Information Technology Process Improvement Decision-Making

2012 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 18-35
Author(s):  
Sandy A. Lamp ◽  
Kathleen M. Hargiss ◽  
Caroline Howard
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Process Improvement ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Investment Decision ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Final Decision ◽  
Insurance Company ◽  
Senior Leadership ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Process Managers

This article is derived from a qualitative multicase study with two settings that explored the way decisions are made in two IT organizations regarding process improvement initiatives by using face-to-face semi-structured interviews with 20 IT process owners and managers. The two participating organizations are a healthcare insurance company and a manufacturer of electronic interconnects. The study sought to uncover (a) how IT process improvements are prioritized and how approvals are attained, (b) how senior leadership is involved in decision making, (c) how security and risk are considered, (d) if and how formal process improvement methodologies are used, (e) if and how estimated and actual cost benefit analysis are conducted associated with decisions, and (f) how alignment with organizational goals is attained. The topic of IT governance was narrowed to explore the perspective of IT process owners and process managers, and their approaches and methodologies used with IT process improvement initiatives. The study found that pre-decision stages take place in IT investment decision making, and that process owners and process managers, participants other than senior leadership, and executive level decision makers are involved in these pre-decision stages and may be involved in the final decision stages.

scholarly journals Strategic decision making frameworks

2010 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen Selwood
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Capital Investment ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Investment Decision ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Environmental Benefits ◽  
Strategic Decision ◽  
Infrastructure Development ◽  
Investment Decision Making

The New Zealand Council for Infrastructure Development (NZCID) considers that there is a need for a much more strategic, more sophisticated and better balanced approach to prioritisation of infrastructure investment in New Zealand. This was one of the key reasons why NZCID was a cornerstone funder of the New Zealand Centre for Advanced Engineering (CAENZ) study into improving capital investment decision-making frameworks. In commenting on the need for reform of decision-making frameworks, this article traces the history of public sector project prioritisation methods, with a particular focus on transport. It critically assesses the approach used in conventional cost-benefit analysis (CBA), as applied during the 1990s and early 2000s. CBA is then compared with the much more politically driven approach adopted from 2003 onwards. The paper concludes by arguing that New Zealand must develop more strategic project prioritisation and decision-making methods which appropriately value economic, social/cultural and environmental benefits and costs. 

Individualized cancer follow-up supported by electronic Patient-Reported Outcomes: Development and evaluation (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sissel Ravn ◽  
Henriette Vind Thaysen ◽  
Lene Seibaek ◽  
Victor Jilbert Verwaal ◽  
Lene Hjerrild Iversen
Keyword(s):  
Ct Scan ◽  
Advanced Cancer ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
European Organization ◽  
Individualized Care ◽  
Patient Reported

BACKGROUND Cancer survivors experience unmet needs during follow-up. Besides recurrence, a follow-up includes detection of late side effects, rehabilitation, palliation and individualized care. OBJECTIVE We aimed to describe the development and evaluate the feasibility of an intervention providing individualized cancer follow-up supported by electronic patient-reported outcomes (e-PRO). METHODS The study was carried out as an interventional study at a Surgical and a Gynecological Department offering complex cancer surgery and follow-up for advanced cancer. The e-PRO screened for a priori defined clinical important symptoms and needs providing individualized follow-up. We included following questionnaires in the e-PRO; the general European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 and the EORTC validated for colorectal and ovarian cancer patients. To support individualization, we included three prioritized issues of the patient’s preference in each e-PRO. The response-algorithm was aggregated based on the severity of the patient’s response. To ensure the sensitivity of the e-PRO, we performed semi-structured interviews with five patients. All clinicians (surgeons and gynecologists) performing the consultations reviewed the e-PRO. The evaluation was divided in two, 1)The feasibility was assessed by a)Patients’ response rate of the e-PRO, b)Number of follow-up visits documenting the use of e-PRO and c)Patients’ prioritized issues prior to the consultation(‘yes’ / ‘no’), and after the follow-up 2)Patients assessment of a)The need and purpose of the follow-up visit and b)the support provided during the follow-up visit. RESULTS In total, 187 patients were included in the study, of which 73%(n=136/187) patients responded to the e-PRO and were subjected to an individualized follow-up. The e-PRO was documented as applied in 79% of the follow-up visits. In total, 23% of the prioritized issues did not include a response. Stratified by time since surgery, significantly more patients did not fill out a prioritized issue had a follow-up >6 months since surgery. In total, 72 % follow-up visits were evaluated to be necessary in order to discuss the outcome of the CT scan, symptoms, and/or prioritized issues. Contrary, 19% of the follow-up visits were evaluated to be necessary only to discuss the result of the CT scan. A range from 19.3–56.3% of patients assessed the follow-up visit to provide support with respect to physical (42% of patients), mental (56%), sexual (19%) or dietary (27%) issues. Further, a range from 34–60% of the patients reported that they did not need support regarding physical (43% of patients), mental (34%), sexual (63%) or dietary (57%) issues. CONCLUSIONS An individualized follow-up based on e-PRO is feasible, and support most patients surgically treated for advanced cancer. However, results indicate that follow-up based on e-PRO may not be beneficial for all patients and circumstances. A thorough cost-benefit analysis may be warranted before implementation in routine clinic.

scholarly journals A Methodological Framework for Sustainable Office Building Renovation Using Green Building Rating Systems and Cost-Benefit Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (15) ◽  
pp. 6156
Author(s):  
Nataša Šuman ◽  
Mojca Marinič ◽  
Milan Kuhta
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Green Building ◽  
Office Buildings ◽  
Office Building ◽  
Rating System ◽  
Benefit Analysis

Sustainable development is a priority for the future of our society. Sustainable development is of particular importance to the Architecture, Engineering, and Construction (AEC) industry, both for new buildings and for the renovation of existing buildings. Great potential for sustainable development lies in the renovation of existing office buildings. This paper introduces a new framework for identifying the best set of renovation strategies for existing office buildings. The framework applies selected green building rating system criteria and cost-effective sustainable renovation solutions based on cost-benefit analysis (CBA), and thus provides a novelty in decision-making support for the sustainable renovation of office buildings at an early-stage. The framework covers all necessary steps and activities including data collection, determination of the required level of renovation, selection of the green building rating system, identification of impact categories and criteria, and final evaluation and decision-making using CBA. The framework can be used in conjunction with different systems and according to different regional characteristics. The applicability of the addressing procedure is shown through a case study of a comprehensive renovation of an office building in the city of Maribor.

STAKEHOLDERS, SPATIAL LOCATIONS AND TIME HORIZONS IN AN EXTENDED SOCIAL COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS: A CASE OF PIPALPANKHA WATER RESOURCE PROJECT

2009 ◽  
Vol 11 (02) ◽  
pp. 245-265 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. RAM BABU ◽  
NALLATHIGA RAMAKRISHNA
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Water Resource ◽  
Social Cost ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Development Project ◽  
Development Projects ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Time Horizons ◽  
Spatial Locations

Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) has been serving as an important tool for decision making with regard to the development projects involving large investments. The Social Cost-Benefit Analysis (SCBA) is an extension of the CBA to certain social impacts, which hitherto were not measured. As the impacts of development projects on ecology and environment assumed importance, measuring the corresponding costs and benefits also began to assume significance. With the advancement in economic valuation techniques over time, measurement could be done and the framework of SCBA has been extended to incorporate the same. Moreover, unlike the CBAs, which do not account for the distributional aspects, the SCBA can potentially account for these. This paper presents a case study of extending the SCBA framework to include social and environmental impacts of a large water resource development project in India. It emphasises the distribution of project benefits and costs over stakeholders, spatial locations and time horizons so as to demonstrate the utility of extended SCBA in project decision making. It is observed that both the numeraire measure i.e. cost-benefit ratio, as well as the distributional analysis present a favourable case for the project.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document