Systems Development

In todays business environment, a company would be considered lacking if it did not incorporate information systems into its daily tasks. Information systems can simplify business processes, shorten the amount of time to perform tasks, and lessen the workload on employees. After understanding that information systems can benefit a business, the most important question that must be answered is, what type of software would most benefit the needs of the company and how can it be acquired?

Software can be purchased either in its entirety or as a piece to be incorporated with an in-house design. Software that can be purchased is typically known as COTS or commercial off-the-shelf software (Post & Anderson, 2006, p. 447). If a business decides to build its own product, the company can choose to outsource the work or hire programmers whose expertise is consistent with the end product desired.

When writing and building an application, a business might choose to control the development of the IS by using the most commonly used tool known as SDLC (systems development life cycle). SDLC has five basic steps: feasibility and planning, systems analysis, systems design, implementation, and maintenance and review (Post & Anderson, 2006, p. 449). Other ways an organization can begin the development process includes prototyping, JAD or RAD, or open source development.

If an IS design is contracted out to specialists, wouldn’t it be feasible to “contract out” to a COP? Are there any known cases of this happening?

Post, G. V., & Anderson, D. L. (2006). Management Information Systems: Solving business problems with Information Technology. New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.

April 9 - Value of IT and COPs

We have learned that a COP blossoms within an organization in many ways, but one of the most important ways is by bringing value to the business. Once an organization realizes this value, the COP is supported through funding, management backing, and encouragement by the company for employees to become members. According to Wenger, McDermott, & Snyder (2002), “communities of practice create value by stewarding highly prized knowledge resources” (p. 166). But, how does an organization measure and manage the value of knowledge since it is a dynamic, intangible item? The answer is, you cannot measure knowledge specifically, “but you can measure and manage the “knowledge system” through which it flows and creates value” (Wenger, McDermott, & Snyder, 2002, p. 166). An organization wants to understand how an idea was created, how it was stewarded by the community, and then how it helped solve a client’s problem or how it influenced a client to do business with the organization. This information is then reviewed and used to determine how much value a COP is bringing to the organization. To find the steps in a knowledge system, the authors explain that stories would be a good place to start. “Stories are the best way to traverse the knowledge system in a way that explains the linkages between community activities, knowledge resources, and performance outcomes” (Wenger, McDermott, & Snyder, 2002, p. 168).

Authors Post and Anderson (2006) pose two very interesting questions, “how can you use information technology to improve your organization and make it better than your competitors” (p. 395) and “how can IT support the operations of the firm to provide a competitive advantage” (p. 408). The answers to these questions are nevertheless important, but even more importantly, the words information technology can be replaced with community of pratice. How can you use COPs to improve your organization and make it better than your competitors, and how can COPs support the operations of the firm to provide a competitive advantage? A COP is nothing more than a tool to be utilized an organization to expand and grow. If one determines the value of information technology in a firm, why wouldn’t the firm want to determine the value of COPs?

If a COP is not contributing an acceptable amount of value to an organization, would it be more beneficial for the business to dismiss the COP or try to find ways to bring it back to life?

Post, G. V., & Anderson, D. L. (2006). Management Information Systems: Solving business problems with Information Technology. New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.

Wenger, E., McDermott, R., & Snyder W. M. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice: A guide to managing knowledge. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

PCIS & Computer Security

Marc Berg explains that success cannot be statically defined for the implementation of patient care information systems; instead, he states that success “is a multi-dimensional concept, which can be defined rather differently by the different involved parties, and which evolves over time” (Berg, n.d., p. 5). Success is a dynamic aspect of the implementation and will only be reached at specific points and will only be proclaimed by specific groups of people. The author (Berg, n.d.) sheds light on three myths to provide designers with a few ideas to help build and implement a successful PCIS. Using the first myth, Berg (Berg, n.d., p. 16) describes implementation as a “process of mutual transformation” (p. 16). The organization is affected by the IS that is implemented, and the IS is also affected by the “organizational dynamics of which it becomes a part” (Berg, n.d., p. 16). While disproving myth two, the author (Berg, n.d.) states that when a project is designed with both management and end users’ input, the implementation is more likely to be successful (p. 8). Finally, Berg explained why myth three should not be followed in the design process. Sometimes, designers try to redesign business processes from scratch, but in the health care environment, this is not possible (Berg, n.d., p. 11). Due to an unpredictable environment and meshing standards, redesigning processes would be a daunting task, not to mention nearly impossible.

Not only is success one of the goals of implementing a PCIS, but so is security. Patient records and personal information is extremely confidential and must be protected as well as possible. “It is much easier to locate and copy data stored on computers” (Post & Anderson, 2006, p. 174) than it is to find hardcopies of specific files and copy them. For this reason, patient care information systems must be physically secured and access to the system must be restricted.

Since security is a topic not to be taken lightly when referring to data stored on a PCIS, who determines access restrictions to the systems. Server administrators require administrative rights to the systems, but how would they be cleared to access such a confidential system? What would be the determining factor to give them access?

Berg, M. (n.d.). Implementing information systems in health care organizations: Myths and Challenges. Rotterdam, Netherlands: Institute of Health Policy and Management.

Post, G. V., & Anderson, D. L. (2006). Management Information Systems: Solving business problems with Information Technology. New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.

Mar 19, Part 2 - Reweaving the world & Electronic Business

Communities of practice are important within an organization because they create value though knowledge sharing, increasing member confidence, and stimulating communication. But, communities of practice are not only effective inside organizations, but also outside of structured organizations or even across company boundaries. Wenger, McDermott, & Synder (2002) call this an extended knowledge system; communities build relationships “both within and beyond the boundaries of the firm” (Wenger & McDermott, 2002, p. 220). Communities can branch outside of an organization by reaching out to suppliers and customers. Creating a knowledge sharing network between suppliers can improve quality because suppliers can share lessons learned with one another (Wenger & McDermott, 2002, p. 221). The COP then creates value for the organization, its suppliers, and its customers. Communities reaching out to customers are important because the tie will provide the organization with direct access to consumers’ needs and desires. The organization can tailor products to fit the requests given by consumers in forums created by the community. Communities outside of the organization can also be created to build relationships between firms and also for the good of society.

In support of crossing boundaries, Post & Anderson (2006) explain that when advertisers pay to publish on a website, they expect to receive important demographic information about who was exposed to the advertisement (p. 289). This is often extremely hard for publishers to accomplish since customers are reluctant to take the time to fill out forms or are reluctant to give personal information to an impersonal information system. This gap between the customer and the advertisers’ requirements can be bridged by a community of practice. If an advertiser chose to promote its services on a community forum that enticed people to freely share information about themselves, lessons learned, solutions to common problems, then the advertiser would have all of the information that they need and more. The advertiser would have this information without forcing people to expose themselves in a way that makes them uncomfortable, but instead be willing to share the information.

Creating communities of practice that interact with customers in order to build relationships are proven to be effective, per our author, but wouldn’t it be more likely for this COP to turn into a social club rather than staying a business to customer relationship?

Post, G. V., & Anderson, D. L. (2006). Management Information Systems: Solving business problems with Information Technology. New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.

Wenger, E., McDermott, R., & Snyder W. M. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice: A guide to managing knowledge. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Mar 19, Part 1 - Information Integration

Data is quickly becoming a key asset in today’s business world; Internet-based transactions have given companies the ability to collect and store massive amounts of important information. But, along with these huge amounts of data, comes requirements of transmission, storage, and search and retrieval. If a business is not ready for the increase in data volume, they “find their systems breaking under the sheer volume and diversity of data being directed at them” (Roth, Wolfson, Kleewein, & Nelin, 2002, p. 563). Companies are now challenged with information integration to prevent the breakdown of their technology infrastructure. “Information integration is a technology approach that combines core elements from data management systems, content management systems, data warehouses, and other enterprise applications into a common platform” (Roth et al., 2002, p. 564). Roth et al. (2002) have described three requirements that are necessary for a “robust information integration platform” (p. 569). These include the necessity for businesses to support XML, the need for a single system to provide access to all data and services, and the requirement for open standards (Roth et al., 2002, pp. 569-570).

Post supports the idea of information integration by identifying that old systems were “built for individual departments and areas within the company” (Post & Anderson, 2006, p. 237) and did not communicate with each another. The only way that managers would have access to information from different areas of the company would be printouts given to them, which may be outdated by the time it reached their hands. The solution is integration and tools are being built and updated to “integrate all of the data in the company, including ties to suppliers and customers” (Post & Anderson, 2006, p. 238).

Information integration seems to be a solution for companies with a large number of departments and outside entities; would information integration be worth the time and effort for a small or medium sized business to implement?

Post, G. V., & Anderson, D. L. (2006). Management Information Systems: Solving business problems with Information Technology. New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.

Roth, M. A., Wolfson, D. C., Kleewein, J. C., & Nelin, C. J. (2002). Information integration: A new generation of information technology. IBM Systems Journal, 41(4), 563-577.

IT in Health Care

Patient care information systems (PCISs) can be extremely beneficial in a health care system. Some of the pros of PCISs include patient records becoming electronic, “eliminating illegible orders, improving communication, improving the tracking of orders, and reminding professionals of actions to be undertaken” (Ash, Berg, & Coiera, 2004, p. 104). On the other hand, PCISs can cause unintended errors and problems in a health care system that may affect workflow and patient care. The authors (Ash et al., 2004) identify two main categories of problems with the user interface of the PCIS: entering and retrieving information and communication and coordination (p. 106). While entering information, errors may occur due to choices being too close to one another on the screen; doctors may get distracted in conversation with a patient and mistakenly select the wrong choice. Even worse than choosing the incorrect response, an order may be placed for the wrong person. User interfaces may also require the user to enter information in a structured format which is much different than the normal “free text” format and the information then loses the “personal touch” of the user (Ash et al., 2004, p. 106).

Problems with communication and coordination include loss of communication and inflexibility and inability to detect urgency. “Physicians may assume that ‘entry’ into the computer system replaces their previous means of initiating and communicating their plans, and that orders will be carried out without further action on their part” (Ash et al., 2004, p. 109). The result is a loss in direct communication between doctors, nurses, and lab technicians and an increased reliance on the PCIS. The inflexibility of the system can be seen when an order is placed that makes sense on paper, but the information system tries to be “smart” and make a correction to the order. In a health care environment, a system must be dynamic and open to manual overrides. Urgency is also an important part of the health care atmosphere; a nurse may give medication to a patient without the doctor’s orders because it is necessary at that moment. The nurse then tries to enter the information, but the information system will not accept the entry because a doctor did not previously order it.

As problems can occur in the exchange of information between personnel in a health care system, they can also occur in transactions. “A transaction consists of an exchange of a product or service for money. Consequently, there is always a risk that something might go wrong in the exchange” (Post & Anderson, 2006, p. 209). Risks for the vendor include not receiving a payment, a fraudulent payment, or the government might invalidate the transaction (Post & Anderson, 2006, p. 209). The customer must be concerned about being charged the proper amount, receiving the product they purchased and whether the transaction is legal (Post & Anderson, 2006, p. 210).

In my mind, one solution to create an efficient and effective PCIS would be to create a nationwide (or even worldwide) standard. This way, each health care entity could contribute to the design by giving comments and using the software in trial runs. Health care organizations would be working together to design a final product that allows everyone to perform their jobs using PCIS with the least amount of negative impact. Is this single application solution too ambitious?

Ash, J. S., Berg, M., & Coiera, E. (Mar/Apr 2004). Some unintended consequences of information technology in health care: The nature of patient care information system-related errors. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 11(2), 104-112.

Post, G. V., & Anderson, D. L. (2006). Management Information Systems: Solving business problems with Information Technology. New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.

Knowledge Management Systems and Teamwork

This article explains why knowledge management systems (KMS) are important for knowledge management. Before describing the ways in which Information Technology impacts knowledge management, the authors (Alavi, M. & Leidner, D. E., 2001) list the various perspectives of knowledge: a state of mind, an object, a process, a condition of having access to information, and a capability (p. 109). Details are given about how each perspective revolves around a knowledge management system. Knowledge as a state of mind would require IT “to provide access to sources of knowledge rather than knowledge itself” (Alavi, M. & Leidner, D. E., 2001, p. 111). In this case, an individual could read company manuals in electronic form or employee handbooks to gain knowledge to meet organizational needs. Gathering, storing, and transferring knowledge is the key to IT when knowledge is viewed as an object “to be stored and manipulated” (Alavi, M. & Leidner, D. E., 2001, p. 111). This would involve knowledge that was previously acquired to be entered into a system for storage and retrieval. Providing a way for knowledge to easily flow between individuals is required by IT when viewing knowledge as a process (Alavi, M. & Leidner, D. E., 2001, p. 111). In this case, discussion forums, knowledge bases, websites, and email would be an efficient solution. Access to information is the fourth view of knowledge and requires IT to “provide effective search and retrieval mechanisms for locating relevant information” (Alavi, M. & Leidner, D. E., 2001, p. 111). Database queries would be the most effective way for search and retrieval. The idea of knowledge being a capability can be best described as having the capacity to use information (Alavi, M. & Leidner, D. E., 2001, p. 110). Pertaining to capability, the “role of IT is to enhance intellectual capital by supporting development of individual and organizational competencies” (Alavi, M. & Leidner, D. E., 2001, p. 111).

Similarly to Information Technology being an integral part of knowledge management, it also plays a key role in helping teams of workers communicate. There are many IT tools to aid communication, and some of them are e-Mail, instant messaging, web pages and blogs, electronic calendars, project management tools, video conferencing, and mobile devices (Post, G. V. & Anderson, D. L., 2006, pp. 319-321). These tools are not necessary for a team to use, but if the team chooses to take advantage of these available features, it will find communication between members much easier and more common.

Since knowledge is a powerful tool for an employee to have, how can an employee be convinced of the importance to share his knowledge with other team members and not simply keep it to himself?

Alavi, M., & Leidner, D. E. (2001, March). Knowledge management and knowledge management systems: Conceptual foundations and research issues. MIS Quarterly, 25(1), 107-136.

Post, G. V., & Anderson, D. L. (2006). Management Information Systems: Solving business problems with Information Technology. New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.

Ch. 4 & 5 and Database Mgmt

The authors (Wenger, McDermott, & Snyder, 2002) explain that there are “five stages of community development: potential, coalescing, maturing, stewardship, and transformation” (p. 68). Each stage has unique issues to address, some straightforward and some are time and labor intensive. When a community is in the first stage, the potential stage, it is necessary to “find enough common ground among members for them to feel connected and see the value of sharing insights, stories, and techniques” (Wenger et al., 2002, p.71). It is important for the organization to recognize the community of practice, so in this stage, members need to build a case to defend the value of the community (Wenger et al., 2002, p.77). The second stage, coalescing, should involve many events in which members would be enticed to “build relationships, trust, and an awareness of their common interests and needs” (Wenger et al., 2002, p.82). Activities could include monthly meetings, attending professional conferences, or participation in online forums. Maturing, which is the third stage of community development, involves “clarifying the community’s focus, role, and boundaries” (Wenger et al., 2002, p.97). In the beginning stages of life, a community is more focused on showing the organization and members that there is great value in the community, but now the community must focus on building a solid infrastructure for itself. In the next stage, stewardship, a community must figure out “how to sustain its momentum through the natural shifts in its practice, members, technology, and relationship to the organization” (Wenger et al., 2002, p.104). The transformation stage can be recognized if a community is losing members and energy, when its members are meeting socially instead of meeting to exchange information about the community’s issues, or when a community begins to dissolve and separate into other groups (Wenger et al., 2002, p.109).

One of the ways that a community can create value for itself is to create a list of issues and the solutions that have been agreed upon my members. If a new member has the exact same question, he will simply go to the created list for his answer. This list would most easily be maintained in a database. An input form would be created for users to enter data and members can then use SQL to retrieve information. Database systems have tools that make it “relatively easy to create input forms and reports” (Post & Anderson, 2006, p. 142). If members are not familiar with SQL, it may be easier to create a query form; using this method, a member would enter search parameters into the form and the results would be presented in a formatted, readable report.

If a community is on the verge of extinction, would it be feasible for a brand new member to step in and take control? I was recently on a community group forum that seems to be fading fast, and I was wondering if I could pose questions to the group to see if there would be any interest in continuing communication.

Post, G. V., & Anderson, D. L. (2006). Management Information Systems: Solving business problems with Information Technology. New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.

Wenger, E., McDermott, R., & Snyder W. M. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice: A guide to managing knowledge. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Technology for Communities

In the report Technology for communities, the authors introduce a person who takes the role of maintaining, supporting, and introducing technology to a community; the authors refer to this person or group as the technology steward (Wenger, White, Smith, & Rowe, 2005, p. 3). If a community is small, there may be only one or two people necessary to support the community’s technology, but if the community is larger in size, it may need a small group of people to maintain the technology. A technology steward has three major items to address: identify and understand new technologies that the market introduces, select community relevant technologies for use in the community’s everyday activities, and finally, monitor the ways a community does or does not utilize the tools and also monitor the uses that members discover for the chosen technologies that were not previously introduced to them (Wenger et al., 2005, p. 3).

There are millions of technologies to choose from, but almost every single one of them involves a network. The technology steward must make sure that all members have access to a network that is sufficient for the technology he wants to incorporate. For example, a web-based meeting may work great for someone in the United States who has access to high bandwidth links, but for someone in a second world country, they may not be as fortunate to have access to high speed Internet and the meeting would be worthless. Since the bandwidth is low, the member on the other side of the world would have to wait for an extremely long time for voice and video to update and appear. This would take the effectiveness out of the meeting. Other items that are built around a network are web sites, newsgroups, chat rooms, e-mail, calendars and scheduling, and centralized storage; these are all important features necessary for a healthy distributed community (Wenger, McDermott, & Snyder, 2002, pp. 76-80).

To keep a distributed community healthy, there is a great dependence on technology and equipment. Would the technology steward support, update, and maintain the technology or would the community rely on the organization's infrastructure? For example, would it be more practical for the community to have its own database vice sharing one with the organization?

Wenger, E., McDermott, R, & Snyder W. M. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice: A guide to managing knowledge. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Wenger, E., White, N., Smith, J. D., & Rowe, K. (2005). Technology for communities.

Communities of Practice: Chapters 1, 2, & 3

After reading the first few chapters of Cultivating Communities of Practice, I understand the definition of, the importance of, and the impact of communities of practice. "Communities of practice are groups of people who share a concern, a set of problems, or a passion about a topic, and who deepen their knowledge and expertise in this area by interacting on an ongoing basis" (Wenger, McDermott, & Snyder, 2002, p.4). Communities of practice have both short-term and long-term value; members receive help on current projects and also build expertise and knowledge to meet future organizational goals (Wenger et al., 2002, p. 15). Creating knowledge bases or standards manuals is a tangible value of a community of practice, meanwhile building relationships and a sense of trust among members is an intangible value of a community of practice (Wenger et al., 2002, p. 15). Having an active and growing community of practice associated with a company can greatly help the company; the community of practice will encourage employees to think outside the box, it will encourage them to seek one another for professional help, and it will infuse energy into the organization by encouraging employees to think of and share new ideas. While introducing key components of Information Technology, Post and Anderson (2006, p.40) explained that "Information Technology changes constantly." Companies must find a solution for coping with changing technology and the answer is communities of practice. They are constantly looking forward to new products and technologies and deciding how to effectively incorporate them into the organization.

Post, G. V., & Anderson, D. L. (2006). Management Information Systems: Solving business problems with Information Technology. New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.

Wenger, E., McDermott, R, & Snyder W. M. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice: A guide to managing knowledge. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Personality types can vary among employees and the same goes for members of a community of practice; is it common to administer personality tests to members of a community of practice in order to give members an understanding of one another and how to work together?