Currently, many organizations have adopted technology as a means of improving efficiency and service execution. In so doing, they have adopted information technology system software which is meant to do the same. The procedure involves having urgency by updating the hospital’s physicians with technological developments. A taskforce is appointed by the organization to be at the forefront of the system. This includes the administration, medical staff, non medical staff, technical staff and physicians.
Experienced and competent personnel promote the use of their intellectual capacity in designing and implementing the technology parts. Then develop a strategy to implement the technology and communicate correctly to the stake holders. It calls for acquiring resources and pilot-testing the technology by giving it to staff to use (Stevens & McGowan, 1985).
It is also important to seek approval by medical staff so that coordination and implementation becomes efficient. Then one can now educate their physicians and develop a continuous process for improvement of technology with set timeline (Sathe, 1983).
The organization through the procurement has the role of purchasing the system to be installed. This involves advice from the organization’s Information Technology experts. Therefore, it is necessary for the organization to be orderly by clearly highlighting the extent and expectations of the technology, develop and institute the project’s blue print. These helps in reducing delays and costs incurred as well as preventing sabotage of the system.
Many organizations, however, fail to make full use and benefit of such a technology system let alone successful implementation. Failure by management to train the end users, who are physicians, leads to failure. Having a poor rapport between the top administration and those who work on implementation bars the efficient deployment and execution.
This is clearly manifested by poor communication which when well used would otherwise lead to successful coordination of the various activities during implementation process. Good oral and written communication skills help in coordination and regular updates about the progress. Another failure is letting go the organization’s employees at critical stage of implementation.
Much as it may inevitably occur, it limits the capacity of the organization leading to unsuccessful deployment of technology system. Organizations also fail because they do not completely convince their staff on the same. Implementation is always low when there is little motivation and acceptance by users (Stevens & McGowan, 1985).
Another failure occurs when there is change in staff in organization’s staff who is championing the process. When such a case is not well handled, the effects are adverse. However, being ready for that ensures that corrective measures are put in place. Organizations also fail to provide continuous training to the implementers and users and to make it worse, there are other organizations that play down and underestimate the acceptability by the users (Stevens & McGowan, 1985).
Sathe (1983) observes that failures are inevitable when care is given a blind eye. Such failures manifest themselves in ways including disruption of the process when some members of taskforce implementing the project quits. Organization can avoid this by anticipating shakeout time in such a scenario by putting mechanisms that help to minimize the extent of disruption.
This can be done by putting in place transition team. Another indicator of failure is inability to accept an eventuality. This is shown when a junior reports progress to a senior and the latter does not welcome them especially when there is a hitch. This case can be avoided by being open to any eventuality in the course of deployment. Thirdly, the inertia in the organization in the case where the technology renders employees less instrumental is an indication of failure.
However, clear highlighting of roles and job design can make them feel satisfied. When the support from leadership is minimal, there is slow execution of the program and this is shown by the long timeline in implementation. Lastly, assumption of competence when designing and delegating job is another important aspect. When the top manager assumes the Information Technologist is competent, it leads to poor program rollout and long timelines.
References
Sathe, V. (1983). “Implications of Corporate Culture: A Manager’s Guide to Action.” Organizational Dynamics, Autum, pp. 5-23.
Stevens, J. M. & McGowan, R. P. (1985). Information Systems and Public Management . New York, NY: Praeger Special Studies.