Abstract
The purpose of this study is to understand how institutional environment influences digital innovation in national health insurance. A growing body of information systems research on health insurance exists; however, these have focused more on performance and management with less attention on institutional influences. This study employs institutional theory as the analytical lens and qualitative, interpretive case study as the methodology to understand digital innovation and institutional challenges to address the research gap. The findings show that digital innovation can help improve national health insurance service delivery. The critical barriers identified for limiting health insurance include (1) error-prone manual system; (2) silo information system that failed to offer healthcare access portability; (3) absence of national identity system and (4) digital divide across accredited health providers. The findings have implication for research, practice, and policy.
Recommended Citation
Renner-Micah, Anthony; Effah, John; and Boateng, Richard, "Understanding Digital Innovation in National Health Insurance: The Case of Ghana" (2019). AMCIS 2019 Proceedings. 6.
https://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2019/global_dev/global_dev/6
Understanding Digital Innovation in National Health Insurance: The Case of Ghana
The purpose of this study is to understand how institutional environment influences digital innovation in national health insurance. A growing body of information systems research on health insurance exists; however, these have focused more on performance and management with less attention on institutional influences. This study employs institutional theory as the analytical lens and qualitative, interpretive case study as the methodology to understand digital innovation and institutional challenges to address the research gap. The findings show that digital innovation can help improve national health insurance service delivery. The critical barriers identified for limiting health insurance include (1) error-prone manual system; (2) silo information system that failed to offer healthcare access portability; (3) absence of national identity system and (4) digital divide across accredited health providers. The findings have implication for research, practice, and policy.