Prototype Design of a Healthcare-Analytics Pre-adoption Readiness Assessment (HAPRA) Instrument

Venkatraman, Sathyanarayanan; Sundarraj, R. P.; Mukherjee, Anik

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-39294-3_11

Cited by 5 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…, 2019). For instance, as evident from Table 1e (see Rows 18, 19, 29 and33 in Table 2), only four studies (Venkatraman et al. , 2016, 2018; Carvalho et al.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…, 2003; Sherer, 2014), and therefore, the fitment of an organization with HA has to be assessed. In keeping with this observation, a rudimentary HA-readiness-assessment model and system was developed (Venkatraman et al. , 2016) by using Peffers et al.…”

Section: Elaborated Action Design Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The lack of comprehensiveness in factor-choice extends to the HA-readiness literature as well. For example, Venkatraman et al's (2016Venkatraman et al's ( , 2018 HA-readiness works are early prototypes/proofs-of-concept; HIMSS' (HIMSS, 2021) HA-maturity assessment does not consider big-data architecture and other organizational and environmental aspects; and HISMM-DA deals only with Assessing healthanalytics readiness operational and technical factors (e.g. data, reports and HA usage) (Carvalho et al, 2019).…”

Section: Literature Gapsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We seek to fill these gaps comprehensively. Our principal objective is to extend the past studies in HA (Brooks et al, 2015;Carvalho et al, 2019;Venkatraman et al, 2016Venkatraman et al, , 2018 through collaborative fieldwork with the industry practitioners in hospitals. The following section details our design journey reflected with the EADR process (Mullarkey and Hevner, 2018).…”

Section: Literature Gapsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While the potential of HA is promising, its success depends on organizational readiness for the technology (Boyton et al, 2015;Venkatraman et al, 2016Venkatraman et al, , 2018. For instance, even for general HIT, Cresswell and Sheikh (2013) note that value creation presupposes alignment among a range of technical, organizational and social issues.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Assessing organizational health-analytics readiness: artifacts based on elaborated action design method

Venkatraman

Sundarraj

2022

JEIM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeWhile the adoption of health-analytics (HA) is expanding, not every healthcare organization understands the factors impacting its readiness for HA. An assessment of HA-readiness helps guide organizational strategy and the realization of business value. Past research on HA has not included a comprehensive set of readiness-factors and assessment methods. This study’s objective is to design artifacts to assess the HA-readiness of hospitals.Design/methodology/approachThe information-systems (IS) theory and methodology entail the iterative Elaborated Action Design Research (EADR)method, combined with cross-sectional field studies involving 14 healthcare organizations and 27 participants. The researchers determine factors and leverage multi-criteria decision-making techniques to assess HA-readiness.FindingsThe artifacts emerging from this research include: (1) a map of readiness factors, (2) multi-criteria decision-making techniques that assess the readiness levels on the factors, the varying levels of factor-importance and the inter-factor relationships and (3) an instantiated system. The in-situ evaluation shows how these artifacts can provide insights and strategic direction to an organization through collective knowledge from stakeholders.Originality/valueThis study finds new factors influencing HA-readiness, validates the well-known and details their industry-specific nuances. The methods used in this research yield a well-rounded HA readiness-assessment (HARA) approach and offer practical insights to hospitals.

show abstract

“…, 2019). For instance, as evident from Table 1e (see Rows 18, 19, 29 and33 in Table 2), only four studies (Venkatraman et al. , 2016, 2018; Carvalho et al.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 93%