<div class="description">
<dl><dd>Thesis advisor(s): Kishore Sangupta, Daniel R. Dolk</dd>
<dd>"September 2000."</dd>
<dd>Thesis (M.S. in Information Technology Management) Naval Postgraduate School, Sept. 2000</dd>
<dd>Includes bibliographical references</dd>
<dd>The feasibility of using argumentation based design rationale capture techniques for improving the implementation strategy of managed care is investigated. The hypothesis is made that managed care is failing because it deals in 'wicked' problems, which are fundamentally different than the 'tame' problems encountered in traditional medicine, and that the organizational structure of managed care is not equipped to handle wicked problems. It is shown that argumentation based design rationale tools are an excellent candidate for bridging the ideals of traditional medicine to the realities of managed care for three reasons: the tools are specifically designed to explore the resolution of wicked problems, the problems encountered in managed care possess many similarities to problems that have been shown to have successful utilization of design rationale capture techniques, and the power relationships within managed care are most fitting with a collaborative implementation strategy. Recommendations for a collaborative implementation strategy of managed care, using design rationale capture tools as a mechanism of collaboration, are given</dd>
<dd>Mode of access: World Wide Web</dd>
<dd>System requirements: Adobe Acrobat reader</dd>
<dd>US Navy (USN) author</dd>
<dd>dk/dk cc:9116 01/18/01</dd></dl><br>Subjects:</div>
<div class="fn value">
Zinder, Daniel J.</div>
Internet Archive identifier