (eds.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1994, pp. 5–29.Google Scholar
  3. Kaplan, B. “Addressing Organizational Issues into the Evaluation of Medical Systems,” Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association (4: 2 ), 1997, pp. 94–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Luff, P., and Heath, C. “System Use and Social Organization: Observations on Human-computer Interaction in an Architectural Practice,” in Technology in Working Order: Studies of Work, Interaction and Technology, G. Button and H. Harper (eds.). London: Routledge, 1993.Google Scholar
  5. Pawson, R., and Tilley, N. Realistic Evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1997.Google Scholar
  6. Walsham, G. “Actor-network Theory and IS Research: Current Status and Future Prospects,” in Information Systems and Qualitative Research, A. S. Lee, J. Liebenau and J. I. DeGross (eds.). London: Chapman & Hall, 1997, pp. 466–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jos Aarts
    • 1
  • Els Goorman
    • 1
  • Heather Heathfield
    • 2
  • Bonnie Kaplan
    • 3
  1. 1.Erasmus University RotterdamThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Manchester Metropolitan UniversityUK
  3. 3.Center for Medical InformaticsYale UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations