SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Yönetim Bilişim Sistemleri Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 12 Sayı: 1

STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT OF DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION INVESTMENTS IN THE HEALTHCARE SECTOR: HTDM MODEL PROPOSAL

SAĞLIK SEKTÖRÜNDE DİJİTAL DÖNÜŞÜM YATIRIMLARININ STRATEJİK YÖNETİMİ: BDDY MODELİ ÖNERİSİ

Sultan Gül Özdamar(MİLLİ SAVUNMA ÜNİVERSİTESİ, ALPARSLAN SAVUNMA BİLİMLERİ ENSTİTÜSÜ, HAREKAT ARAŞTIRMASI ANABİLİM DALI, HAREKAT ARAŞTIRMASI (DR))0000-0002-9998-7022
Semra Tebrizcik(KIRIKKALE ÜNİVERSİTESİ)
Süleyman Ersöz(KIRIKKALE ÜNİVERSİTESİ)
Pages
37–49
Publication Date
2026-06-25
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

By framing digital transformation as a continuous sociotechnical management cycle rather than a one-off IT installation project, the model provides healthcare managers with a practical roadmap to govern adoption and sustain measurable value creation, while also offering a testable theoretical foundation for future empirical research.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Healthcare is undergoing rapid digital transformation through innovations such as AI-assisted diagnostic systems, telemedicine, and electronic health records.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This underperformance is often driven less by technical limitations than by managerial gaps, including strategic misalignment, governance deficiencies, and organizational resistance.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:By framing digital transformation as a continuous sociotechnical management cycle rather than a one-off IT installation project, the model provides healthcare managers with a practical roadmap to govern adoption and sustain measurable value creation, while also offering a testable theoretical foundation for future empirical research.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Dijital Dönüşüm · Sağlık Sektörü · Stratejik Yönetim

Abstract

Healthcare is undergoing rapid digital transformation through innovations such as AI-assisted diagnostic systems, telemedicine, and electronic health records. However, prior research suggests that many of these investments fail to deliver the expected clinical, operational, and financial value. This underperformance is often driven less by technical limitations than by managerial gaps, including strategic misalignment, governance deficiencies, and organizational resistance. This study proposes the Holistic Digital Transformation Management (HDTM) framework (BDDY in Turkish), which integrates technology selection, change management, and value realization within a unified strategic management perspective. Grounded in an integrative literature synthesis, the framework was developed through traceable consolidation of findings from diverse theoretical traditions. Unlike existing frameworks that explain why digital transformation fails, HDTM prescribes how it should be managed — offering a structured decision–input–output logic across all four phases, while explicitly addressing the sociotechnical complexity of healthcare environments, including multi-stakeholder dynamics, professional resistance, and clinical workflow integration. The framework comprises four iterative phases: (1) Strategic Alignment and Requirements Analysis, (2) Technology Evaluation and Selection, (3) Implementation and Change Management, and (4) Value Realization and Optimization. By framing digital transformation as a continuous sociotechnical management cycle rather than a one-off IT installation project, the model provides healthcare managers with a practical roadmap to govern adoption and sustain measurable value creation, while also offering a testable theoretical foundation for future empirical research.

Özet

Sağlık sektörü, yapay zekâ destekli karar destek sistemleri, teletıp uygulamaları ve elektronik sağlık kayıtları gibi dijital yeniliklerin hızla yayıldığı bir dönüşüm dönemindedir. Buna karşın literatür, bu yatırımların önemli bir bölümünün beklenen klinik, operasyonel ve finansal faydayı üretmediğini göstermektedir. Başarısızlıkların temelinde çoğu zaman teknik eksikliklerden ziyade stratejik hizalanma eksikliği, yönetişim zafiyetleri ve organizasyonel direnç gibi yönetimsel sorunlar yer almaktadır. Bu çalışma, sağlık kurumlarında dijital dönüşüm yatırımlarını Yönetim Bilişim Sistemleri perspektifinden ele alarak teknoloji seçimi, değişim yönetimi ve değer gerçekleştirme süreçlerini bütünleştiren Bütüncül Dijital Dönüşüm Yönetimi (BDDY) çerçevesini önermektedir. Araştırma, bütünleştirici literatür sentezi yaklaşımıyla yürütülmüş ve farklı kuramsal akımlardan elde edilen bulguların izlenebilir biçimde birleştirilmesiyle kavramsal model geliştirmiştir. Mevcut çerçeveler dijital dönüşümün neden başarısız olduğunu açıklarken, BDDY bu sürecin nasıl yönetilmesi gerektiğini karar–girdi–çıktı mantığıyla ortaya koymakta ve genel yönetim döngülerinden farklı olarak sağlık ortamlarına özgü sosyo-teknik karmaşıklığı her aşamada ele almaktadır. Önerilen çerçeve dört aşamadan oluşur: (i) Stratejik Uyum ve Gereksinim Analizi, (ii) Teknoloji Değerlendirme ve Seçim, (iii) Uygulama ve Değişim Yönetimi, (iv) Değer Gerçekleştirme ve Optimizasyon. BDDY, dijital dönüşümü tek seferlik bir BT (Bilgi Teknolojileri) projesi yerine, karar–girdi–çıktı mantığıyla yönetilen ve sürekli iyileştirme döngüsü içinde sürdürülen bir stratejik yönetim süreci olarak konumlandırmakta; sağlık yöneticilerine uygulanabilir bir yol haritası ve ileri ampirik çalışmalar için test edilebilir bir kuramsal zemin sunmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Özdamar, S. G., Tebrizcik, S., Ersöz, S. (2026). STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT OF DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION INVESTMENTS IN THE HEALTHCARE SECTOR: HTDM MODEL PROPOSAL. Yönetim Bilişim Sistemleri Dergisi, Cilt: 12 Sayı: 1, 37–49. https://ajindex.com/articles/1578451

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (34)

  1. Amann, J., Blasimme, A., Vayena, E., Frey, D. ve Madai, V. I. (2020). Explainability for artificial intelligence in healthcare: A multidisciplinary perspective. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 20 (1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-020-01332-6
  2. Axelos. (2019). ITIL Foundation: ITIL 4 Edition. London: TSO.
  3. Coventry, L. ve Branley, D. (2018). Cybersecurity in healthcare: A narrative review of trends, threats and ways forward. Maturitas, 113: 48-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.maturitas.2018.04.008
  4. Cresswell, K. ve Sheikh, A. (2013). Organizational issues in the implementation and adoption of health information technology innovations: An interpretative review. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 82 (5): e73-e86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2012.10.007
  5. Deming, W. E. (1986). Out of the Crisis. Cambridge: MIT Press.
  6. Ellram, L. M. (1995). Total cost of ownership: An analysis approach for purchasing. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 25 (8): 4-23. https://doi.org/10.1108/09600039510099928
  7. Ersöz, O. Ö. ve Ersöz, S. (2015). İşletmelerde Bilgi Sistemleri. Ankara: Nobel Yayınevi.
  8. Fagherazzi, G., Goetzinger, C., Rashid, M. A., Aguayo, G. A. ve Huiart, L. (2020). Digital health strategies to fight COVID-19 worldwide: Challenges, recommendations, and a call for papers. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 22 (6). https://doi.org/10.2196/19284
  9. Greenhalgh, T., Wherton, J., Papoutsi, C., Lynch, J., Hughes, G., A'Court, C., Hinder, S., Fahy, N., Procter, R. ve Shaw, S. (2017). Beyond adoption: A new framework for theorizing and evaluating nonadoption, abandonment, and challenges to the scale-up, spread, and sustainability of health and care technologies. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 19 (11). https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.8775
  10. Henderson, J. C. ve Venkatraman, N. (1993). Strategic alignment: Leveraging information technology for transforming organizations. IBM Systems Journal, 32 (1): 4-16.
  11. Holden, R. J. ve Karsh, B. T. (2010). The technology acceptance model: Its past and its future in health care. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 43 (1): 159-172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2009.07.002
  12. Hughes, L., Petrella, A., Phillips, N. ve Taylor, R. M. (2022). Virtual care and the impact of COVID-19 on nursing: A single centre evaluation. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 78 (2): 498-509. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.15050
  13. Iyawa, G. E., Herselman, M. ve Botha, A. (2017). A scoping review of digital health innovation ecosystems in developed and developing countries. IST-Africa Week Conference, 31 Mayıs - 2 Haziran 2017, Windhoek, Namibya. https://doi.org/10.23919/ISTAFRICA.2017.8102325
  14. Kaplan, B. ve Harris-Salamone, K. D. (2009). Health IT success and failure: Recommendations from literature and an AMIA workshop. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 16 (3): 291-299. https://doi.org/10.1197/jamia.M2997
  15. Kotter, J. P. (1995). Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail. Harvard Business Review, 73 (2): 59-67.
  16. Kruse, C. S., Smith, B., Vanderlinden, H. ve Nealand, A. (2017). Security techniques for the electronic health records. Journal of Medical Systems, 41 (8). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-017-0778-4
  17. Laudon, K. C., Laudon, J. P., Yozgat, U. ve Öğüt, A. (2011). Yönetim Bilişim Sistemleri: Dijital İşletmeyi Yönetme. Ankara: Nobel Yayın.
  18. Matt, C., Hess, T. ve Benlian, A. (2015). Digital transformation strategies. Business and Information Systems Engineering, 57 (5): 339-343. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-015-0401-5
  19. Peppard, J. ve Ward, J. (2007). Managing the realization of business benefits from IT investments. MIS Quarterly Executive, 6 (1): 1-11.
  20. Saaty, T. L. (2008). Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Services Sciences, 1 (1): 83-98.
  21. Scipion, C. E. A., Manchester, M. A., Federman, A., Wang, Y. ve Arias, J. J. (2025). Barriers to and facilitators of clinician acceptance and use of artificial intelligence in healthcare settings: A scoping review. BMJ Open, 15 (4). https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2024-092624
  22. Shanafelt, T. D., Dyrbye, L. N., Sinsky, C., Hasan, O., Satele, D., Sloan, J. ve West, C. P. (2016). Relationship between clerical burden and characteristics of the electronic environment with physician burnout and professional satisfaction. Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 91 (7): 836-848. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mayocp.2016.05.007
  23. Silic, M. ve Back, A. (2014). Shadow IT – A view from behind the curtain. Computers and Security, 45: 274-283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2014.06.007
  24. Taherdoost, H. ve Madanchian, M. (2023). Multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) methods and concepts. Encyclopedia, 3 (1): 77-87. https://doi.org/10.3390/encyclopedia3010006
  25. Tai-Seale, M., Olson, C. W., Li, J., Chan, A. S., Morikawa, C., Durbin, M., Wang, W. ve Luft, H. S. (2017). Electronic health record logs indicate that physicians split time evenly between seeing patients and desktop medicine. Health Affairs, 36 (4): 655-662. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2016.0811
  26. Torraco, R. J. (2005). Writing integrative literature reviews: Guidelines and examples. Human Resource Development Review, 4 (3): 356-367. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484305278283
  27. Vest, J. R. ve Gamm, L. D. (2010). Health information exchange: Persistent challenges and new strategies. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 17 (3): 288-294. https://doi.org/10.1136/jamia.2010.003673
  28. Vial, G. (2019). Understanding digital transformation: A review and a research agenda. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 28 (2): 118-144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2019.01.003
  29. Walter, Z. ve Lopez, M. S. (2008). Physician acceptance of information technologies: Role of perceived threat to professional autonomy. Decision Support Systems, 46 (1): 206-215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2008.06.004
  30. Whitelaw, S., Mamas, M. A., Topol, E. ve Van Spall, H. G. C. (2020). Applications of digital technology in COVID-19 pandemic planning and response. The Lancet Digital Health, 2 (8): e435-e440. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2589-7500(20)30142-4
  31. Whittemore, R. ve Knafl, K. (2005). The integrative review: Updated methodology. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 52 (5): 546-553. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03621.x
  32. Wisner, K., Lyndon, A. ve Chesla, C. A. (2019). The electronic health record's impact on nurses' cognitive work: An integrative review. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 94: 74-84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2019.03.003
  33. Wosik, J., Fudim, M., Cameron, B., Gellad, Z. F., Cho, A., Phinney, D., Curtis, S., Roman, M., Poon, E. G., Ferranti, J., Katz, J. N. ve Tcheng, J. (2020). Telehealth transformation: COVID-19 and the rise of virtual care. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 27 (6): 957-962. https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocaa067
  34. Yuan, C. T., Bradley, E. H. ve Nembhard, I. M. (2015). A mixed methods study of how clinician "super users" influence others during the implementation of electronic health records. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 15 (1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-015-0154-6