After thoroughly reading through the case and identifying the major drawbacks in the system which lead to failure, I would like to present some solutions which I think are essential in rectifying the errors in the CAD system. • Project Manager: The LAS should thoroughly plan the implementation phase of the CAD system. An experienced project manager should be hired who will look into this phase. The role of a project manager is crucial to the implementation of a system. A project manager will enhance the communication between and among the related parties and he will be responsible for collaboration.
Additionally, he will be responsible for the test phase. He will counsel the staff at LAS. He will check the system for its specifications in accordance with the Systems Requirements- SRS Document. • Test: The system should be tested to measure its responsiveness to flexibility. This includes the hardware test as well as that of software. The system or the project should have a problem owner like the management. The metrics on which the test should be based are: i. Flexibility ii. Ability to meet objectives iii. Deliver quality performance iv. Accurate Statistics about the transportation resources v.
Provision of ambulances at time of need vi. Real time data transmission • Training Programs: The system implemented earlier was not able to meet the objectives because of the staff’s inefficiency to operate it. The staff was not able to perform the functions of the system because of the lack of knowledge about the systems functionality. The management of LAS should conduct training programs that would teach the staff as to how to use the system and reap the maximum advantages from it. • Restructuring the Management: The successful implementation of CAD is possible if the management level at LAS is further restructured.
It can solve managerial as well as operational problems occurring because of the implementation. The span of control that lies within the power of a few executive directors must be lessened. An effective level of management must be implemented in which all members are assigned tasks and have delegated responsibilities. They are authorized to make day to day functional and operational decisions. These executives and members must be fully committed to the project and dedicated to its implementation. All these members must be held accountable to the Board serving the LAS.
• Communication: The communications element is of utmost importance when it comes to the implementation of a system. The LAS must adopt a reasonable approach towards communicating the changes to the affected bodies’ via media, outside bodies and other representatives from within LAS. They must have a genuine intention of responding to the queries generated by the parties to whom the information is communicated. • Complaints: All the complaints that are generated by the patients or other stakeholders must be answered by the staff. This staff should be trained.
Their communication and interpersonal skills must be enhanced so that they are able to answer and resolve different complaints made by the customers. Given Algorithm: The LAS was introduced to introduce a computerized command and control system. It was introduced to replace the manual system. A systems requirement document was made that stated the actual requirements of the management team. The SRS document was made with the help of contract analyst and the systems manager played a great role in it. The new elements identified in the SRS would be implemented as part of the SOLO mobile data terminals.
The actual systems functionality was not communicated properly to the staff. There was little communication about the new systems with the stake holders of the LAS. A supplier procurement process was initiated so that the procurement parties can submit their quotations to the LAS. These procurement parties were evaluated using many metrics that have been identified in the case. An audit of the process was carried out by the systems manager and the analyst to approve of the process. A recommendation report about the suppliers was sent to the Board. SO was selected as the supplier who would design the CAD system for LAS.
PRINCE methodology was adopted. ANALYSIS: The project that was started by the LAS did not follow any time line. The SO was selected as the supplier of the software. This company had neither previous experience nor the reputation of developing a system on such a large scale. The project management team of the SO as well as LAS was inefficient. The SO was regularly late in its deliveries of software to the LAS. Also, the PRINCE development methodology was unfamiliar to the development and the working team at LAS. Keeping these things in mind, the stakeholders of LAS have plenty of safety concerns.
The system was implemented despite the identification of the imperfections in it. Some of the safety concerns were: Te ambulance provision system was not accurate hence jeopardizing the lives of patients who called in emergency. Also, poor communication resulted in a failure of staff communicating their problems and issues to the management regarding to their problems with the system. The algorithm that CAD followed violated the ethics principles. It claimed competency in implementing the system and using it when they did not possess any ability to do so.
It was violated by the LAS procurement team in which only one of the two members assigned possessed the technical knowledge. It was also violated by the Apricot and the So. They did not have any experience or the knowledge to satisfy the design specifications of the CAD system. Secondly, it violated the public welfare principle of ethics. The LAS management failed to investigate into the failures of the system and also to rectify the failures following the implementation. SO and Apricot also violated this principle by using untested methodologies. Proposed Algorithm:
The following algorithm must have been followed by the LAS in order to implement the CAD successfully: 1. Design a competent team consisting of well qualified people possessing technical knowledge 2. Make a detailed SRS document which highlights all the important elements to be implemented in the system 3. Communicate the process to all the related parties 4. Develop a criteria on which the Supplier Parties are to be tested 5. The evaluation process must be fair and the Board should be participative in it 6. Such parties must be selected which are credible and also have previous related experience
7. The process should be thoroughly audited by the members of the Board 8. A highly qualified and experienced Project Manager should be assigned to the project who has strong communication and interpersonal skills 9. Keep the users in mind and develop a system in a way that satisfies their needs 10. Use formal design methodologies 11. Introduce training programs so that the users of the CAD at all levels can benefit from it 12. The system should be thoroughly tested before implementation 13. The system must be evaluated on a regular basis post implementation Conclusion:
The CAD system implemented by the LAS failed in the project planning process. There were numerous issues in the project management process. Had these problems in the management phase been identified earlier the system would have been saved from the failure. References London-Ambulance-Service_2_. pdf. Retreived: May 06, 2006 from https://docs. google. com/viewer? a=v&pid=gmail&attid=0. 1&thid=1286434d4b2b2084&mt=application%2Fpdf&url=https%3A%2F%2Fmail. google. com%2Fmail%2F%3Fui%3D2%26ik%3D65fc72e764%26view%3Datt%26th%3D1286434d4b2b2084%26attid%3D0. 1%26disp%3Dattd%26zw&sig=AHIEtbT1eaUWKJ3kj2RAPZyY0bbWsxRHYg