Monthly Archives: June 2016

Big Impacts of Big Data: Why Analytics are Necessary to Drive Growth

Big Impacts of Big Data: Why Analytics are Necessary to Drive Growth

Although businesses are learning the value of analyzing big data with analytics, the process can be difficult to manage on a large scale. Many enterprises begin with basic data analysis but become bogged down as their efforts progress, preventing them from receiving the full value of their big data analytics.

Organizational adaptation is needed on a large scale to drive growth. This usually involves a change in priorities—businesses need to identify the areas most critical to success and apply analytics across the entire enterprise.

Barriers to Change

Investing in analytics can be a hard pill to swallow for bottom-line focused executives, as early analytic applications don’t always drive defensible returns.graphic-1142957_1280 However, this fundamental fear undermines the true value of big data analytics—innovation and meaningful insights can only be found by assessing data in context and with the necessary scope. Executives (who fail to see how analytics can improve decision-making) prevent this large-scale assessment from taking place by underfunding the analytic tools, training, and quality controls that quality data analysis needs.

On top of that, businesses without established analytic infrastructure have a tough time of capturing the value that analytics provide. Often, industry-wide shifts are necessary to set an enterprise towards better analytic governance, and yet top-level executives are wary of this transition and its costs.

Scaling to Increase Impact

Despite the barriers to change common in companies beginning to leverage big data, new technologies are developing that help address the challenges of achieving scale:

  • Analytics software is improving in sophistication, allowing more targeted solutions that better address the specific needs of each business. This translates to a more direct and demonstrable impact on a businesses’ bottom line.
  • Users of analytic tools are gaining confidence in the value of analytics; this push towards adoption is a necessary part of analytics generating enough momentum to become a viable option at scale.
  • Aside from the improved tools on offer, businesses hoping to achieve scale must adapt their internal policies to reflect analytics’ increased role. Decision-making must become intertwined with analytic reporting, along with a general push towards a culture of data governance that involves redesigning jobs and placing faith in analytics.

Analytic solutions are becoming more accessible than ever, changing the way businesses will handle big data. As technology continues to grow, a foundational culture of analytic reporting and data management will become a necessity for businesses hoping to stay lean and profitable. Businesses need to speed up their data-analysis transformation practices.

Desh Urs iBridge LLC

Written by Desh Urs

Desh Urs brings more than 20 years of entrepreneurial, start-up and Global 500 corporate experience in sales, marketing, and general management to the customers of iBridge. He has led sales organizations as SVP at Qsent, Inc. and VP at Acxiom Corporation, and has focused on the usage of data in data distribution, direct marketing, fraud prevention, and law enforcement.

As a Vice President of Global Sales, Services, and Marketing at Silicon Graphics, Inc., Urs managed engineering and non-engineering functions, developing solutions in sciences, telecommunications, manufacturing, media, business, and defense intelligence, for companies with revenues of several billion dollars. During his tenure as Vice President at Think Tools AG and Brio Technology, Inc., he ran business development and alliances providing solutions in Business Intelligence and Decisions Cycle Management to Global 100 corporations worldwide. In the late 1980s, Urs founded Indus Systems, Inc., which he profitably sold to a systems integration company.

Urs serves on several Advisory Boards, as well as many company Boards, in the United States and India.

iBridge NewsletterUnderground eBook CTA

EHRs the New Target of Malpractice Litigators

EHRs the New Target of Malpractice Litigators

Medical malpractice litigators have found a new target: Electronic Health Records (EHRs).

Amidst the concerns of data security and protecting EHRs from breaches, certain legal teams are finding ways to exploit the imperfect nature of electronic records for legal gain.

Targeting Electronic Records

Many EHRs are designed with a digital experience in mind. Information is stored in templates that populate correctly on a screen but don’t keep the same clean format when printed. This can create confusion for those viewing the printed records—data may populate in several locations at once, giving the appearance of mismanaged records and internal disorganization.EHRs the New Target of Malpractice Litigators

Litigators, whose job it is to discredit medical organizations during malpractice suits, prey on this confusion and use it as an example of poor healthcare practices. The argument is that if the record itself is confusing, it stands to reason that overall care will be marginal. Legal teams can take this even further by questioning the authenticity of the data itself.

This leads to situations where healthcare providers are embroiled in malpractice disputes about quality of care, but have to defend how their medical records work. This litigation is controversial—rather than discussing the actual issues the defendants in the complaint, litigators are shifting the focus to technical failings to help win their cases. Every healthcare organization must know of this trend and do what it can to prevent EHR templates from damaging credibility.

Avoiding Confusion

Litigators exploiting the shortcomings of EHRs rely on one primary element for their cases—confusion. If healthcare organizations can improve their communication and documentation protocols, they will be less vulnerable to the drawbacks of EHR paper documentation.

Understanding the context of care is essential when determining how to address malpractice concerns. Organizations must be able to defend their actions in the face of scrutiny, even when printed EHRs provide irregular readouts. Questions concerning how care is viewed, which provider did what, and when they did it all contribute to understanding health outcomes. Each of these questions must be thoroughly documented for each patient to prevent legal teams from using data confusion as ammunition for malpractice suits.

In addition, communication between C-suite staff, caregivers, and EHR providers must be seamless and transparent. Litigators targeting EHRs rely on the inherent disorganization that comes from transferring digital information into print. When processes and patient care are documented thoroughly, they become easy to understand at a glance. This helps reduce the likelihood that litigators can leverage the weaknesses of printed digital templates to discredit healthcare providers.

Desh Urs iBridge LLC

Written by Desh Urs

Desh Urs brings more than 20 years of entrepreneurial, start-up and Global 500 corporate experience in sales, marketing, and general management to the customers of iBridge. He has led sales organizations as SVP at Qsent, Inc. and VP at Acxiom Corporation, and has focused on the usage of data in data distribution, direct marketing, fraud prevention, and law enforcement.

As a Vice President of Global Sales, Services, and Marketing at Silicon Graphics, Inc., Urs managed engineering and non-engineering functions, developing solutions in sciences, telecommunications, manufacturing, media, business, and defense intelligence, for companies with revenues of several billion dollars. During his tenure as Vice President at Think Tools AG and Brio Technology, Inc., he ran business development and alliances providing solutions in Business Intelligence and Decisions Cycle Management to Global 100 corporations worldwide. In the late 1980s, Urs founded Indus Systems, Inc., which he profitably sold to a systems integration company.

Urs serves on several Advisory Boards, as well as many company Boards, in the United States and India.

iBridge Newsletter10 Legal eBook CTA

Lean and Mean: Improving Efficiency in an Outdated Justice System

Lean and Mean: Improving Efficiency in an Outdated Justice System

With ever-shrinking corporate budgets and more eyes turned to where dollars are going, clients are demanding accountability from their legal representation.

Strategies that were once considered “business-only” are finding a home in the legal world. The push towards optimization practices like Lean Six Sigma is increasing as the high costs of legal discovery and litigation are creating unrest in the legal world.

Lean Six Sigma in the Legal World

Understanding Lean Six Sigma

Lean Six Sigma is an optimization concept with its roots in Henry Ford’s groundbreaking continuous assembly line. The idea involves reducing business workflows to the essential processes that increase customer value and streamline operations. Much like how Ford revolutionized the automobile manufacturing industry with his optimized workflows, big businesses like Toyota, General Electric, and Samsung have adopted similar strategies in search of reduced organizational waste.

Specifically, Lean Six Sigma is viewed as a method of defining, measuring, analyzing, and improving processes with the overall goal of increased efficiency. Moreover, while these processes have traditionally been business facing, they function well in legal settings too.

Applying Lean Six Sigma to Legal

The legal world has its own, if outdated, structures for process optimization. The federal rulemaking process promotes judiciary efficiency, but this 80-year-old system is very different from the Lean strategies being adopted by businesses today. In the past, the civil justice system prioritized comprehensive discovery over cost management. This lead to chronic overspending on discovery and forced settlements based on financial restrictions rather than case merits.

However, recent amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) may change the way discovery is handled. These amendments alter discovery limitations and place responsibility on attorneys and judges to justify how proportional discovery is to the needs of each case. The goal of these amendments, particularly Rule 26(b)(1), is to protect against redundant and wasteful discovery costs by encouraging attorneys to look at the big picture of each case. When discovery must be justified with specific and defensible assessments, optimization will be a matter of course.

This concept is the central tenant of applying Lean Six Sigma to legal cases. Much as the 2015 FRCP amendments reduce waste, Lean Six Sigma forces individuals to look at the entirety of a case and ask hard questions about which processes are essential. As legal teams adapt to more conservative discovery practices, the benefits of deploying Lean workflows will become more apparent. Just as Henry Ford changed the manufacturing world, business optimization practices make waves in our outdated legal infrastructure.

Dean Van Dyke iBridge LLC

Written by Dean Van Dyke, Vice President, Business Process Optimization

Dean Van Dyke is the Vice President of Business Process Optimization for iBridge. He brings more than 18 years of customer relations, business process outsourcing, lean six sigma, program/project management, records management, manufacturing, and vendor management experience to iBridge. Mr. Van Dyke was the former head of Microsoft’s corporate records and information management team and served honorably for over fourteen years in the U.S. Navy and Army National Guard. He received his Bachelor of Science in Business Administration from the University of South Dakota and his Master’s in Business Administration from Colorado Technical University.

iBridge Newsletter10 Legal eBook CTA