Best Practices for Bio 1 updates/changes, etc.

Jenny Physioc

I am new to my recent position with LLUH and it is very different from where I came from or "grew up using RE"  There are about 95 people who have user rights to RE.  They all have different levels of access but are use to having access to make any sort of changes/updates/deletions to RE.  I stopped that when I got here and am still hearing graons about it.  It has increased work for us however the accuracy has skyrocketed and recording of why and what was done is recorded too.

 I have been challenged to empower others to do these changes and train them so I have 'more staff' so to speak.  I am wanting to know what you feel is best practice on who makes changes to RE and would you want others making these types of changes to your database.  I would need to train them all of course.  Not being able to see what was actually changed is a problem otherwise I could check daily how, what and why these changes are taking place to make sure everything was being done correctly.  Plus the current database state is really awful because there are 8 schools and 6 hospitals all using RE and entering things as they saw fit until I got here.

 Please advise what you would do.  I greatly appreciate your opinions.

Laura Caswell

Jenny Physioc:

I am new to my recent position with LLUH and it is very different from where I came from or "grew up using RE"  There are about 95 people who have user rights to RE.  They all have different levels of access but are use to having access to make any sort of changes/updates/deletions to RE.  I stopped that when I got here and am still hearing graons about it.  It has increased work for us however the accuracy has skyrocketed and recording of why and what was done is recorded too.

 I have been challenged to empower others to do these changes and train them so I have 'more staff' so to speak.  I am wanting to know what you feel is best practice on who makes changes to RE and would you want others making these types of changes to your database.  I would need to train them all of course.  Not being able to see what was actually changed is a problem otherwise I could check daily how, what and why these changes are taking place to make sure everything was being done correctly.  Plus the current database state is really awful because there are 8 schools and 6 hospitals all using RE and entering things as they saw fit until I got here.

 Please advise what you would do.  I greatly appreciate your opinions.

 First, if it's a total record delete that all users had access to, I'd keep that in my control. If people at my organization had that kind of power, we'd have a mess. Their reasons for deleting someone are pretty darn flimsy and they wouldn't think twice about deleting a record with money on it. We have attributes that we use to keep those records off of their lists.

 As for updates/changes and the like, instead of letting all 95 users back at the records in any capacity they want, how about a few power users in each area who can handle the data entry piece? People who "get" why it's important to create a note of what was done and why and who made the request. People who will call you with questions if they aren't sure how to make the requested change. It puts "control" back in the different areas but not in everyone's hands.

Another thought: Our events office makes it a requirement that training is attended before you can have access to the events software. They actually shut down access until the training is attended. Could you get buy in for that? And then roll out the access in a manner that you can handle. Run queries that check for the most obvious data entry "mistakes" and if you've only given access to 10 "new" people, you can track & correct a little.

 If you've got proof that taking the control back to properly trained people has cut down on errors and made for cleaner data, you have some ammunition with requiring training for access and limiting access to people who actually understand that garbage in makes for garbage out. And that entering something in XYZ format today just to get what you want for this one report/amiling, can have long range consequences.

 HTH,

laura

 

 

Jenny Physioc

Laura Caswell:

 First, if it's a total record delete that all users had access to, I'd keep that in my control. If people at my organization had that kind of power, we'd have a mess. Their reasons for deleting someone are pretty darn flimsy and they wouldn't think twice about deleting a record with money on it. We have attributes that we use to keep those records off of their lists.

 As for updates/changes and the like, instead of letting all 95 users back at the records in any capacity they want, how about a few power users in each area who can handle the data entry piece? People who "get" why it's important to create a note of what was done and why and who made the request. People who will call you with questions if they aren't sure how to make the requested change. It puts "control" back in the different areas but not in everyone's hands.

Another thought: Our events office makes it a requirement that training is attended before you can have access to the events software. They actually shut down access until the training is attended. Could you get buy in for that? And then roll out the access in a manner that you can handle. Run queries that check for the most obvious data entry "mistakes" and if you've only given access to 10 "new" people, you can track & correct a little.

 If you've got proof that taking the control back to properly trained people has cut down on errors and made for cleaner data, you have some ammunition with requiring training for access and limiting access to people who actually understand that garbage in makes for garbage out. And that entering something in XYZ format today just to get what you want for this one report/amiling, can have long range consequences.

 HTH,

laura

 

 

Thank you for your thoughts. I like the power user idea a lot!