Re: Interesting Govt. Health IT Writeup on Web 3.0 (Semantic Web) and Health IT from Mark Montgomery on 2007-07-24 (public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org from July 2007)

From: Mark Montgomery <markm@kyield.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 19:44:23 -0700
To: <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>, "Kashyap, Vipul" <VKASHYAP1@PARTNERS.ORG>
Message-ID: <016501c7cd9c$8ed5ff90$a100a8c0@Inspiron>

Well, you run into conflicts with the cake and eat it to problem. The huge economic miracle of write once/ replicate anywhere in software is what brings the price down worldwide (or should in competitive markets)- a similar but not quite as magical effect takes place with chip manufacturing- hardware has been more successful in driving prices down interesting enough, even though their margins are not as high as SW. In that regard the first generation PC leaders did provide great value, even if at times at other's expense. The trouble is that this phenom conflicts directly with the need for differentiation- not just in large organizations or even private sector, but most organizational types.

So then we have the argument on costs that if we had this huge semantic web where everyone contributed content for free, or between partners, that those users of that system would enjoy a vastly increased level of productivity. No argument from me- we've been on that pulpit for a long time indeed- precisely the case I made with the U.S. Gov in the katrina business case. In fact I have zero doubt that such systems could also save large numbers of lives.

However, let's not ignore the key issue with adoption. The economic problem is the alignment of interest challenge (which is similar to open source)- the users are not necessarily of the same economic entity that must pay for the development of the content (in this case we are talking about billions of $ in R&D- not just blogs), the development of the ontologies, and who are then expected to share. And public sources are not paying for the majority of the content people need even if willing to share.

Given the complexity of the current business and revenue models in healthcare, along with the vastly different IT systems along the chain (many specialists don't even have networks they are such small businesses), it would seem that the meritocracy issue if not the solution we propose would be of interest. I am confident that eventually it will be, but in healthcare, government, and some other sectors perhaps that component/module will only be of value in conjunction with updating the archaic compensation schemes and revenue models. For example, it took an act of congress for the first significant test of a true merit system in the federal government (U.S.).

It's important to note however that we did not include meritocracy in our holistic architecture due to our own activism or belief systems- rather it was based on extensive research and testing on sharing knowledge within and across organizations. Academia is far from perfect, but it does have a peer system of sorts, which does favor publication and some sharing of knowledge. Most cultures do not, even within a single organization just the opposite is the case because our incentive systems are dysfunctional- which promotes less than favorable cultures, and certainly the sharing publicly on the Internet has proven to be only for the self destructive like myself and a few hundred million others, apparently, who prop up the few who are compensated.

We've been on a long journey my friends, and we've taken up most of these issues many times. We did not reach our conclusions easily, nor out of chance, but rather with ears open to the truth within the realm of what's immediately doable. I am confident that eventually the mainstream will come to similar conclusions- we see pieces of it throughout R&D thought leaders in related disciplines evolving, but it's not at all integrated well across disciplines.

Thanks Vipul for the interesting discussion. I hope you and your organization will share some of your cases with us as these theories are field tested. We are seeking the opportunity to do the same with our Kyield architecture. Holistic systems are not for the faint of heart, but I'm confident that most of the value lies therein. .02 - MM
----- Original Message -----
From: Kashyap, Vipul
To: Mark Montgomery ; public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org
Sent: Monday, July 23, 2007 6:55 PM
Subject: RE: Interesting Govt. Health IT Writeup on Web 3.0 (Semantic Web) and Health IT

That's not too different from what most have been seeking for over a decade, and what we and others are attempting to offer- the question is whether it can be delivered, and if so by whom. A lot of organizations attempted same previously, finding that they only increased and transferred costs as nothing was replaced, and very few have found much flexibility yet in the entire IT world. It isn't clear to me yet how ontologies achieve those goals- in fact much like XML I see the potential for costs skyrocketing and if one is not careful- an extension of the old extortion game in ESW.

[VK] I think the fundamental shift in this regard comes from carving out portions of the application/business logic space and replacing them with declarative constructs. For instance, decision support logic which

was hitherto viewed as software code written in java is now viewed as declarative "content" that is externalized from the software. This is what enables more efficient change management. The promise of semantic

technologies lies in coming up with specifications and tools to represent and reason with this "content" decoupled from software development and deployment. One reason, the value was nor realized earlier is

that an attempt was made to get software re-use and change.. Which is very difficult to achieve.

In contrast, value is being sought in the context of information retrieval, search, integration, etc. where the value exists but is difficult to articulate. The change management value proposition is easier to see and articulate. Besides, rule engines are currently deployed in quite a few verticals and are already delivering value.

I certainly do see substantial potential in flexibility and change management in this general area, and any organization with influence who embraces those goals will have a positive impact throughout the ecosystem and beyond. Good to see that organizational differentiation is finally becoming a priority, if reports are true. The way we were headed previously was IT enabled if-not-required universal mediocrity.

[VK] I think the above is a key point. SW technologies are not universally applicable and have to be targeted to the appropriate use case to achieve the value proposition.

Cheers,

---Vipul

----- Original Message -----

From: Kashyap, Vipul

To: Mark Montgomery ; public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org

Sent: Monday, July 23, 2007 12:51 PM

Subject: RE: Interesting Govt. Health IT Writeup on Web 3.0 (Semantic Web) and Health IT

Mark,

It's interesting to see that even the traditionally risk averse healthcare IT types are looking at Semantic Web technologies.

The key issue is that in the enterprise context, the value proposition is very different . For instance, we are looking at

flexibility, maintenance, change management and cost reduction.

Cheers,

---Vipul

=======================================

Vipul Kashyap, Ph.D.

Senior Medical Informatician

Clinical Informatics R&D, Partners HealthCare System

Phone: (781)416-9254

Cell: (617)943-7120

http://www.partners.org/cird/AboutUs.asp?cBox=Staff&stAb=vik

To keep up you need the right answers; to get ahead you need the right questions

---John Browning and Spencer Reiss, Wired 6.04.95

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Mark Montgomery [mailto:markm@kyield.com]
Sent: Monday, July 23, 2007 3:45 PM
To: Kashyap, Vipul; public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org
Subject: Re: Interesting Govt. Health IT Writeup on Web 3.0 (Semantic Web) and Health IT

No doubt a great many people will be watching to see how well the early adopting orgs' web 3.0/SW efforts go, particularly in health management.

Interesting discussion and differing perspectives on risk aversion and embracing of innovation in large organizations:

++ Square Off: Most CIOs Deliver Business Value, Even If Housekeeping Is A Bear
Toromont Industries CIO Mike Cuddy doesn't buy the claim that IT
departments aren't generating new ideas.
informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=201002312

++ Square Off: IT Leaders Know Innovation Matters, They Just Can't
Execute
Gartner analyst Stephen Prentice says IT leaders are getting too bogged
down in me-too decision making at the expense of true innovation.
informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=201002311

Mark Montgomery
CEO, Kyield
http://www.kyield.com
Managing Partner
Initium Venture Capital
http://www.initiumcapital.com

----- Original Message -----

From: Kashyap, Vipul

To: public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org

Sent: Monday, July 23, 2007 9:08 AM

Subject: Interesting Govt. Health IT Writeup on Web 3.0 (Semantic Web) and Health IT

http://www.govhealthit.com/article103153-07-16-07-Print

=======================================

Vipul Kashyap, Ph.D.

Senior Medical Informatician

Clinical Informatics R&D, Partners HealthCare System

Phone: (781)416-9254

Cell: (617)943-7120

http://www.partners.org/cird/AboutUs.asp?cBox=Staff&stAb=vik

To keep up you need the right answers; to get ahead you need the right questions

---John Browning and Spencer Reiss, Wired 6.04.95

The information transmitted in this electronic communication is intended only for the person or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this information in error, please contact the Compliance HelpLine at 800-856-1983 and properly dispose of this information.

Received on Tuesday, 24 July 2007 02:48:39 UTC