London Ambulance Service Failure

7/21/2019 London Ambulance Service Failure

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/london-ambulance-service-failure 1/5

MBA 508: Management Information Systems (Sec 01)

Case: 1

Submitted to

………………………

Submitted by

…………………

ID: …………….

Date…th February, 2014



Introduction

The case of Computer-Aided Dispatch (Cad) System of London Ambulance Service failed

because of multiple reasons. The poor management practice, high technological complexities and

unfavorable operating environment involved in the implementation of the CAD system in LAS.

The Following factors facilitate Correspondence Failure:

This IS project does not meet its predefined objectives which should be fast,accurate automatic human-intensive process involved in the manual dispatchsystem.

The ambulance took over three hours to answer a call while the government’srecommended maximum was 17 minutes. Top management was less connectedwith the operations.

In other words, the expected benefit fails to materialize failure is linked with

senior management The senior management fails to conceive a realistic goal of the project. The project developed in a very short time. LAS management had received over the years little or no effective management

training. The small software house with no previous experience of similar systems, LAS

management were taking a high risk

The following factors facilitate Process Failures:

The estimating method used in allocating budget and time is not appropriate

Management’s lack of control on the project because of changing the scope of the project Project management throughout the development and implementation process was

inadequate and at times ambiguous. £1.1 million contract for the development ofthe CAD which was tight

Design flaws which delay development of the system The amount of incorrect vehicle information recorded by the system also

increased The was over ambitious and was developed and implemented against an

impossible timetable the timetable or the high risk was on the comprehensive systems The scope is too big to be completed in a reasonable budget and time The system was not fully tested to a satisfactory level of quality and resilience

before full implementation Need for close perfect information of vehicle locations and status the closet vehicle was not chosen for the dispatch Unreliability, slowness and operator interface problem with the system, including:

• Failure to identify all duplicated calls;• Lack of prioritisation of exception messages;

• Exception messages and awaiting attention queues scroll off top of screen.



Communication problems among the CAD system The increase in calls on those days was largely as a result of unidentified

duplicate calls and call backs from the public in response to ambulance delays The system relied on a technical communications infrastructure that was

overloaded and unable to cope easily with the demands Inability of the CAD software to identify and allocate the nearest available

resource. the system practically did not follow any standard systems development

approach

The following factors facilitate Interaction Failure

This type of failure is concerned with the level of use and degrees of usersatisfaction.

Low staff morale and friction between LAS management and workforce’s staffmorale and friction between LAS management and workforce.

There was incomplete ownership of the system by the majority of LAS staff. Poor industrial relations.

System allocated nearest resource, regardless of originating station. Technical problems reduced confidence in the system for ambulance crews and

CAC staff. There was incomplete "ownership" of the system by the majority of its users.

The many problems identified with many of the system components over the preceding months had instilled an atmosphere of system distrust in which staffexpected the system to fail rather than willing it to succeed

Poor communications between staff and staff associations and senior LASmanagers have created an atmosphere of mistrust senior management failed toidentify or to recognize the significance of the many problems that wereultimately to cause it to fail.

Lessons learned

The main lessons learned from this case-study are shown below:

In a hurry nothing you can do the best No chance to avoid user and manager involvement of the project Focus on

repairing reputation of CAD within the service; Increasing sense of ‘ownership’ for all stakeholders; They still believe that a technological solution is required; Development process must allow fully for consultation, quality assurance,

testing, training; Management and staff must have total, demonstrable, confidence in thereliability of the system;

Any new system should be introduced step by step..



Recommendations based on Success Factors of IS Projects:

User involvement

Without users support or acceptance no change of operational process can bedone successfully

Software and system design should be mindful of stakeholder values,satisfaction, and status.

One particularly important area is to avoid fully automating user decision-making and instead supporting the user to make better decisions.

The end-users should be involved in the systems investigation (stage 2),systems analysis (stage 3) and implementation (stage 6) stages of life cycle

User must be involved at all stages of the life cycle The objectives and scope must be communicated with staff (and users) The project is more likely to succeed if the management could offer full

explanations as to the need of monitoring the performance of employees

Continuous Top management Support

Without support from the top management, IS projects are unlikely to succeed Sources of continuous consultation/feedback are an important practice to

mitigate risk these include: up-front consultation; on-going drop-in sessions;user acceptance testing where users can delay go-live if unhappy

Stakeholder risks that are mitigated via coercion tend to dampen feedbackloops between stakeholders resulting in poor communication and ultimately a project that is not a good fit with its environment and thus a failure

it must have total ownership by management and staff, both within CAC andthe ambulance crews

Top management and staff must have total, demonstrable, confidence in thereliability of the system

LAS management gives serious thought to how to demonstrate itscommitment to, and appreciation of, its most valuable asset,

The reinstatement of recognized uniforms to all levels of operational andcontrol management, including, in appropriate circumstances, senior executivestaff

There is a need to implement an experienced and effective level ofmanagement, with delegated responsibility and authority for decision-making

It is important to deal with day to day operational issues on a divisional basiswithin the area

Clear Project Objectives and Scope

The objective should be to resolve all issues of divisional responsibility at thelowest possible level.

The scope should not be too big to be implemented within a reasonable budgetand schedule



It must be developed and introduced in a timescale which, whilst recognizing

the need for earliest introduction, must allow fully for consultation, quality

assurance, testing, and training It must be fully reliable and resilient with fully tested The management should not lacks the control on the changing nature of

project scope It is thus important to establish clearly defined project objectives and scope

which are achievable within the allocated budget and time frame

Assigning Skilled Personnel

Assigning IS staff who have the right skill and attitude to work with end users a suitably qualified and experienced project manager be appointed

immediately to co- ordinate and control the implementation of the proposedfirst stage of CAD

Appropriate end-users should be selected who would identify the keyrequirements of the system

the LAS devote adequate resources to answering complaints in terms of permanent staff trained in the complaints procedures, backed by the necessaryadministrative support

Recruit suitable consultants who would offer their expertise which are notavailable

Conclusion

The London Ambulance Service as a very important example to learn before launch a successful

project. One can learn a lot of lessons, just by reviewing the opportunities for improvementwithin their own projects. All of those mistakes, failures, and misjudgments by multiple parties

that lead to the system failure.

Documents

London Ambulance Service Failure