Leadership in Infromation Technology Research Paper

Leadership in Infromation Technology - Research Paper Example However, little population ranks self-knowledge as most critical. Using means, the rank order of knowledge domains is as follows: Business environments (1.5) Technology (2.14) Self and human resources (2.57 and 2.57) Finance (3.86) Much of the literature available addresses leadership at a strategic level. Clearly the most critical role of effective IT leaders is perceived to be the communicator role, followed by facilitator, guide, partner, and collaborator. Informal management styles seem to be preferred in technology intense organizations. (Lewis, S. & Lewis, 2005) The roles of tactician, technical guru, and human resources leader receives middle rankings while commander, servant, dictator, king or queen receive the lowest ranking for effective IT leaders. Congruent with this ranking of roles for effective IT leaders, team building is considered the most important function, followed by management, then creating. Leadership in Information Technology in Private Industry When the inf ormation technological skills of leadership are combined with an ability to use software to solve IT problems as in Acorn Computer City, New York, leaders of the organization are better equipped to move among the various agencies comprising our society. It was assessed whether leaders of IT firm can be trained, what characteristics are important for IT leaders of the organization, and what is the best environment to encourage IT leadership. While strategic leadership is possible at all levels within the organization, there is a need for work on leadership at the project leader/project manager level. As Sear (2008) pointed out, IT leaders have a difficult time making the transition from skilled technical work to project leader. Not only are they better able to use software to manage their... The concept of communication with a physician via e-mail is not really a future capability; it is available now and used to a very limited extent. What stands in the way of its widespread use is not the absence of cutting-edge communication technology, but rather a broken payment system. Physicians are paid relatively well for procedures, relatively poorly for office visits, and not at all for telephone or e-mail advice. Increasing the bandwidth for patients without fixing reimbursement is more likely to lead to a future state where frustrated patients complain, "My doctor doesn't return my phone calls or answer my e-mail." One of the more contentious but critically important issues today is the so-called misalignment of the costs and benefits of health IT. Essentially, the argument is that under our current fragmented healthcare system, physicians and hospitals pay for IT, and most of the benefit flows to payers. The Center for Information Technology Leadership modeled the cost and benefit of an ambulatory computerized physician order entry system, and concluded that 89 percent of the benefit accrued to payers, with only 11 percent flowing to providers (Johnston et al. 2003). Nelson references the landmark Wang study, which looked at system benefits of an advanced EHR in an office practice. Wang concluded that primarily by reducing pharmacy expenditures and avoiding redundant testing, payers would save about $86,000 per physician over five years-thus making the first real economic argument for payers funding EHRs for physicians.