Re: [Hardhats-members] grown vs architected systems

[Richard G. DAVIS]

Title: Re: [Hardhats-members] grown vs architected systems

BOTH!

The classification depends on the level of analysis.  

At the implementation level, that is, at the technical IT level, the origins of VistA were from the outset soundly grounded on unifying principles of architecture.  The presence of an open common data dictionary and associated storage framework with a set of commonly used methods to manage the dictionary and data reveals the presence of an “architected” system.

Moving up the ‘system hierarchy’, when the analysis turns to focus on health care ‘systems’ INDEPENDENT of the underlying implementation technology, then DHCP and VistA in its wake, were more “grown”.  VistA origins at this higher level reflect the nature of health care organization in the world at large.  The system is more a host of loosely affiliated stove pipes.

Over the years there have been heroic efforts to remediate the stove pipe architecture, but the work either becomes ensnarled in political processes, or degenerates into technology obsessions.

There are, of course, many who will not agree with this view.

Regards,

Richard Davis.

---

From: "Lorie Obal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 15:56:02 -0700
To: <hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: [Hardhats-members] grown vs architected systems

Would it be fair to classify openVista as a "grown" system - developed as demanded (ad hoc) as opposed to an architected from the ground up system?

-Lorie