Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Mastering the PACS RFP.

Jef Williams1, Adrian Riggs

  • 1TeamPACS, Sutter Health, Inc., USA. jwilliams@mckenziestephenson.com

Radiology Management
|September 29, 2005
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

The traditional Request for Proposal (RFP) process for Picture Archiving and Communication Systems (PACS) is lengthy. A dynamic RFP significantly shortens vendor selection time, ensuring more relevant decisions.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same journal

The Diagnostic Imagination in Radiology: Part 2.

Radiology management·2019
Same journal

Enhancing Patient Safety Using Medical Imaging Informatics.

Radiology management·2019
Same journal

Leading and Motivating Generation Y Employees.

Radiology management·2019
Same journal

Accounting Basics Part 4: Net Present Value.

Radiology management·2019
Same journal

Employee Incentives in Healthcare: An Eight Year Comparison.

Radiology management·2019
Same journal

Current Employment Practices and Future Preferences for Multicredentialed Technologists in Nebraska.

Radiology management·2019

Area of Science:

  • Medical Informatics
  • Healthcare Management

Background:

  • Selecting a Picture Archiving and Communication System (PACS) vendor is critical for realizing system benefits.
  • The traditional Request for Proposal (RFP) process is time-consuming, often taking 9-18 months.
  • Long RFP timelines can lead to outdated information in rapidly evolving industries.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To highlight the inefficiencies of the legacy RFP process in vendor selection.
  • To introduce and advocate for a dynamic RFP approach.
  • To demonstrate how a dynamic RFP improves vendor selection accuracy and efficiency.

Main Methods:

  • Analysis of the traditional RFP process duration and its drawbacks.
  • Introduction of the dynamic RFP methodology.
  • Explanation of dynamic RFP components: shorter timelines (3-5 months), weighting, on-site demonstrations, and vendor presentations.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • Dynamic RFPs significantly reduce vendor selection timelines.
  • Shorter timelines ensure steering committee relevance and improve decision accuracy.
  • Dynamic RFPs create a level playing field for vendor evaluation.

Conclusions:

  • A dynamic RFP process is superior to the legacy RFP for selecting PACS vendors.
  • This approach enhances the likelihood of choosing the most suitable vendor.
  • Implementing dynamic RFPs leads to more effective PACS implementations and benefits.