An Interview with Dave Rice of Siemens Medical Solutions, USA

By DAVID ZIEV

Dave Rice is the chief information officer (CIO) for Siemens Medical Solutions, USA, in Malvern, Penn. Siemens Medical Solutions, USA, is part of a larger global organization, headquartered in Erlangen, Germany, and is one of the largest providers of business solutions for the healthcare industry in the world. The company is known for bringing together innovative medical technologies, healthcare information systems, management consulting, and support services, to help customers achieve tangible, sustainable, clinical and financial outcomes.
Rice was the CIO and vice president of Siemens Medical Solutions Health Services from October 2000 until September 2002, and since October 2002 has been the CIO and vice president of Siemens Medical Solutions, USA.. Prior to that, Rice served as CIO and vice president of distributed technologies at Shared Medical Systems, which was acquired by Siemens AG in July, 2000.

Ziev: Dave, as the CIO, what are your current focus areas, and how would business continuity (BC) affect these areas?
Rice: Helping to achieve Siemens Medical Solutions’ business objectives is our highest priority, with the primary focus areas being on the customer relationship management (CRM) and supply chain management (SCM) business processes. Our job is to support Siemens Medical Solutions’ with a technology strategy that helps attain these business objectives. Disaster recovery (DR) planning for the infrastructure that supports these processes is critical. At Siemens Medical Solutions, as well as other businesses, business continuity and disaster recovery have become more closely integrated in order to ensure the overall success of the business.

Ziev: Is there a blur between BCP and DR?
Rice: At one point DR meant that you recovered systems after a cataclysmic event, but other things are now considered just as disastrous if they cause disruptions in a stable, reliable infrastructure that supports the business. Also, in the past, less focus was placed on the recovering the overall, end-to-end business processes supported by the systems. It’s easy to imagine how a cataclysmic event such as a fire or flood would cause such a disruption, but relatively new threats to the stability of the business can be just as damaging – e.g., infection by viruses, security breaches, etc. Nowadays, most companies are more likely to recognize these potential risk areas, and proactively develop comprehensive BC plans to address them.

Ziev: Are decisions to develop BCP programs being driven by the board among your peers?
Rice: The predominant driver is the need to provide a stable and secure infrastructure for the business – and this is clearly a mandate throughout the organization. Frankly, Y2K also helped to provide focus for BCP. Y2K created a sense of urgency, a heightened priority, and raised awareness. Likewise, the devastating actions of 9/11also brought the critical importance of BCP to the foreground, and helped re-enforce a sense of urgency surrounding the need for an effective BCP / DR program. Quite frankly, another profound driver is regulatory compliance. We are obliged by federal regulation to ensure that we have the necessary controls in place to ensure that proper BCP / D/R planning occurs.

Ziev: What organizational chain should BCP report through? Some argue that it should be the president, CFO, or COO.
Rice: BCP does need strong “top down” senior executive level management support in order to be successful. I believe this is less linked with a specific title though than it is with someone that has the necessary energy and passion to truly drive comprehensive BCP planning and compliance. In our particular organization, the CFO plays a vital role in this area.

Ziev: So how does the relationship work between the CIO and business units? Does the IT department shoulder the brunt of the responsibility for business continuity?
Rice: In order to be effective, BCP must be a partnership between the business units and IT. We’ve found that approaching BCP from an integrated perspective that encompasses both the business process and the associated system requirements yields a much more effective outcome.

Ziev: Dave, do you have any last thoughts to share with BCP practitioners about what CIOs and other executives should consider in terms of BCP?
Rice: Companies simply can’t afford to just feel they are covered. Businesses are global now, with a much wider impact on worldwide operations. Business requirements drive IT, and there is a corresponding expectation of a stable, reliable, infrastructure that will be continuously available.
There may be a sense of immediate gratification associated with developing a disaster recovery plan for a piece of technology, but this doesn’t necessarily address the true “heavy lifting” of comprehensive business continuity planning. Continuity of the business is heavily dependent on an understanding of the fundamental business processes of the enterprise, and how they inter-relate to the enabling infrastructure. This understanding helps to ensure that business continuity plans are developed to support the overall business process, and are not just technology recovery plans.

©Copyright 2004 Systems Support Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without the express written permission of System Support Inc. is prohibited.

«BACK to the Articles Index