Harvard Business Schools Case Caregroup

Harvard Business Schools Case CareGroup

CareGroup

November 13, 2002 is definitely a day that the CareGroup organization will never forget. This was the day that their brand new network system crashed, forcing the many hospitals under the name to have to resort back to extremely outdated processes to ensure that order was secured. CareGroup is a huge health care organization that dealt with a number of hospitals in the New England area. It had implemented a network created to streamline a myriad of keeping transaction details and other records for billing and other health care related purposes. The research suggests that this was because of "the possibility of developing integrated services across the hospitals that could improve the quality of care and drive down costs," (McFarlan & Austin 2005 p 2). Yet, this is what ultimately led to the crash in 2002.

The essential problem was found within the very framework of the network itself. The entire network crashed because of an un-terminated application process. This imposed CareGroup to look for external sources in order to begin working on a fix for the entire system. The crash forced the organization to have to revert back to business practices before the streamlining of modern technology helped maximize employee efficiency, therefore costing the organization because of immensely increased inefficiency levels.

The underlying cause of the system collapse was the fact that the network was not in tune with the proper updated speculations. The main switch of the network went under. Although the individual networks were still allowed to communicate with one another, the "alternative data paths could no longer operate," (McFarlan & Austin 2005 p 5). The network's created system for integrating the many operating systems was often mismanaged and unmonitored, causing the data flow to run amuck and eventually crash the entire system. There was no underlying structure for streamlining data transferrable and storage that helped keep control in a situation with little human involvement. The network that was created did not allow strong manipulation and control by the individuals in charge of it governance. Unable to make adjustments to the network configuration, the problem only continued to persist until it caused the ultimate collapse of the system.