Week 4

By Moo Young Baek

I think this week's case study was not too far removed from the reality health care organizations go through with HIT implementation.  Organizations benchmark against each other to keep each other competitive and although patients may  not necessarily look at who did what first, organizations from staff to leaders believe it will help in their curb appeal.  I believe if a senior leader had pulled a stunt that cut the EMR implementation time in half that leader would no longer be around.   Adequate time would equip the organization to discover inadequacies  whether it is in the hardware or the training of the staff and relieve the pressure to deliver.  However, I think even if the timeline was cut in half any organization would still have to face the post-implementation challenges such as having to polish certain processes that were planned out, but did not go as smoothly in reality.  This in my opinion is the more challenging part because it requires changes to a system that is already "alive."  

The focus of our discussions were more on change management and not the technical aspects of a EMR system.  I think this is why this course makes sense as part of the MHA program.  Although HIT knowledge is essential in implementing an EMR system, it is not all that is required.  Much of the building and support goes into having staff translate their paper or non-electronic process and have it arranged to ensure a smooth workflow in the electronic reality.  I think if all staff were invested and believed beyond the surface values of implementing and relying on an EMR system, building and implementing would be easier.  However, we all know what heavy resistance exists in all organizations regardless of the affinity staff have towards electronic devices.  I hope regardless of everyone's interests, organizations and their staff recognize that this is not a trend and stay committed to creating an interactive and interoperable EMR system.