This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
Difference between revisions of "AID SWOT"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Rene spronk (talk | contribs) |
Rene spronk (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
====Threats==== | ====Threats==== | ||
| − | *Stifling effect of Intellectual Property issues | + | *Stifling effect of Intellectual Property issues preventing participation by some parties |
*AID not seen as an active WG because few implementers attend WGMs. | *AID not seen as an active WG because few implementers attend WGMs. | ||
*Risk that commercial parties use AID as a marketing platform for tools. | *Risk that commercial parties use AID as a marketing platform for tools. | ||
Revision as of 14:55, 13 May 2015
SWOT
Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats for the AID "user group"
Strengths
- Active members with actual experience of HL7 implementations
- Active members with a passion for health information technology
- Deep understanding of HL7 standards and healthcare IT implementations
Weaknesses
- Inbalance in ability to share information due to Intellectual Property issues (e.g. users that are unable to share because of company IP issues)
- Quite a few active contributors to the deliverables don't take part in WGMs (those are too much geared towards standards developers)
Opportunities
- Has the ability to show the power of HL7 standards
- Has the capability to ease implementations of HL7 standards (best practices, reference implementation)
- Free IP, and Grassroots adoption of FHIR, will expand our audience.
Threats
- Stifling effect of Intellectual Property issues preventing participation by some parties
- AID not seen as an active WG because few implementers attend WGMs.
- Risk that commercial parties use AID as a marketing platform for tools.
