Demonstrate your understanding and knowledge gained about session’s material. Complete with a short discussion (one paragraph) for each question on a Word document and upload through the courseware. Use the approach set of questions for either Beth Israel or TJX.

For the Beth Israel outage case, answer these questions: 1. In your opinion, what decision options does Beth Israel Deaconess have in the case situation?

Beth Israel Deaconess has few decision options as it pertains to their crisis with their network. They can choose to ignore the situation and hope it goes away; they can act as experts on their own working to solve the issue; they can request external help by an organization that has expertise in the area; or they can shut down their network, work off of paper and move forward. They aren’t all necessarily good options but rather those available based on the network issue they are having. The most viable option, in my opinion, is that of external help – bringing in outside support to diagnose their problem and implement a plan and solution.

2. What criteria is important to making this decision?

To make an important decision such as this, it is necessary to talk a look from a bird’s eye view of the situation. Understanding the overall problem – the system is down/not working correctly because it is outdated – and what is needed to fix it – updating the system – allows for solutions. In addition to this, an understanding of timeframe and available budget to implement solutions is key. If there isn’t a $10,000 budget available for upgrades to a system then another avenue to move things forward will need to be taken.

3. What implications and consequences do each of the options present?

Each option presents its own set of unique implications and consequences. If they choose to ignore the situation, then the network could official crash, data could be lost and the hospital would stop running. If they act as experts on their on to solve the issue, they may miss a key item that needs attention, they may inadvertently create further damage and they may take longer than is needed to solve a problem. If they request external help, their fiscal budget will take a hit as they are bringing in experts, they expert may not be able to help/may diagnose a more severe problem than originally thought and they may charge for services unnecessarily if they are unethical. If they shut down the network and move forward with a paper system they are taking a few steps back in their organization and in their way of working, efficiency may decrease, mistake could increase and moral might decrease do to new changes.

4. What data, facts or experience can you use to support your suggested options and implications?

I used the data from the Beth Israel case to formulate my thoughts and opinions as listed here in addition to critical thinking skills learned on the job in the field of crisis communications. Seeing some missteps on the hospital’s parts ex. assuming there was no problem when things were first running slowly lead me to the implication that they could have caused a more severe problem by trying to handle it on their own.

5. List 5 of the most important concepts or knowledge that you gained from this case.

This was admittedly an interesting case as it showed hospital in a different light. A few key items I learned include: * Systems are not perfect and require monitoring from diligent individuals who are experts in their field. * Technology requires maintenance, care and upgrades, it is worth this investment upfront, not during a crisis. * Technology is not infallible, knowing how to do something “the old fashioned way” is sometimes a good thing. * Always seek care from a medical professional who knows their business – how to diagnose a patient based on his/her knowledge of symptoms from a patient and knowledge on various medicine and how they work to help/hurt a patient. * Cisco has a crisis response team who can handle this sort of situation and are able to go out to a location and create/repair a network as needed.