On behalf of IT people I would like to apologise (responding to previous concerns raised about information systems gaps, delivery methods failures, disconnect between digital and clinical)
My vision / desire for clinical informatics capability is for clinical informatics leads to partner with service directors (i.e. cardiology, maternity, etc) to create clinical digital transformation plans, owned by the directorates, for the directorates (but joined up). I recognise that the group is not resourced for this and that would have to be solved.
From an architect viewpoint, clinical informatics people are a key source of information for planning and roadmaps
Because we know the IT machine we can help inject you at critical points in delivery, business case, and even IT operations. Not just governance but also planning.
Data and Digital architects are a thin resource and we can’t always be present with technical teams… so we create documents to guide technology folk in the form of principles and standards. Could you do the same? Create some content to guide decision making with the essence of your thinking. You may not want to get involved in all the detail.
Lara responded with it is important to get involved in detail - participate in the D&D ecosystem and learn to be a translator.
Other things recollect
Digital competencies are now part of governing body regulatory requirements
I do wish I had taken notes on the session. During the discussion I did raise that in my region there has been talk of “clinical accountability” for informatics projects; but that “accountability” had not been clearly defined. Certainly accountability is expected in a mature process, but we will need to be careful that any informatics role, including anything like a CCIO, that expects accountability also includes the authority to do what needs to be done. Otherwise if you have accountability without authority then you are a figurehead at best and scapegoat at worst.