| Course | HIM 400 Communication and Technologies II |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 1 |
| Paper type | undergraduate discussion post on project management for health technology |
| Length | About 340 words, 3 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Southern New Hampshire University |
| Program | BS Health Information Management |
| Updated | September 2026 |
Free sample paper for HIM 400 Module 1
Module One Discussion
Ten Weeks Late and Three Reports Longer
At Cold Brook Health, we started building an interface last spring to bring HbA1c results from two outside laboratories into our diabetes registry. The work was estimated at twelve weeks. It is now in week twenty-two, and nobody can say when it will end. Looking at it through this module's readings, I do not think the software is the problem. The interface engine works, the lab vendors are cooperative and the test messages parse correctly.
Kaplan and Harris-Salamone (2009) summarized an AMIA workshop and the literature on health IT projects and concluded that failures usually grow from people, organizational and communication problems rather than from the technology itself. Our project fits that pattern. It never had a written charter, so when the quality director asked for three new registry reports in week six, they were simply added. Each request was reasonable, but together they doubled the testing load. No one owned the decision to say yes or no, because our executive sponsor moved to another role in the first month and was never replaced.
Sittig and Singh (2010) describe health technology as a set of connected dimensions, including the software, the people who use it, their workflow, organizational policies and outside rules, and they argue that a change in one dimension ripples through the rest. We treated the interface as a technical task. We did not ask how clinic staff would reconcile outside results that already sat in scanned documents, so each practice invented its own process, and testing kept uncovering duplicate values.
Basic project management would have helped: a charter defining scope, a sponsor with authority, a change control step that weighs every new request against time and budget, and a workflow review before building. Cresswell et al. (2013) also stress that large health IT efforts need attention to users after launch, so our workflow review should continue once results start flowing. For classmates: in your organization, who decides that a technology project is finished, and how do they handle requests that arrive halfway through?
References
Cresswell, K. M., Bates, D. W., & Sheikh, A. (2013). Ten key considerations for the successful implementation and adoption of large-scale health information technology. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 20(e1), e9-e13. https://doi.org/10.1136/amiajnl-2013-001684
Kaplan, B., & Harris-Salamone, K. D. (2009). Health IT success and failure: Recommendations from literature and an AMIA workshop. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 16(3), 291-299. https://doi.org/10.1197/jamia.M2997
Sittig, D. F., & Singh, H. (2010). A new sociotechnical model for studying health information technology in complex adaptive healthcare systems. Quality and Safety in Health Care, 19(Suppl. 3), i68-i74. https://doi.org/10.1136/qshc.2010.042085
What the HIM 400 Module 1 instructions ask for
The opening HIM 400 discussion usually asks you to explain project management fundamentals and apply them to a health information technology effort. A post near 400 words that draws on a few peer-reviewed articles, cited in APA 7, fits most versions, then answer classmates later in the week. Choose a real or composite project, describe what went well or badly in concrete terms such as weeks, requests or roles, and connect each problem to a named concept like scope, change control, sponsorship or stakeholder engagement. Show how a project management tool would have changed the outcome, and end with a question that invites peers to compare their own experience.
How this HIM 400 Module 1 discussion example is built
Cold Brook Health's lab interface, planned for twelve weeks, is in week twenty-two. The post draws on Kaplan and Harris-Salamone to argue that people and organizational problems, not software, usually sink health IT projects, then shows how a missing charter let three new reports double testing and how an unreplaced sponsor left no one to refuse them. Sittig and Singh's sociotechnical model explains why ignoring clinic workflow for outside results created duplicates. The post names four fixes, from a charter to a workflow review, and asks classmates who decides when a project is done. Every claim in the post points to either a dated fact about the project or a cited finding.
Where the HIM 400 Module 1 rubric puts the points
Early HIM 400 posts are typically marked on accurate use of project management concepts, a specific example, sound use of sources and thoughtful peer engagement, plus APA 7 citations. Posts that stand out tie each problem to a concept and a remedy instead of listing general advice, and they use numbers such as planned and actual weeks to make the case concrete. Explaining why a technology problem is often an organizational one shows the systems thinking that later modules build on. Replies earn more credit when they add a new tool or source than when they simply agree with a classmate. Accurate terms matter too. A post that uses change control, charter and sponsor correctly reads as professional work.
HIM 400 Module 1 help: the mistakes that cost points
First-week posts in this course lose points when they define project management in the abstract, describe a project with no measurable details or blame the software without examining scope, roles and workflow. Another frequent gap is citing a source without saying what it found. If your prompt names a specific tool, such as a work breakdown structure or a Gantt chart, send it with any project details you have, and the sample can be built around that tool. A custom post can use a project from your own workplace while keeping the pattern of problem, concept, source and fix. Mention your reply requirements as well.
Get HIM 400 Module 1 written to your instructions
Send the HIM 400 Module 1 discussion prompt and a few details about a technology project you know. The post will connect its problems to scope, sponsorship and change control, cite research on health IT success and failure and close with a question for classmates, ready within 24 to 48 hours and free the first time. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Southern New Hampshire University document.
More HIM 400 papers and related BS Health Information Management samples
- HIM 200 Module 2 EHR Adoption Short Paper: How the HITECH Act Drove Electronic Record Adoption
- HIM 350 Module 5 Patient Communication Short Paper: Reminders, Portals, Health Literacy and Access
- HIM 360 Module 1 Discussion: Coding for Risk and Quality, Not Only Payment
- HIM 215 Module 3 ICD-10-PCS Short Paper: Seven Characters and Root Operations With Worked Examples
HIM 400 Module 1 questions, answered
Where can I find a free HIM 400 Module 1 Discussion sample?
The complete HIM 400 Module 1 post is on this page: a late lab interface project, scope creep and what project management adds to health IT work.
Why do health IT projects fail?
Research finds that most failures come from people, organizational and communication problems such as weak sponsorship and unclear scope rather than from the software.
What is scope creep?
The gradual addition of work beyond a project's original plan without adjusting time, budget or resources to match.
What does a project charter do?
It defines a project's purpose, scope, sponsor, deliverables and authority so that later requests can be judged against an agreed baseline.
What is a sociotechnical view of health technology?
A view that treats software, people, workflow, organizational policies and outside rules as connected parts that change together.