I was one of the 'survivors' of an Epic implementation - hired in for the implementation and witnessed some of the long term staff not chosen to attend Epic training and relegated to 'keeping the lights on' - I was not Epic trained my self at the time but had a good work history with clinical systems so I got the spend the summer in Wisconsin getting trained. I don't remember the 'tests' but may have been exempt from that process. Epic was outwardly directing staffing decisions and pushing the CIO (with threats about going to the CEO if advice not heeded). It was really creepy and one of the reasons I walked away from my 5 Epic certifications to go and work with another clinical system. I also have heard first hand of the 'tests' on current staff at one of my alma maters as they allocated staff into the Epic corner and the 'keep the lights on' corner. Truly amazing Epic has that much power with a site, and yet they send 23 year old UW grads with no healthcare experience to be your 'IC'.
Furydelabongo - 7 years ago
I have experienced one of the two reduction methods used at my past health system. The back story was a desperate need to find operating dollars that could be redirected for an Epic project run amok with consultants. Continually asking for more capital dollars became distasteful to those having to allocate their limited resources for implementation versus clinical or infrastructure needs. In one method staff who volunteered to help keep the lights on for older systems found themselves out of work as others were kept on who came in with the new system. In the other method, managers and directors not specifically overseeing implementation divisions were put up for adoption with the assumption their work could readily be absorbed by the new world order. In either case I have seen a lack of transparency as though the balance of revenue, expenses and goals was some magical stew not to be entrusted or disclosed to the community. In both cases, the layoffs were poorly executed by people lacking the ability to be direct, open and honest.
Greek CIO - 7 years ago
Went through a selection process years ago ending in Eclipsys for advanced clinicals. They convinced senior management that to be successful, (a) all of IT needed to be outsourced to Eclipsys and (b) the full suite of Eclipsys products had to be purchased. The contract had about a 400% increase in costs and the staffing costs (through outsourcing) increased by at least 300%. Eclipsys hired most of the current IT staff, but none of management.
Sand - 7 years ago
Epic implementation leads to failures and to offset cost loss of jobs is a common outcome
I was one of the 'survivors' of an Epic implementation - hired in for the implementation and witnessed some of the long term staff not chosen to attend Epic training and relegated to 'keeping the lights on' - I was not Epic trained my self at the time but had a good work history with clinical systems so I got the spend the summer in Wisconsin getting trained. I don't remember the 'tests' but may have been exempt from that process. Epic was outwardly directing staffing decisions and pushing the CIO (with threats about going to the CEO if advice not heeded). It was really creepy and one of the reasons I walked away from my 5 Epic certifications to go and work with another clinical system. I also have heard first hand of the 'tests' on current staff at one of my alma maters as they allocated staff into the Epic corner and the 'keep the lights on' corner. Truly amazing Epic has that much power with a site, and yet they send 23 year old UW grads with no healthcare experience to be your 'IC'.
I have experienced one of the two reduction methods used at my past health system. The back story was a desperate need to find operating dollars that could be redirected for an Epic project run amok with consultants. Continually asking for more capital dollars became distasteful to those having to allocate their limited resources for implementation versus clinical or infrastructure needs. In one method staff who volunteered to help keep the lights on for older systems found themselves out of work as others were kept on who came in with the new system. In the other method, managers and directors not specifically overseeing implementation divisions were put up for adoption with the assumption their work could readily be absorbed by the new world order. In either case I have seen a lack of transparency as though the balance of revenue, expenses and goals was some magical stew not to be entrusted or disclosed to the community. In both cases, the layoffs were poorly executed by people lacking the ability to be direct, open and honest.
Went through a selection process years ago ending in Eclipsys for advanced clinicals. They convinced senior management that to be successful, (a) all of IT needed to be outsourced to Eclipsys and (b) the full suite of Eclipsys products had to be purchased. The contract had about a 400% increase in costs and the staffing costs (through outsourcing) increased by at least 300%. Eclipsys hired most of the current IT staff, but none of management.
Epic implementation leads to failures and to offset cost loss of jobs is a common outcome