Exploring the Capabilities of HIT Industry Solutions

Week 2 Assignment Rubric CATEGORY SWOT Analysis (48 points possible) EXCELLENT - above expectations The SWOT Analysis shows depth, breath, triangulation, and clarity in critical thinking in addressing the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of three vendors. GOOD - met expectations The SWOT Analysis fully addresses the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of three vendors. Triangulation was attempted but not fully addressed. FAIR - below expectations The SWOT Analysis lacks depth, breath, triangulation, and clarity in critical thinking in addressing the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of three vendors. POOR - significantly below expectations or missing The SWOT Analysis does not address (zero points) or poorly addresses the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of three vendors. SCORE (0-34 points) (43-48 points) (39-42 points) (35-38 points ) The executive summary shows depth, breath, triangulation, and clarity in critical thinking in recommending vendors. The executive summary fully addresses the recommendation of vendors. The executive summary lacks depth, breath, triangulation, and clarity in critical thinking in recommending vendors. Executive Summary (48 points possible) The executive summary does not address (zero points) or poorly addresses the recommendation of vendors. Triangulation was attempted but not fully addressed. (43-48 points) (0-34 points) (35-38 points ) (39-42 points) Writing (24 points possible) The Assignment uses professional tone appropriate to the audience, contains original writing and proper paraphrasing, contains very few or no writing and/or spelling errors, and is fully consistent with graduate level writing style. The work is supported by the Learning Resources and more than three additional scholarly sources. The Assignment is mostly consistent with graduate level writing style and may have some spelling, and writing errors. The tone is mostly professional and appropriate to the audience. The work is supported by the Learning Resources and at least three additional scholarly sources. The Assignment is somewhat consistent with graduate level writing style and may have some spelling, and writing errors. The tone is somewhat professional, but may not be appropriate to the audience. The Assignment is well below graduate level writing style expectations for organization, scholarly tone, and writing, or shows heavy reliance on quoting. The tone is not professional and not appropriate to the audience. The work is supported by the Learning Resources and less than three additional scholarly sources. The work is not supported by the Learning Resources or additional scholarly sources. (0-17 points) (20-21 points) (18-19 points) (22-24 points) Instructor comments: Total Score (120 possible points): 2016 Laureate Education, Inc. Page 1 of 1 points Week 2 Assignment Rubric CATEGORY SWOT Analysis (48 points possible) EXCELLENT - above expectations The SWOT Analysis shows depth, breath, triangulation, and clarity in critical thinking in addressing the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of three vendors. GOOD - met expectations The SWOT Analysis fully addresses the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of three vendors. Triangulation was attempted but not fully addressed. FAIR - below expectations The SWOT Analysis lacks depth, breath, triangulation, and clarity in critical thinking in addressing the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of three vendors. POOR - significantly below expectations or missing The SWOT Analysis does not address (zero points) or poorly addresses the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of three vendors. SCORE (0-34 points) (43-48 points) (39-42 points) (35-38 points ) The executive summary shows depth, breath, triangulation, and clarity in critical thinking in recommending vendors. The executive summary fully addresses the recommendation of vendors. The executive summary lacks depth, breath, triangulation, and clarity in critical thinking in recommending vendors. Executive Summary (48 points possible) The executive summary does not address (zero points) or poorly addresses the recommendation of vendors. Triangulation was attempted but not fully addressed. (43-48 points) (0-34 points) (35-38 points ) (39-42 points) Writing (24 points possible) The Assignment uses professional tone appropriate to the audience, contains original writing and proper paraphrasing, contains very few or no writing and/or spelling errors, and is fully consistent with graduate level writing style. The work is supported by the Learning Resources and more than three additional scholarly sources. The Assignment is mostly consistent with graduate level writing style and may have some spelling, and writing errors. The tone is mostly professional and appropriate to the audience. The work is supported by the Learning Resources and at least three additional scholarly sources. The Assignment is somewhat consistent with graduate level writing style and may have some spelling, and writing errors. The tone is somewhat professional, but may not be appropriate to the audience. The Assignment is well below graduate level writing style expectations for organization, scholarly tone, and writing, or shows heavy reliance on quoting. The tone is not professional and not appropriate to the audience. The work is supported by the Learning Resources and less than three additional scholarly sources. The work is not supported by the Learning Resources or additional scholarly sources. (0-17 points) (20-21 points) (18-19 points) (22-24 points) Instructor comments: Total Score (120 possible points): 2016 Laureate Education, Inc. Page 1 of 1 points Week 2: Exploring the Capabilities of HIT Industry Solutions Introduction Technology solutions are often costly in both their initial capital outlay and their ongoing operational costs such as maintenance and upgrades. While they can be part of strategies that bring tremendous value to an organization by way of increases in revenue or decreases in expenses, their purchase and ongoing funding must be justified like any other investment. As leaders you may be part of collaborative executive teams who are responsible for the thoughtful acquisition of technology-based solutions. You will also be responsible for the ongoing financial support of these technologies in concert with operational strategies that have highly embedded technical components. This week you focus on the SWOT analysis of such investments and the analysis of your findings to form a knowledgeable recommendation. Learning Objectives Students will: Assess the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats of contracting with Health Information Technology vendors Evaluate the purchase of a vendor HIT solution in the form of a management recommendation Please proceed to the Resources. Week 2 Learning Resources This page contains the Learning Resources for this week. Be sure to scroll down the page to see all of this week's assigned Learning Resources. Required Resources Note: To access this week's required library resources, please click on the link to the Course Readings List, found in the Course Materials section of your Syllabus. Readings Wager, K. A., Lee, F. W., & Glaser, J. P. (2013). Health care information systems: A practical approach for health care management (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. o Chapter 7, \"Systems Acquisition\" (pp. 209-239) Chapter 13, \"IT Alignment and Strategic Planning\" (pp. 437-465) Chapter 14, \"Strategy Considerations\" (pp. 467-489) Devriendt, E., Wellens, N. I. H., Flamaing, J., Declercq, A., Moons, P., Boonen, S., & Milisen, K. (2013). The interRAI acute care instrument incorporated in an eHealth system for standardized and web-based geriatric assessment: Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats in the acute hospital setting. BMC Geriatrics, 13(1). Retrieved from the Walden Library databases. o Gartner. (2013). Magic quadrant for global enterprise EHR systems. Retrieved from https://www.gartner.com/doc/2586552/magic-quadrant-global-enterprise-ehr Handler, T.J. (2013, September 9). Magic Quadrant for Global Enterprise EHR Systems. Gartner blog network. Retrieved from https://www.gartner.com/doc/2586552/magic-quadrant-global-enterprise-ehr o KLAS Reports. (2015). Is ambulatory EMR usability improving? Retrieved from http://www.klasresearch.com/ KLAS Enterprises, LLC (2015). KLAS reports: Ambulatory EMR's Report, 2015. Retrieved from http://www.klasresearch.com/reports o Weng, W., & Lin, W. (2014). Development trends and strategy planning in big data industry.Contemporary Management Research, 10(3), 203-213. Retrieved from the Walden Library databases. o HealthIT.gov. (2015). Certified health IT product list (CHPL). Retrieved fromhttp://www.healthit.gov/policy-researchers-implementers/certified-health-it-product-list-chpl o Document: Independent Physician Office Scenario (PDF) Optional Resources Masrom, M., & Rahimli, A. (2015). Cloud computing adoption in the healthcare sector: A SWOT analysis. Asian Social Science, 11(10), 12-18. Parr and Associates. (2014). How to SWOT analysis [Video file]. Retrieved fromhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVwQNOIu808 Week 2 Assignment Choosing an HIT Vendor Solution It is very typical for leaders and their staffs to explore market capabilities when it comes to looking for viable and feasible partners who provide health technology solutions. When examining vendor products, be they software, hardware, or other technologies, it is important to examine not only the vendor sales literature but also objective industry analysis as well. This process is collaborative and has many dimensions that include looking at the technical, financial, and functional aspects of technology solutions. As a health care administrator you will collaborate with other leaders such as CIOs, operations managers, CFOs, and CMOs in the analysis of Health Information Technology (HIT) vendor software solutions. Keeping in mind both the tactical problems that your organization is facing and your organization's overall strategic direction, you will analyze vendors in the marketplace and the HIT products that they sell. For this two-part Assignment, analyze vendors who compete in the HIT software marketplace using the Independent Physician Office Ambulatory EMR Scenario in your Learning Resources. After assessing the capabilities and limitations of at least three possible vendor solutions, for Part 2, you will make a recommendation to your leadership team colleagues on which one or two vendors you would feel most comfortable progressing toward the next steps of system acquisition. Keep in mind that choosing two solutions allows the organization to have potential leverage in negotiations. If your recommendation is one vendor, how do you justify this recommendation? To prepare for this Assignment: Review the Independent Physician Office Scenario in your Learning Resources. Select three vendors after reviewing the HealthIT.gov list and the KLAS reports provided in the Learning Resources. The AssignmentPart 1: Compare and contrast the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) of three vendors offering an ambulatory Electronic Health Record to independent physician practices. Construct a table that summarizes your SWOT analysis with an accompanying reference page listing any external resources used in your analysis. Comparisons should include quantitative/evidence-based information as well as qualitative. Note: The following table is an example of what to construct for Part 1. Vendor: (Consider A B C Functional, Technical, Operational, and Strategic for each element of the SWOT) Strengths Weaknesses Opportunities Threats The AssignmentPart 2: Write a 2-page executive summary outlining the one or two IT vendors that you recommend engaging for further acquisition activities such as stakeholder demos and request for proposals. The executive summary should be addressed to the members of your fellow executive leadership team. Be sure to clearly outline the strategic, operational, technical (IT) requirements, and market reasons for your recommendation. If you are recommending one vendor, justify your strategy to handle the organizations' anticipated loss in negotiating leverage. Note: You should submit both parts as one document, with Part 1 being an appendix to your executive summary. Your Assignment should show effective application of triangulation of content and resources to show your conclusion and recommendations. See the Week 2 Assignment Rubric for additional requirements related to research and professional writing. This Assignment is due by Day 7