Comments on: Monday Morning Update 11/12/07

By: Art_Vandelay

Art_Vandelay — Mon, 12 Nov 2007 11:21:41 +0000

Will – absolutely correct, I was reading into this, as-if this were a surprise after the application was bought and in-use. Even with demonstration, dry-run, or paper simulations of use-cases with the vendor or other customers, it is difficult to truly grasp the depth of trade-offs until the application is in testing or more often live use. The most challenging trade-offs are usually around those items the users take for granted (i.e., behind the scenes functions, basic system operations) such as device footprint or capabilities, authentication, reporting on data and discrete value interfacing.

By: Will Weider

Will Weider — Sun, 11 Nov 2007 21:03:26 +0000

The vendor in question is VISICU. I suspect that concern came from one of my Ministry IT teammates. If not, there is more than one customer asking for this.

Art, it is always a matter of traeoffs. We have a very mature IT Assessment process, which includes looking at the required screen resolution. But, sometimes leadership is compelled by the potential benefits (in this case patient safety) and they decide to live with some workaround, in this case additional devices to support this unique application.

By: Art_Vandelay

Art_Vandelay — Sun, 11 Nov 2007 13:12:25 +0000

My take on the 1280 resolution – where were your hardware technologists who do the basic reviews of the vendor product? I’d hope the organization learns from this one and sets-up a checklist with the basics about what your organization can and does support (i.e., desktops, COWs, laptops, handhelds, Tablets, printers, labelers, all-in-one devices, servers, OS, database, middleware, other glue software programs like job schedulers, report writers).

Mr. HISTalk is right-on. The vendor has done their job. If this is a recurring issue, the smart vendors adapt and find a solution.

By: MumpsMan

MumpsMan — Sun, 11 Nov 2007 03:54:52 +0000

I’ve been put up in some of the seedier Madison hotels when I’ve gone to WI…so hearing about Epic folks having to tolerate sub-par lodging warms my heart. Not for any logical reason mind you, Epic had nothing to do with my crappy lodging, but whats good for the goose and all.

A good rule of thumb – If you’re going to be cheap, be cheap with the vendor first, and with your employees second.

By: HISReader

HISReader — Sun, 11 Nov 2007 02:52:40 +0000

RE: From Red: “Re: KUMED. Their project manager (must be a Cerner lover) is putting the EPIC kids up at a 40-something buck a night motel.

The place isn’t bad. If you’re a reasonable person spending your own money, you wouldn’t blink staying there Why assume that every consultant needs a JW Marriott room at KUMEDs expense.

Reasonable decision and a pretty decently run project all the way through. That’s the kind of decision making that keeps a customer healthy through a tough project.