Various threads, lots of noise and The Way is no clearer.
In an earlier messgae I quoted Donald Johnson, the Editor of the
Health Care News Server making the 2 points:
<http://www.healthcarenewsserver.com/stories/HCN1998051800001.shtml>
1. health care managers as lurkers not participants, hence their
online community won't work
2. health care professionals would be more successful in building such
communities but within restricted peer environments
A knowledgable and well informed friend just reminded me about our own
community here on gp-uk.
He noted, amongst other things, that gp-uk is "Not helpful but full
of help, interested but not committed to change, outspoken but not
radical, critical but not constructive."
He added, almost in a lament: "how do we get the discussion from the
surface noise to the real issues around networking."
Well, I said. Let's first perhaps attempt to define what we mean by
'networking'.
Let's put aside for a moment all the technology stuff, the wiring,
the machines and the politics. Let's then begin to think like mature
thinkers about what we actually mean by 'networking' and what we want
*and* expect 'the networks' to do.
Hence we are reasonably good at knowing what to do in a 'carbon'
network (OK, rub that out, in a group situation), therefore we ought
to be able to define that.
I mean, what do we, as clinicans. actually do in the carbon world
that makes our work and play better?
There are bits in that knowing that we can, no, we must, preserve as
carbon domain. There are also bits that we can transfer to the
'silicon' domain because that envrionment is better suited for those
bits.
Do we know which is which?
For example, Jel Coward was horrified when my receptionist wrote down
his message to me on a piece of paper. He was expecting the Risk
Household to be using some kind of e-comms.
Why? We are a small 'network'. For us, the paper remains a powerful
*token* of information.
Prit Buttar archives records on a floppy and yet has to print off the
reams of paper. Why? Perhaps because we have not thought yet of a
'Common Language'.
So, what *is* our 'Common Language'? This question is addressed to
the clinicians, specifically the GPs.
Are you getting my drift?
Let's just put things in simple plain words:
What do we want, given all the various aspects of our daily practice?
How can 'networking', either carbon or silicon make that better?
Can we start with people and end with people? That way, the bits in
the middle get easier to build.
When we have formulated what we want and what we wish, we shift the
debate a gear up and begin thinking about how to get there.
That way, we would be much better equipped to inform, for example,
NHSnet.
How about it? Tell me! Can we have more signal and less noise please?
:-)
Ahmad
________________________________________
Dr Ahmad Risk
http://mednetics.org
Chairman British Healthcare Internet Associaiton
http://www.bhia.org
Director Internet Healthcare Coalition (USA)
http://www.ihc.net
Home: +44 1273 724866/748198
Work: +44 1737 240022
Fax: +44 1737 244660/1273 728931
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|