Risk Perception during Information System Development in Non-Profit Health Care Organizations

Abstract

The perception of risk exposure among design team members during the early phases of information system development projects can provide valuable strategic information for clinical organizations. To develop a typology of perceived risks during information system development projects in health care, interviews were performed with key team members from a specialist clinic, primary health care, and an informatics research group, during the requirements specification. Phenomenological data analysis and secondary integration of the results in available theories were performed. System objectives, the user requirements definition procedure, the communication pattern between design team members and project management were found to be perceived as the main risk areas. In the secondary analysis, the technical factors, identified as preventing a maximization of the use of the resources, were lack of informatics knowledge among economic decision makers and differences between customers and suppliers regarding their views on the nature of system design. During the implementation of a given strategy, decision makers may consider the requests of their own sponsors in the first place and maximize the use ofthe project resources in the second place. Informatics knowledge plays a key role in risk perception during the development of an information system in health care. Political considerations by team members are important to take into regard, since these may influence technical and economic decisions.

Keywords

Risk Perception - Health-Care Organizations - Phenomenological Analysis - Informatics Knowledge - Political Considerations - Technical and Economic Factors

• REFERENCES

• 1 Orthner HF, Blum BI. Implementing health care information systems. New York: Springer; 1989
• 2 Boehm BW. Software risk management: principles and practices. IEEE Software 1991; 8: 32-41.
• 3 Waterstone M. The Social Genesis of Risks and Hazards. In: Risk and Society: The Interaction of Science, Technology and Public Policy. Amsterdam: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 1992: 1-12.
• 4 Fischhoff B, Slovic P, Lichtenstein S, Read S, Combs B. How Safe is Safe enough? A Psychometric Study of Attidudes towards Technological Risks and Benefits. Policy Sciences 1978; 8: 127-52.
• 5 Slovic P. Perception of Risk. Science 1987; 236: 280-5.
• 6 Slovic P, Fischhoff B, Lichtenstein S. The Psychometric Study of Risk Perception. In: Risk Evaluation and Management. New York: Plenum Press; 1986: 3-24.
• 7 Rowe WD. Risk Analysis: A Tool for Policy Decisions. In: Risk and Society: The interaction of Science, Technology and Public Policy. Amsterdam: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 1992: 17-31.
• 8 Baker C, Wuest J, Stern PN. Method slurring: The grounded theory/phenomenology example. J Adv Nurs 1992; 17: 1355-60.
• 9 Giorgi A. Sketch of a Psychological Phenomenological Method. Phenomenology and Psychological Research. Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press 1985; 8-22.
• 10 Curtis B, Krasner H, Iscoe N. A Field Study of the Software Design Process for Large Systems. CACM 1988; 11 (31) 1268-87.
• 11 Landauer TK. The Trouble with Computers. Usefulness, Usability and Productivity. Cambridge: MIT Press; 1995
• 12 Langefors B. Essays of Infology. Sweden: Studentlitteratur; 1995
• 13 Charette RN. Software Engineering Risk Analysis and Management. New York: Intertext Publications; 1989
• 14 Douglas M, Wildawsky A. Risk and Culture. Berkeley: University of California Press; 1982
• 15 Coldwell D. The Economics of Habits. Humboldt Journal of Social Relations. Spring/Summer 1981; 8 (2) 1-10.
• 16 Arrow KJ, Lind R. Uncertainty and the Evaluation of Public Investment. American Economic Review 1970; 60: 364-78.
• 17 Coldwell D. The Economics of Habits. Humboldt Journal of Social Relations. Spring/Summer 1981; 8 (2) 1-10.
• 18 Coase RH. The Problem of Social Cost. Journal of Law and Economics 1960; 3: 1-45.
• 19 Hirshleifer J. The Expanding Domain of Economics. American Economic Review 1985; 75 (6) 53-68.
• 20 Clegg SR. Frameworks of Power. London: Sage Publications; 1989
• 21 Hogbin G, Thomas DV. Investing In Information Technology. Managing the Decision-Making Process. London: McGraw-Hill Book Company; 1994
• 22 Cooter R, Ulen T. Law and Economics. Harper-Collins Publishers; 1988
• 23 Davenport TH. Process Innovation Reengineering Work through Information Technology. Boston: Harvard Business School Press; 1993
• 24 Curtis B, Kraesner H, Iscoe N. A Field Study Of The Software Design Process For Large Systems. CACM 1988; 11 (31) 1268-87.
• 25 McLendon J, Weinberg G. Beyond Blaming: Congruence in Large Systems Development Projects. IEEE Software 1996; 13 (4) 33-42.
• 26 Wildawsky A. No Risk Is the Highest Risk of All. American Scientist 1979; 67: 32-7.
• 27 Cooter R, Ulen T. Law and Economics. Harper-Collins Publishers; 1988
• 28 Simons HA. The Sciences of the Artificial. Cambridge: MIT Press; 1969
• 29 Arrow KJ. Uncertainty and the Welfare Economics of Medical Care. American Economic Review 1963; 53: 941-73.
• 30 Hirshleifer J. The Expanding Domain of Economics. American Economic Review 1985; 75 (6) 53-68.
• 31 Akerlof GA, Dickens WT. The Economic Consequences of Cognitive Dissonance. American Economic Review 1982; 72 (3) 307-19.