With the USA it was recognised earlier that data was not being loaded; a graphic example was the earthquake in LA, six months after phase I went live, when the data in the system did not allow them to report their exposure. At this point senior management in London and USA were brought in to commit to a plan of action (00340) but to no avail. When the audit was conducted six months later, the data quality in the USA was so poor it was not worth auditting (00658). Six months later they were talking about relaunching the system in the USA. As with the UK and Holland there seems to have been a confusion between having the programmes in the system and having the data correct (00618, 00658).
Social influence: |
|
Technical influence: |
System characteristics: Data |
![]() |
Commentary |
![]() |
Social influence |
||
![]() |
Technical influence |
![]() |
© Clare Tagg 2000