CIS591: Business Process and Workflow Analysis Dr. Raghu Santanam

1. CIS591: Business Process and Workflow Analysis Dr. Raghu Santanam Department of Information Systems MEDSIS and Stakeholder Analysis

2. Session Learning Objectives • Illustrate need for stakeholder analysis • Importance of • Rolling out Process Innovations and Experimentation • Challenges of upsetting the equilibrium for stakeholders • Technology limitations in process redesign

3. Public Health Surveillance Source: AZ HIMSS - July 23, 2004 John Nelson Ken Komatsu

4. MEDSIS Objectives • Timely receipt of disease reports • Increase in disease reports • Less data entry of incoming reports • Better data quality • Simultaneous County/State access • Facilitates monitoring trends and analyses • Access to alternative surveillance data Source: AZ HIMSS - July 23, 2004 John Nelson Ken Komatsu

5. Challenges and Issues • Technology • System response: Speed, User Interface • Patient identification management • Integration with other systems • System • Functionality: single or multiple systems? • Access: role based access & missing information • Data ownership: analysis of historical trends

6. Challenges and Issues • Process and Policy • Objectives • ADHS – Count cases • Counties – Case management • Mandate vs. buy-in • Funding • Involvement • Implementation/Transition Plan • Rollout vs. migration • Workflow and process issues

7. Process Change • McAfee (2003) - “pitfalls are readily recognizable, consistent across implementations, and unambiguously counterproductive.” • These pitfalls can occur despite the best efforts of management. • Common pitfalls encountered in IT project implementation include • Resistance • Inertia • Misspecification • Misuse and Non-use.

8. Pitfalls (McAfee 2003) • Resistance: Lack of progress over time due to disagreement • Inertia: Lack of progress over time even after (supposed) agreement • Misspecification: Making incorrect decisions, creating a process/technology that “works” but is a misfit. • Misuse: Improper employment of a new technology/process. Post cut-over. • Nonuse: Lack of adoption post cut-over. When new process/technology is discretionary.

9. FACTORS PITFALLS STRATEGIES Interface between organizations Process Volume Complexity RESISTANCE Consensus building INERTIA Groups Span Core Autonomy MISSPECIFICATION Incremental Phasing Technology Tool NONUSE Pre-cutover Preparation MISUSE Post-cutover Preparation

10. Systems Development

11. Top Management Role • Technology Leadership Roles and Responsibilities • Need for • Shorter cycle times in roll out plans • Experimentation • Feasibility, competency and complexity analysis

12. Identifying stakeholders • Each process analysis scenario is different • Primary stakeholder should always be the customer • Internal processes should consider internal stakeholders across functional boundaries and organizational hierarchies • Top-down or bottom-up approach should be used to systematically identify and group stakeholders

13. Stakeholder identification • Identify and analyze interactions between stakeholders • Employ an iterative and evolutionary approach • Understand that stakeholder interests/views change over time • Not all wishes can be fulfilled

14. Lessons Learnt • Proposition 1 (Commitment) • Stakeholder commitment is enhanced when emergency preparedness systems and processes are designed by information intermediaries to complement everyday operations to enhance efficiency. • Proposition 2 (Trust & Coordination) • Interaction efficiencies among stakeholders are enhanced when the design and implementation of systems and processes adequately address the unique needs of independent stakeholders and create trust among them, facilitating coordination, collaboration and information exchange both before and during process execution.

15. Lessons Learnt • Proposition 3 (Information Sharing) • Information asymmetries and associated friction is minimized when IT systems are embedded in the operations of stakeholder organizations and extend organizational capabilities for information sharing and exchange among stakeholders • Proposition 4 (Incentive Alignment) • Cooperation and collaboration among stakeholders is enhanced when IT augmentation a priori addresses incentive alignment among the stakeholders

16. Lessons Learnt • Proposition 5 (Goal congruence) • Effectiveness of IT augmentation is enhanced by aligning with the goals of stakeholder organizations; and by positioning these systems at key decision points to ensure an on-going assessment of whether these systems and the organizational goals align