Risk Factors Relationships for Information Systems Projects – Insight from Polish Public Organizations

Author(s):  
Ewa Ziemba ◽  
Iwona Kolasa
2008 ◽  
Vol 47 (03) ◽  
pp. 251-259 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Sicotte ◽  
M. Jaana ◽  
D. Girouard ◽  
G. Paré

Summary Objective: The aim of this study is to gain a better understanding of the risk factors influencing the success of clinical information system projects. Methods: This study addresses this issue by first reviewing the extant literature on information technology project risks, and second conducting a Delphi survey among 21 experts highly involved in clinical information system projects in Québec, Canada, a region where government have invested heavily in health information technologies in recent years. Results: Twenty-three risk factors were identified. The absence of a project champion was the factor that experts felt most deserves their attention. Lack of commitment from upper management was ranked second. Our panel of experts also confirmed the importance of a variable that has been extensively studied in information systems, namely, perceived usefulness that ranked third. Respondents ranked project ambiguity fourth. The fifth-ranked risk was associated with poor alignment between the clinical information systems’ characteristics and the organization of clinical work. The large majority of risk factors associated with the technology itself were considered less important. This finding supports the idea that technology-associated factors rarely figure among the main reasons for a project failure. Conclusions: In addition to providing a comprehensive list of risk factors and their relative importance, the study presents a major contribution by unifying the literature on information systems and medical infor - matics. Our checklist provides a basis for further research that may help practitioners identify the effective countermeasures for mitigating risks associated with the implementation of clinical information systems.


Author(s):  
Bruce Rocheleau

Information systems have become an important concern of generalist managers ingovernmental organizations and public managers need to learn how to manage IT. Forgeneralist and IT managers, the current situation creates both difficulties and possibili-ties. It is the best of times because IT has become recognized as the major vehicle forachieving innovation in public organizations. At the same time, the number and speedof new technologies in the IT area can make it difficult for even the most highly-skilledIT professional staff to keep up with innovations in the field. What is a generalist managerto do who needs to attempt to not only comprehend, but manage these IT innovations?The situation facing these administrators (and IT staff themselves) is the sense of beingon a “moving staircase” (Farbey, Land & Targett, 1999). The problem is that thesemanagers must find a method for making rational choices in a field that changes soquickly.


Author(s):  
P. Partow-Navid

Today, information security is one of the highest priorities on the IT agenda. In 2003, Luftman and McLean (2004) conducted a survey of Society for Information Management members to identify the top 20 information technology (IT) issues for executives. Security and privacy issues were ranked third, after IT/ business alignment and IT strategic planning. Concept of information security applies to all the data stored in information systems or being communicated in information networks and encompasses measures applied on all layers of open system interconnect (OSI) model of international standards such as application, networking, and physical. Sophisticated technologies and methods have been developed to: • Control access to computer networks • Secure information systems with advanced cryptography and security models • Establish standards for operating systems with focus on confidentiality • Communication integrity and availability for securing different types of networks • Manage trustworthy networks and support business continuity planning, disaster recovery, and auditing The most widely recognized standards are: • In the United States: Trusted Computer System Evaluation Criteria (TCSEC). • In Canada: Canadian Trusted Computer Product Evaluation Criteria (CTCPEC). • In Europe: Information Technology Security Evaluation Criteria (ITSEC). All of theses standards have recently been aggregated into Common Criteria standards. And yet, the information systems continue to be penetrated internally and externally at a high rate by malicious code, attacks leading to loss of processing capability (like distributed denial-of-service attack), impersonation and session hijacking (like man-in-the-middle attack), sniffing, illegal data mining, spying, and others. The problem points to three areas: technology, law, and IT administration. Even prior to the drama of 9/11, several computer laws were enacted in the USA and yet more may come in the future. Still the fundamental threats to information security, whether they originated outside the network or by the company’s insiders, are based on fundamental vulnerabilities inherent to the most common communication protocols, operating systems, hardware, application systems, and operational procedures. Among all technologies, the Internet, which originally was created for communication where trust was not a characteristic, presents the greatest source of vulnerabilities for public information systems infrastructures. Here, a threat is a probable activity, which, if realized, can cause damage to a system or create a loss of confidentiality, integrity, or availability of data. Consequently, vulnerability is a weakness in a system that can be exploited by a threat. Although, some of these attacks may ultimately lead to an organization’s financial disaster, an all-out defense against these threats may not be economically feasible. The defense actions must be focused and measured to correspond to risk assessment analysis provided by the business and IT management. That puts IT management at the helm of the information security strategy in public organizations.


2008 ◽  
pp. 2745-2754
Author(s):  
Parviz Partow-Navid ◽  
Ludwig Slusky

Today, information security is one of the highest priorities on the IT agenda. In 2003, Luftman and McLean (2004) conducted a survey of Society for Information Management members to identify the top 20 information technology (IT) issues for executives. Security and privacy issues were ranked third, after IT/ business alignment and IT strategic planning. Concept of information security applies to all the data stored in information systems or being communicated in information networks and encompasses measures applied on all layers of open system interconnect (OSI) model of international standards such as application, networking, and physical. Sophisticated technologies and methods have been developed to: • Control access to computer networks • Secure information systems with advanced cryptography and security models • Establish standards for operating systems with focus on confidentiality • Communication integrity and availability for securing different types of networks • Manage trustworthy networks and support business continuity planning, disaster recovery, and auditing The most widely recognized standards are: • In the United States: Trusted Computer System Evaluation Criteria (TCSEC). • In Canada: Canadian Trusted Computer Product Evaluation Criteria (CTCPEC). • In Europe: Information Technology Security Evaluation Criteria (ITSEC). All of theses standards have recently been aggregated into Common Criteria standards. And yet, the information systems continue to be penetrated internally and externally at a high rate by malicious code, attacks leading to loss of processing capability (like distributed denial-of-service attack), impersonation and session hijacking (like man-in-the-middle attack), sniffing, illegal data mining, spying, and others. The problem points to three areas: technology, law, and IT administration. Even prior to the drama of 9/11, several computer laws were enacted in the USA and yet more may come in the future. Still the fundamental threats to information security, whether they originated outside the network or by the company’s insiders, are based on fundamental vulnerabilities inherent to the most common communication protocols, operating systems, hardware, application systems, and operational procedures. Among all technologies, the Internet, which originally was created for communication where trust was not a characteristic, presents the greatest source of vulnerabilities for public information systems infrastructures. Here, a threat is a probable activity, which, if realized, can cause damage to a system or create a loss of confidentiality, integrity, or availability of data. Consequently, vulnerability is a weakness in a system that can be exploited by a threat. Although, some of these attacks may ultimately lead to an organization’s financial disaster, an all-out defense against these threats may not be economically feasible. The defense actions must be focused and measured to correspond to risk assessment analysis provided by the business and IT management. That puts IT management at the helm of the information security strategy in public organizations.


2011 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 59-77 ◽  
Author(s):  
Euripidis Loukis ◽  
Yannis Charalabidis

This paper presents an empirical study of the risk factors of large governmental information systems (IS) projects. For this purpose the Official Decisions of the Greek Government Information Technology Projects Advisory Committee (ITPAC) concerning 80 large IS projects have been analyzed and interviews with its members have been conducted. From this analysis 21 risk factors have been identified, and further elaborated and associated with inherent particular characteristics of the public sector, extending existing approaches in the literature. A categorization of them with respect to origin revealed that they are associated with the management, the processes, and the content of these projects. Results show that behind the identified risk factors there are political factors, which are associated with intra-organizational and inter-organizational politics and competition, and can be regarded as ‘second level’ risk sources. The risk factors identified in this study are compared with the ones found by similar studies conducted in Hong Kong, Finland, and the United States, and also with the ones mentioned by OECD reports. Similarities and differences are discussed.


10.28945/2185 ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 047-062 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ewa Ziemba ◽  
Iwona Oblak

It can be argued that public organizations, in order to provide the public with sufficient services in the current, highly competitive and continuously evolving environment, require changes. The changes that become necessary are often related to the implementation of information systems (IS). Moreover, when organizations are faced with changes, a change management (CM) process needs to be put in place. CM theories that are currently available to practitioners and academics are often contradictory; they mostly lack empirical evidence and are supported by unchallenged hypotheses concerning the nature of the contemporary CM. The aim of this paper is, therefore, to identify critical success factors (CFSs) for CM in IS projects. In order to reach this aim an explanation of changes in public organizations and the nature of CM are presented. Following this, a framework of CFSs for CM in IS projects are identified based on the literature review. The paper also examines two IS projects and uses them to demonstrate CFSs influencing CM in IS projects in Polish pubic organizations. A discussion of the research findings is provided and the paper concludes with a presentation of the study’s contributions and limitations as well as the stream of future work.


2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S199-S199
Author(s):  
Julia Marshall ◽  
Vance G Fowler ◽  
Felicia Ruffin ◽  
Paul Lantos ◽  
Christopher Timmins

Abstract Background Risk factors for community-associated Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia (SAB) are incompletely understood. We used Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and spatial statistics to analyze demographic and geographic epidemiology of SAB in the community. Methods We used the S. aureus Bacteremia Group Prospective Cohort Study (SABG-PCS) at Duke University Medical Center to obtain demographic and clinical data. We used the American Community Survey and U.S. Census to supply neighborhood variables. Secular trends in demographic and clinical characteristics of SAB patients prospectively enrolled between 1995 and 2015 (n = 2478) were determined using linear regressions. To characterize spatial patterns in Methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) bacteremia compared to Methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) bacteremia, we used GIS mapping and selected a subgroup of patients (n = 667) living in and around Durham County, North Carolina. We then created generalized additive models (GAMs) using this subgroup to detect geographic heterogeneities in probabilities of MRSA infections compared to MSSA infections. Results We found evidence of changing demographic and clinical characteristics of SAB patients over the 21-year period. The proportion of infections acquired in the community increased significantly (p < 0.0001). However, we did not detect spatial heterogeneities of MRSA infections in Durham County. Patient location of residence was not significantly associated with antimicrobial-resistant infections. Patient age and year of hospital admission were the only statistically significant covariates in our spatial models. Conclusion We utilized a novel method to analyze SAB in the community using GIS and spatial statistics. Future research should prioritize community transmission of S. aureus to identify robust risk factors for infection. Disclosures Vance G. Fowler, Jr., MD, MHS, Achaogen (Consultant)Advanced Liquid Logics (Grant/Research Support)Affinergy (Consultant, Grant/Research Support)Affinium (Consultant)Akagera (Consultant)Allergan (Grant/Research Support)Amphliphi Biosciences (Consultant)Aridis (Consultant)Armata (Consultant)Basilea (Consultant, Grant/Research Support)Bayer (Consultant)C3J (Consultant)Cerexa (Consultant, Other Financial or Material Support, Educational fees)Contrafect (Consultant, Grant/Research Support)Debiopharm (Consultant, Other Financial or Material Support, Educational fees)Destiny (Consultant)Durata (Consultant, Other Financial or Material Support, educational fees)Genentech (Consultant, Grant/Research Support)Green Cross (Other Financial or Material Support, Educational fees)Integrated Biotherapeutics (Consultant)Janssen (Consultant, Grant/Research Support)Karius (Grant/Research Support)Locus (Grant/Research Support)Medical Biosurfaces (Grant/Research Support)Medicines Co. (Consultant)MedImmune (Consultant, Grant/Research Support)Merck (Grant/Research Support)NIH (Grant/Research Support)Novadigm (Consultant)Novartis (Consultant, Grant/Research Support)Pfizer (Grant/Research Support)Regeneron (Consultant, Grant/Research Support)sepsis diagnostics (Other Financial or Material Support, Pending patent for host gene expression signature diagnostic for sepsis.)Tetraphase (Consultant)Theravance (Consultant, Grant/Research Support, Other Financial or Material Support, Educational fees)Trius (Consultant)UpToDate (Other Financial or Material Support, Royalties)Valanbio (Consultant, Other Financial or Material Support, Stock options)xBiotech (Consultant)


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document