IT Strategic Planning - Methodology and Approach

4,461 views
4,006 views

Published on

Published in: Health & Medicine

IT Strategic Planning - Methodology and Approach

  1. 1. IT Strategic Planning Methodology and Approach David Shiple Senior ConsultantJune 2, 2012 1 © 2011 DIVURGENT. All rights reserved.
  2. 2. IT Strategic Planning• An IT Strategic Plan (ITSP) generally covers a 3 – 5 year planning horizon and ensures senior leadership is on the same page regarding – What IT investments are going to made, when, and why – What the value of IT is to the organization – How IT investment decisions are made in the organization• IT is generally the largest capital spend in an health system after new construction – management should participate and drive the IT investment decision-making process• The “sweet spot” of an ITSP is the alignment between the business strategy and the IT strategy• The key construct of the ITSP is the gap analysis – What it will take from the current state to the future state• Since the arrival of the Meaningful Use, ITSP’s have not been a focal point for many health systems, however, this is changing as key stakeholders ask, “now what? – where is this frenzy of IT implementation activity going?” 2 © 2011 DIVURGENT. All rights reserved.
  3. 3. IT Strategic Planning Level-Setting Future State/ Gap Analysis Strategic Plan Charter Governance Consensus Workshops Education Workshops Opportunity Interviews Clinical Transformation ValidationBenchmarking Physician Alignment Benefits/ Prioritization External Meaningful Use Implementation Drivers PlanningCurrent State Infrastructure Strategic IT Enablement 3 © 2011 DIVURGENT. All rights reserved.
  4. 4. Methodology Overview• Charter. An opportunity for DIVURGENT and the project sponsor(s) to refine the project scope and critical success factors and memorialize in a written project charter. – What is the definition of success for the project? – Who should be interviewed? – What is the optimal workshop schedule and format? – Where should DIVURGENT put their primary focus?• Interviews. Structured, probing interviews conducted with a broad cross- section of Health System constituents. – Interview guides are prepared in advance and distributed – Interviews are confidential with resulting “take-aways” aggregated with other interview responses – A generous number of interviews brings more people into the process and produces more buy-in of the resulting plan 4 © 2011 DIVURGENT. All rights reserved.
  5. 5. Methodology Overview• Benchmarking. Brings empirical evidence into the planning process, measuring Health System relative to their peers. Compared to their peers: – How much progress on MU has Health System made? – How much does Health System spend on IT? – How large is the I.S. department?• External Drivers. Industry trends, government regulations, and other forces driving Health System’s decision making process are fully explored, e.g. – Does Health System intend to pursue full meaningful use stimulus funding for both their hospital and eligible providers? – Is Health System positioned to convert to ICD-10 on time? – Is Health System beginning to put in place the building blocks in preparation for value-based purchasing? 5 © 2011 DIVURGENT. All rights reserved.
  6. 6. Methodology Overview• Current State. The “as-is” environment is documented to ensure a common understanding of the current state and as input into the gap analysis – Is there consensus among Health System leadership on the health system’s current capabilities, issues, strengths, weaknesses, etc.? – Did DIVURGENT miss any salient points on the current state assessment that need to be added?• Educational Workshop(s). Educational sessions to ensure that decision- makers have enough background information to participate fully in planning process – Does Health System leadership understand MU and its implications and can they communicate these concepts to others? – Do the owners of MU objectives clearly understand what they are “owning”? 6 © 2011 DIVURGENT. All rights reserved.
  7. 7. Methodology Overview• Future State & Gap Analysis. Where does Health System want to be in 3- 5 years? What is required to achieve this desired state? – IT Governance. What type of IT Governance structure would optimally serve Health System? Where can existing committee structures be leveraged? How will expediency, accountability, and sound decision-making be instilled into the IT Governance model? How will physicians be given a prominent role in IT Governance? – Clinical Transformation. How will clinical processes be optimized and fully exploit the potential of Meditech’s advanced clinical systems? How will the clinical community be brought into the transformation process? How will change management and user adoption be managed? – Physician Alignment. Does the health system and the physicians have a common vision for the use of IT at Health System? Have physicians been fully engaged on IT, workflow, and business model decisions? Do physicians fully understand the quality and safety imperative and the role of CPOE and MU? – Meaningful Use. Is the vendor’s MU roadmap clear and unambiguous with commitments to milestone dates? Are the Health System owners of the objectives positioned for success? Have all necessary modules been purchased, including needed 3rd party modules? 7 © 2011 DIVURGENT. All rights reserved.
  8. 8. Methodology Overview – Infrastructure. Has the network, servers, service desk, training capabilities, and other infrastructure components been “right-sized” to accommodate the increasing I.S. customer demands (e.g. physician users)? Will Health System pass a privacy/ security audit?• Consensus Workshops. Facilitated, focused working sessions with senior leadership to review draft recommendations and make key directional decisions. – 8-10 senior leaders participate in a 3-hour workshop – Various models for achieving consensus are presented; the model with the closest cultural fit will be selected – Draft recommendations are presented and vetted by the group – Key decision points – with pro’s and con’s of each alternative path – are presented for decision-making and consensus – A strawman matrix of opportunities and benefits is presented and vetted 8 © 2011 DIVURGENT. All rights reserved.
  9. 9. Methodology OverviewA strawman matrix of opportunities and benefits is presented,deliberated, and adjusted Health Clinical Physician Information Integration Alignment Exchange MU Ownership Achieving MU Benefits/ ROI Medication BCMA Reconciliation Growth Stark Waivers Charts for inpatients ICD-10 Lower Costs / Risks 9 © 2011 DIVURGENT. All rights reserved.
  10. 10. Methodology Overview• Opportunity Validation. Following the executive workshop where a strawman model of opportunities is vetted, the selected opportunities are further researched and defined: – Opportunity description – General business case of the opportunity – Key stakeholders involved – Cultural change required – Possible impediments to realizing the opportunity• Opportunity Benefits/ Prioritization. The benefits and dollar ROI (if applicable) are clearly articulated for each opportunity; the opportunities are then prioritized – Sample benefits can include quicker IT implementations, higher IT adoption, increased safety/ quality, etc. – ROI is measured in both soft dollars (e.g. time savings), and hard dollars (e.g. actual budgets are reduced as a result of implementation) – Based on the positioning of opportunities on a cost vs. benefit matrix, opportunities are prioritized 10 © 2011 DIVURGENT. All rights reserved.
  11. 11. Methodology Overview• Implementation Planning. Opportunities and regulatory-driven initiatives (e.g. MU) are packaged into projects and placed on a master timeline. – Projects are broken into high-level tasks and key milestones – Projects are placed on a master Gantt chart, showing all dependencies – Vetting of Gantt chart ensures that projects are done in a logical sequence and in a manner that does not overwhelm the Health System organization – Resource needs are broken down by skillset, month, project – summing resource requirements across all projects provides total FTE requirements – In addition to the projects, detailed tasks, and timeline, additional information is embedded into the plan, for example: • Meaningful Use best practices • Project governance structure • Critical success factors • Change management strategy • Communication strategy 11 © 2011 DIVURGENT. All rights reserved.
  12. 12. Project Deliverables• Assessment findings for each functional area – Management and Operations – Finance – Physician Alignment – Information Systems• Identification of those specific areas providing opportunities for Health System to achieve the above listed goals in a well-planned, prioritized manner over the next several years• Identification of any impediments observed during the engagement to achieve identified opportunities• A first draft of a Total Cost of Ownership model which will be handed off to Health System for refinement post project completion• Roadmap for attaining Stage 1 MU compliance 12 © 2011 DIVURGENT. All rights reserved.
  13. 13. Sample Timeline 13 © 2011 DIVURGENT. All rights reserved.
  14. 14. Contact InformationDavid. Shiple@DIVURGENT.com617.947.1925DIVURGENT4445 Corporation Lane, Suite 228Virginia Beach, VA 23462877.254.9794 14 © 2011 DIVURGENT. All rights reserved.

×