I need some assistance/help solving Case 14.1, question 3

Case 14.1 Epic Systems and Founder/CEO Judith Faulkner In 1979, in the basement of home in Madison, Wisconsin, Judy Faulkner and Dr. John Greist cofounded Human Services Computing, the company now known as Epic Systems. Faulkner, a gradwate student in computer science at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, and Greist, chief resident in internal medicine at the University of Wisconsin-Madison Hospital, met in 1969 when Greist needed a programmer to build a call schedule for the university hospital. Ten years later, Human Services Computing was inaugurated. Today, Epic Systems is an industry leader in electronic health records (EHR) systems, which enable health care systems to record, store, access, and transmit electronic patient medical records. Judy Faulkner is the company's CEO, and Epic's cloud-based systems ate used in hundreds of leading medical centers in the United States and beyond, including such systems as the Mayo Clinic, St. Luke's University Health Nerwork, University of Wisconsin Health Network, Northwestern Medicine, and Yale New Haven Health. Epie Systems has generated more than $3.0 billion in revenues in recent years and handles the medical records of more than 250 million patients annually. Amazingly, the company has not ever made an acquisition to facilitate growth, instead developing all of the software it uses in-house, and it has never raised private equity or venture capital from outside parties. Faulkner, who wrote all the code for the early patient databases, earned a master's degree in computer science at one of only two such graduate programs that existed at that time in the United States. As Faulkner explains, "When I was in graduate school, I took maybe what was the first-ever computers in medicine course offered in the world." Faulkner's father was a pharmacist, who provided her with early exposure to health care. She later married a pediatrician, and she learned firsthand from him about challenges physicians face when they require access to accurate patient medical records during emergency situations. Epic is sometimes described as the "Microsoft Office of health care software" because it offers comprehensive electronic solutions to a medical system's data needs. Although the individual component parts of the Epic system may not be deemed best-in-class by all users, Epic's comprehensive software system offers a kind of "one-stop shopping" health care solution. Epic software fearures include the management of appointments, billing, documents, insurance information and claims, lab results, patient history, prescriptions, teferrals, as well as many other functionalities. Epic also tailors each on-site software installation to each health care system's respective needs. As a creator and manager of technology designed to provide accurate medical records at a moment's notice, Epic Systems must monitor progress and take corrective action whenever it is needed in order to ensure a client's desired objectives are met. In this iense, controlling is central to Epic's success. In such an areas as medical services, accuracy is critical, because software ertors or fallures could literally have lethal consequences. Given the broad reach of Eplc's software, installacion and ioregration of this softwate with a healkt care system's existing software can be a lengthy process that can result in temporary disruptions and setbacks. For example, New York City-based Health and Hospicals Corporation (HHC) sigend a $302 million, 15 -year conaract with Epic Systems in 2013 that included software and dacabase licensen, professional services, testing and rechnical training, software maintenance, and database support and upgrades; 2017 was the taget date for implementation. HHC planned to implement the Eple software in 11 hospirals, four long-tetm care facilisies, six diagneatic treatment centets, and 70 communiry-based clinics, theteby affecting reconds for hundreds of thousands of patients served by this medical system. Unfortunacely, the implementation process weot awry, and coocdinulon fillures by the multiple imvolved parties produced very contly and lengthy delays. In early 2016, a chief medical Information officer in the NYC bealch care network reportedly resigned from his role, warning that an upcoming planned Epic EHR implementation could pocentially lead to patient harm and fasallites. The HHC implementation of Epic softwate brought sigaificant and unfortseen isues to light for eample, just the migration of patient data from the healkh care network's existing ryoem to the new Epic softwase sequired several months to complete. In contrast, a large health eare network in the sourheas: United States, Atrium Health, contracted with Epic Sysems in 2017 to integrate putent finascial isformation from lts existing sysems in otdet to eliminate system redundancies and improve patient access to bealth care costs and options. billing questions, and payment opetions. This implementation was beralded as a broad success thas, resalked not only in enormous improvements and efficiescies but also in new revenues for Atrium Health. Dicusuch Ditsmees 1. Conilder Epic Systems's ievallation problems with the NYC Health and Hospleal Corp. What type of control system might have been most critical in the eventual voccesuful softwart implementation? 2. Which step (x) in the control system proces might Epic Syvtems have implemented to tura the HHC performance around? 3. The concroli discussed in this case mifhr fill into which one of the three sontrol frequenciea? 4. In jesr opinions, what do you suppose are some key consideratioes that Eple Systems must in jesr opixios, what do you suppose are vome key consideratioes that Epic Systems must softwate in place? Please identify and briefly explain three considerations. Sositits hitpaillwewesgiccom/comenunity intereperabitity