The Impact of National Culture On the Meaning of Information System Success

This article explores how people from different national cultures; France, Canada and Germany, define and perceive information systems success. Research has confirmed that different national cultures define information systems success differently. However, there were many limitations in this research.

1. The research was only done on one single multinational organization.

2. The number of respondents in the study was limited.

Despite the research limitations, multinational organizations should know that the implemenation as well as long term success of a standard information system will not be the same througout countries. Information quality and other systems based concepts are defined diffrently among cultures.

This article supports the chapter and the case study on Nestle's globalized IT system. It is extremely difficult to implement a standardized system throughout countries that not only use different IT systems, but perceive the success of an information system differently. This is largely due to the vast array of cultures and languages across the globe.

This study analyzed countries that were relatively similar compared to an African or Middleastern country and there were still a great difference in the countries perception. There is no doubt that it is easier to use different IT systems in a multinational organization. I know that McKesson uses different IT systems throughout the world and its main branches are in the United States, Europe, and Australia. All relatively similar compared to the possibilties globally. I respect what Nestle has tried to accomplish in standardizing its system, it is no easy task!

Hafid Agourram, John Ingham. (2007). The impact of national culture on the meaning of information system success at the user level. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 20(6), 641-656. Retrieved June 2, 2008, from ABI/INFORM Global database.

Nestle Tries for an All-for-One Global Strategy

2. What type of global business and systems strategy did Nestle adopt? Was this strategy appropriate for Nestle's business model?

In the past, Nestle allowed each local organization to conduct business in its chosen manner. This decentralized approach allowed for differences in culture and language between each branch. At one point, there were eighty different information technology systems utilized. However, Nestle decided to abandon that traditional approach in managing a multinational company. It wanted to standardize all business processes globally to better serve its customers. It wanted to adopt a single set of business processes and systems for procurement, distribution, and sales management. They wanted to operate as a single country globally.

According to the norm, this was not the appropriate strategy for Nestle's business model. However, it seems to be working despite IT budgeting, data capacity, and delays in implementing the system across all branches. Nestle has achieved better operational efficiencies and is much closer to standardizing all processes, data, and systems. I really didn't think this would work as I read the case study, but it looks like Nestle could reach this goal in the near future.

3. What management, organization, and technology challenges did Nestle have to deal with to standardize its business processes and systems?

Nestle had the overwhelming task of merging eighty different information technology units into one designed system. None of its products are considered to be a truly global brand, so standardizing its processes and systems is quite complex. The biggest challenge Nestle faced was not technical, but personal. Previous attempts in developing cooperate standards had mixed results, most branches responded to the idea in a negative manner. Branches stated how a standard system wouldn't work globally. Branch managers feared the loss of decision-making power. Initially, the project staff was not large enough to design such a system.

Then there was the time challenge, the deadline for the rollout of the new standardized IT system was changed several times. This was also a large financial investment to embark on. Nestle had to invest billions of dollars in this project and still had the challenge to stay in budget. It was challenged to implement the new business processes concurrently with the new systems while not making it noticeable to anyone outside of the company. Managers and workers had no time to train on the system before it was deployed. Finally, Nestle had to deal with some technical issues as the system rolled out across the globe. Specifically, Canada had a problem with the amount of data storage it was allotted to allow for promotion data.

Great Project Management = IT Success

This article is closely related to the material discussed in the chapter. Kropf and Scalzi explain that it can be difficult to implement new information technology. They specifically analyze IT in health care. Senior management and professional project management must work together to overcome significant obstacles during IT implementation. Kropf and Scalzi suggest that a team of trained project managers should be created to monitor the progress of the implementation and provide accessible information form all projects. Software tools can be utilized by the team to collect, analyze and communicate the information on projects.

Health care organizations should:

1. Hire a staff member certified in project management or send an existing staff member for project management training.

2. Form a project management office (PMO). The PMO can free physicians to focus on the development of IT projects that can create benefits to the organization.

3. Appoint someone that can make decisions on money spent on IT.

I think that these 3 suggestions should definitely be implemented by health care organizations designing new information systems. As the chapter, case study and this article reiterate, a project management team should be experienced, have the proper support and knowledge to minimize risks.

Roger Kropf, Guy Scalzi. (2008). Great Project Management = IT Success. Physician Executive, 34(3), 38-40. Retrieved June 1, 2008, from ABI/INFORM Global database.

What Went Wrong with Maine's New Medicaid System?

1. How important are information systems for Maine's Department of Health and Human Services? Analyze the impact of its faulty Medicaid claims processing system.


Information systems are critical to Maine's Department of Health and Human Services. Its new Medicaid claims processing system was rejecting claims much more frequently than its old system had. Due to the rejected and frozen claims, the Bureau of Medical Services could not keep up with the processing and number of phone calls in relation to these claims. Some of the Medicaid providers were forced to turn away patients and even close operations because they were not compensated properly. Several others had to seek financing to maintain operations. Maine's finances became threatened as well due to the large segment of the state budget that Medicaid had in the past. The system created overpayments totaling $9 million. This huge disaster cost the state millions of dollars to fix. Maine became the only state not to satisfy the HIPAA requirements.


5. If you were in charge of managing this project, what else would you have done differently to increase the chances for success?


Well I wouldn't have implemented a brand new information system or I would have only went with a designer that already had created a similar successful system for another state. Considering the time constraint and lack of knowledge in creating such an elaborate system, I wouldn't have taken this risk. If it had been decided to create a new system, I would most definitely have done things differently. I would have appointed a Medicaid expert to work with the designer full-time from the beginning. Communication between the designer and Medicaid team would be highly emphasized. I would have also created some sort of online training session for providers to learn how to fill out the claim forms correctly. This would have greatly reduce several of the claim rejections.

Physicians Get Help in Safe Medication Prescribing

This article informs how Duke University Hospital and McKesson have developed a solution to simplify complex drug dosing. McKesson has announced the introduction of its new Advanced Dosing functionality for Horizon Expert Orders, McKesson's clinical decision support (CDS) and computerized provider order entry (CPOE) system to help increase the accuracy and safety of medication prescribing for high-risk, complex patients.

Duke believes that the Advanced Dosing solution can aid pediatric and neonatal units where specialized approaches to weight and age-based dosing are required. Small miscalculations in these units can cause significant problems. Inputting relevant criteria into the system at the time of ordering reduces the cognitive burden on prescribers. This burden has been created from the increase in number of drugs along with the increasing volume and complexity of drug information. These systems span virtually all settings of healthcare and are used with more than 50 million clinical transactions per week. McKesson has lead major breakthroughs in patient safety and was the first to introduce a point-of-care-bar-code medication administration solution which prevents more than 700,000 medication errors weekly.

As an employee of McKesson, I am a close witness of what amount of energy and focus is directed toward these information systems. We are constantly educated and trained on how these systems can benefit hospitals. I have had a few clients that have purchased these systems and they feel that have made a good investment. Here is a link to where I point my clients in regard to our patient and medication safety products.

http://www.mckesson.com/en_us/McKesson.com/For%2BHealthcare%2BProviders/Hospitals/Patient%2Band%2BMedication%2BSafety/Patient%2Band%2BMedication%2BSafety.html

Our Horizon Expert Orders™ software solution was created by clinicians for clinicians to specifically address the common barriers to physician adoption of computerized physician order entry (CPOE), focusing on the clinical decision-making process instead of order entry. McKesson’s Horizon Expert Orders solution features proven clinical content driven through a simple clinical interface and intuitive workflow that supports the way physicians practice medicine. The benefits from this systems include; overcoming traditional barriers to physician adoption, delivering real-time clinical decision support, and improving patient safety.

Physicians Get Help in Safe Medication Prescribing. (3 March). Business Wire. Retrieved May 14, 2008, from ProQuest Newsstand database.

Can Information Systems Make Your Doctor Better?

1. What problems are hospitals and physicians encountering in diagnosing diseases and prescribing medications? What management organization, and technology factors are responsible for these problems?

Many doctors struggle to identify diseases or misdiagnose patients. Substantial drug errors resulting in injury to over 1.5 million Americans. These drug errors include drug interactions, inappropriate prescriptions and forgetting secondary prescriptions. These preventable drug errors may result in $3.5 billion in additional billing annually to patients. Many of these errors can be attributed to human errors including; poor handwriting, memory lapses, fatigue, distractions and the total volume and complexity of available medications. Some information systems used to prevent these errors actually create new ways of making errors because of their design.


3. What obstacles prevent computer systems from improving the medical industry? How can these obstacles be removed?

One obstacle includes designing the information systems too much for physicians rather than nurses, who feel the greater impact from these systems. Designers of these information systems must acknowledge who will be utilizing the systems most frequently and accommodate these nurses. Another drawback of these systems are that they can be more rigid than traditional paperwork, not allowing a physician to write orders until a patient is admitted. Duke has addressed this problem by adding a new unit to the system that permits virtual admissions of patients.

Doctors and nurses must trust the system and not ignore automated prompts, which can be another obstacle. Many doctors resist the idea of needing help remembering procedures and treatments. To remove this obstacle, medical staff need to be informed of the accuracy of these systems and be educated on the time-saving component of these systems. Finally, some doctors argue that Diagnostic Decision-Support systems have not proved to be more successful than human diagnostics. They also grown at the cost and time involved with these systems. Physicians need to be provided with a ROI calculation and all the data that proves that these systems can prevent errors, which ultimately saves lives and money.

Analysis: Stripping the eBay Mall of Its Community Spirit?

Some users have become upset with eBay's new transition from an "unruly flea market" to a "strip mall". Some have grown so angry, that they have called for a global boycott of eBay. This anger stems from the introduction of a newly implemented policy of not allowing sellers to leave neutral or negative feedback. Before this policy, eBay traders have been able to rate each other, which allows small sellers to build a good reputation, and to respond to buyers' false comments. This new policy change makes it look to favor big sellers. In addition, eBay recently raised the fee payable on sales from 5.25% to 7.25% of the final sales price and reduced the item insertion fee. These new changes are to lower the initial cost of selling on the online marketplace. eBay announced that these changes will enable the trust within the eBay community to flourish again.

Some business critics agree with eBay by stating that its core business is no different from Amazon.com and that allowing sellers to criticize buyers is not a good idea. Buyers don't like to be criticised in the real world. eBay explains that they have leveled out the playing field for buyers and sellers. However, eBay needs to be careful not to lose the sense of community that has made it so popular. Its recent changes may keep it above its competitors, but it must be careful not to alienate its users.

I have experience as both a buyer and seller on eBay. When I closed my massage spa a few years ago, I sold much of the equipment I had in the spa on eBay to reduce my total investment lost. I have also purchased personal items on the online marketplace. I feel that eBay shouldn't have implemented these new changes. The concept of eBay works so well because there seemed to be an even playing field between buyers and sellers. I know that sellers don't often criticise buyers outside of this online marketplace, but most sellers aren't like eBay users. In essence, sellers on eBay are its customers, not the buyers. The sellers are the ones that pay the fees to insert an item online as well as pay a percentage of the sales price. You want to keep these sellers or "customers" happy, so limiting the service for your customer is not a good idea. I realize that all business evolve to sustain a competitive advantage, but these are the wrong changes to implement. If eBay is concerned about sellers criticizing buyers, have a running count of how many negative comments a seller posts, this would indicate if a seller is abusing this feature.

Screenshot of eBay feedback screen:

Analysis: Stripping the eBay mall of its community spirit? (2008, May). Marketing Week,8. Retrieved May 9, 2008, from ABI/INFORM Global database.