Group items tagged

Supercharging the HVA Engineering and Maintenance Risk Assessment in the Healthcare Setting Webinar Registration Hospitals have been under close scrutiny for years to insure they evaluate and mitigate risks and exposures that could impact their ability to deliver healthcare services under all conditions. A staple of this activity is the "Hazard Vulnerability Assessment". A traditional HVA looks at specific threats within four categories (natural, technological, human and hazardous materials). While the HVA is useful for auditors looking to confirm minimum compliance, it does not properly arm the organization to assess how risk, mitigation strategies and limited capital can effectively be deployed for maximum benefit. Come hear from leaders of Deaconess Health Systems Engineering and Maintenance team on how they partnered with Virtual Corporation to execute an effective risk assessment methodology and toolkit across the DHS enterprise. Participants will see examples of innovative risk mapping and reporting methods that yield high information density in simple, understandable format. Presenters: Mark Merrill, Facility Engineer, Deaconess Health System Tom Barnett, Manager, Engineering and Maintenance, Deaconess Health System Scott Ream, President, Virtual Corporation Webinar Registration Hospitals have been under close scrutiny for years to insure they evaluate and mitigate risks and exposures that could impact their ability to deliver healthcare services under all conditions. A staple of this activity is the "Hazard Vulnerability Assessment". A traditional HVA looks at specific threats within four categories (natural, technological, human and hazardous materials). While the HVA is useful for auditors looking to confirm minimum compliance, it does not properly arm the organization to assess how risk, mitigation strategies and limited capital can effectively be deployed for maximum benefit. Come hear from leaders of Deaconess H

Companies in the technology, media and telecommunications industries (TMT) significantly reduced investment in security spending in 2008, according to a new survey from Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu. The third edition of the Deloitte TMT Global Security Survey reveals that 32 percent of respondents reduced their information security budgets, while 60 percent of respondents believe they are "falling behind" or still "catching up" to their security threats -- a significant increase from 49 percent over the previous year. "This year's results indicate companies are explicitly scaling back. With funding decreasing and the threats increasing, it is more important than ever for TMT companies to be highly cost efficient in addressing their security risks," said Irfan Saif, a principal in Deloitte & Touche LLP's Audit and Enterprise Risk Services practice. "Companies that do not have a sound understanding of their security risk profile, or who under-invest in security now, may find themselves exposed to significant and increasingly sophisticated threats that they are not equipped to mitigate." With the proliferation of digitized assets, security should claim a significant portion of a company's overall IT budget. However, only 6 percent of respondents allocate 7 percent or more of their total budget to IT security. This year represents a significant decline from the previous edition of the survey, which showed that 36 percent of the respondents allocated 7 percent or more of their budget to IT security. The survey also indicates that declining security investment is hindering adoption of new security technologies, with only 53 percent of respondents considering their organizations to be early adopters, or part of the early majority, down from 67 percent in 2007. Companies are focusing more effort on optimizing solutions that are already in place rather than investing in cutting-edge technology that can be capitalized upon during economic recovery.

"On January 20, 2009, Heartland Payment Systems reported discovering malicious software in its payment processing system, a security breach of potentially massive magnitude given that the company's handles 100 million transactions per month for more than 250,000 businesses. While the monetary and data loses following from the penetration of Heartland's systems -- the compromise that lasted for months -- are still being determined, the financial impact on Heartland's stock price alone was devastating. " The breach, in conjunction with the economic downturn, led to the loss of about $500 million in shareholder value, more than three-quarters of the company's market capitalization, two months after the news was announced. And then there's the cost of more than several dozen breach-related lawsuits filed against the company this year and related expenses. According to slides presented in August at a National Retail Federation Conference by Robert O. Carr, Heartland's founder, chairman and CEO, the breach cost the company $32 million in legal fees, fines, settlements, and forensics during just the first half of the year.

Oh, the double-edged sword of Twitter. It's not nice when it makes PR people and reporters look like asses, as Jennifer Leggio will post tomorrow. But it's a whole new can o' beans when it affects political power. And yup, Twitter did in fact (or not - see below) alter the balance of power in Virginia (the state capital of which is Richmond, Va., for what it's worth) this week, as Talking Points Memo blogs: Yesterday the Virginia GOP came very close to taking control of the state Senate, nearly luring a Democratic Senator to switch parties and put them at a 20-20 tie, which would have been broken by the Republican Lt. Governor. Then Jeff Frederick, a state legislator and the party chairman, ruined it all by Twittering this: Big news coming out of Senate: Apparently one dem is either switching or leaving the dem caucus. Negotiations for power sharing underway. The Dems then read the message, quickly mobilized to talk the renegade out of it, and stopped the GOP coup before it could happen. Here's Frederick's exciting presence on Twitter, featuring such nail-biting updates as: * Had great meeting; dinner @ Bookbinders; now at Lucky Strike/Cap Results party. Tired * Meeting w/ Senator about a bill he wants me to support. And then this intriguing post: Meeting w/ HseMajLdr abt my senate post earlier.He gave me info, which came f/ a Senator who said it was public. That will be a fun meeting. At any rate Frederick pointed to a blog post from conservative Roanoke County, which says the whole Twitter story is b.s., that the Dems already knew about the rogue House member before Frederick ever Tweeted. Even so, the strange power of Twitter is now well-established.

Will monetary value increase the value of user's data on social networks?

Facebook and Twitter have helped make social networking a household word. Now they need to make money. Efforts to monetize the popular Internet services are increasingly a priority within the two companies, with Facebook Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg and Twitter Co-founder Biz Stone outlining several initiatives at the Reuters Global Technology Summit in New York this week. And analysts and investors, in search of the next Google-like hit, are paying close attention to the breakneck speed at which Facebook and Twitter are adding new users. While the popularity of the two social media firms has yet to translate into the kind of revenue-generating machine that Google Inc developed with its search advertising business, some say Facebook and Twitter have become so central to the Internet experience that they are inherently valuable. "Both are new ways of communicating. And when you have a new way of communicating ... you benefit people enough so that there is going to be value there," said Tim Draper, managing director of venture capital firm Draper Fisher Jurvetson, noting that he regretted not having invested in either firm. In April, Twitter's website attracted 17 million unique visitors in the United States, up sharply from 9.3 million the month before. Facebook grew to 200 million active users in April, less than a year after hitting 100 million users.

Raises some realistic questions about the American approach to privacy law & regulation. Unfortunately, the article tends to point at the misapplication of laws more heavily than offering the reader an account of the abuses that led us to where we are now. Businesses & government, including the medical industry, freely shared details - or spied on Americans with impunity for decades. The article reminds us that work needs to continue to balance our approach. A Federal law, that sets a floor for privacy requirements, could help reduce conflicting requirements caused by almost every state writing seperate laws because there was a lack of leadership from Washington. American privacy regulations are implemented sectorally - at the industry or State level for example. This leads to many different, and conflicting laws. Privacy is a difficult subject with complex considerations touching aspects of life that have not been questioned for years. This article provides more con than balance, but it reminds us that extreme positions rarely serve anyone well.

Special interest groups and lawyers claim they are defenders of individual privacy. But all that red tape is causing more harm to consumers than good. In a world of tight budgets and sacrificed programs, one sector has continued to grow with the speed and choking effectiveness of kudzu: regulations around privacy. More than 300 privacy-related laws are on the books, in both Washington, D.C. and state capitals. Privacy-related consulting services provided by law and accounting firms are a $500-million-a-year business and have been growing at double digits.

A disconnect exists between federal government CIOs, CISOs and IT hiring managers and the human resources professionals charged with finding qualified candidates with cybersecurity skills, according to a just-published report. The report, Cyber In-Security: Strengthening the Federal Cybersecurity Workforce from the Partnership for Public Service, concludes that IT managers are less satisfied than their HR counterparts with the quality of cybersecurity recruits and the time it takes to hire IT security personnel. "The human capital management process is broken; operations and HR people should be joined at the hip and collaborate across the government," the report quotes Norman Lorentz, former chief technology officer at the White House Office of Management and Budget. Indeed, one third of chief information officers, chief information security officers and IT hiring managers surveyed for the report expressed unhappiness with candidate quality vs. 10 percent for HR managers. Sixty-one percent of HR managers vs. 40 percent of IT managers expressed satisfaction with candidate quality (see chart).

Shopper insights has moved quickly across the CPG and retailing landscapes in the past decade as marketers seek to understand the shopper's entire path to purchase and increase sales. From their home (including how they use and view products; advertising media that sparks their interest in new products; how and when they decide where to purchase the product) to the store (including aisle and shelf navigation; product attribute trade-offs; and so on), shoppers are constantly making purchase-related decisions. Shopper insights seeks to holistically comprehend the shopper's environment, surroundings and influences to learn from and capitalize on all of the choices they make along the way.

Do you know what your data did last night? Almost none of more than 27 million people who took the RealAge quiz realized that their personal health data was sold to drug companies, who in turned used that information for targeted e-mail marketing campaigns. There's a basic consumer protection principle at work here, and it's the concept of "unfair and deceptive" trade practices. Basically, a company shouldn't be able to say one thing and do another: sell used goods as new, lie on ingredients lists, advertise prices that aren't generally available, claim features that don't exist, and so on. RealAge's privacy policy doesn't mention anything about selling data to drug companies, but buried in its 2,400 words, it does say that "we will share your personal data with third parties to fulfill the services that you have asked us to provide to you." They maintain that when you join the website, you consent to receiving pharmaceutical company spam. But since that isn't spelled out, it's not really informed consent. That's deceptive. Cloud computing is another technology where users entrust their data to service providers. Salesforce.com, Gmail, and Google Docs are examples; your data isn't on your computer -- it's out in the "cloud" somewhere -- and you access it from your web browser. Cloud computing has significant benefits for customers and huge profit potential for providers. It's one of the fastest growing IT market segments -- 69% of Americans now use some sort of cloud computing services -- but the business is rife with shady, if not outright deceptive, advertising.