— it is quite pertinent given that you used failure rates as evidence of professional incompetence. —

No, just as one piece of evidence that non-medically-trained-and-experienced people are largely not competent in medicine and dealing with the sociotechnical issues in complex medical environments. I don’t know why that’s a controversial statement, except perhaps when egos and emotions are involved.

I want to make the point that I find the resistance in IT circles towards leadership of clinical IT by qualified biomedical informatics professionals quite puzzling. It’s not as if the latter want to run the entire IT shop including business IT, just provide leadship in clinical IT.

It’s a true win-win situation, after all. CIO’s and other IT personnel get reduced job stress and perhaps longer tenures due to the expertise and presence of an intermediary (it’s been said that in healthcare, CIO=”career is over”, as average job tenure is just a few years). Biomedical informatics professionals get to leverage their expertise and the sacrifices they made in pursuing additional training. The healthcare system benefits from improved HIT and less costly HIT errors, difficulties and failures.

And last (but certainly not least), patients benefit.

“I think it’s obvious, since I don’t know you and cannot even identify you, that I meant “at many organizations.”

Appeal to a common belief.

I am wondering if you missed the point of the 100% failure rate comment…it is quite pertinent given that you used failure rates as evidence of professional incompetence.

— I was enjoying your response until this intellectual letdown: “Unlike your organization, where at meetings and in behind-closed-doors sessions such argumentation can be effective (been there, seen that)” —

I think it’s obvious, since I don’t know you and cannot even identify you, that I meant “at many organizations.”

— please acknowledge that medicine has a 100% failure rate at keeping people alive for their desired lifespan —

Non sequitur.

—The “wisdom” that pervades your posts is a sense of victimhood—

Argumentum ad hominem. Please review that topic here:

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html

“Unlike your organization, where at meetings and in behind-closed-doors sessions such argumentation can be effective (been there, seen that)”

I thought that you were quite beyond little jabs like this, but apparently I need to point out a flaw in your logic. Your assumption that you know anything about my organization (when you don’t know the nature of the organization or even its name) is a critical mistake.

The “wisdom” that pervades your posts is a sense of victimhood…that the high failure rates in IT (please acknowledge that medicine has a 100% failure rate at keeping people alive for their desired lifespan) are due to the mystical idea that physicians have been forced to depend on IT experts to assist them with IT issues.

We get it. You would like for clinical IT specialists to be escalated to positions of leadership. That sounds great and I hope that some day you get your wish.

Thanks for your thoughts.