Interview: ECC General Manager¶

Stakeholder: Executive leadership with strategic governance and policy oversight responsibilities
Date Conducted: [To be filled]
Interviewer(s): [To be filled]
Notetaker: [To be filled]

PREPARATION¶

Goals (Doelen)¶

What do we want to achieve with this interview?

Understand the strategic decision-making process around healthcare compliance and regulatory oversight
Identify organizational pain points and bottlenecks in the current governance workflow
Validate the high-level process map and decision criteria that inform downstream SQ0/SQ1 research
Gather evidence about what constitutes "success" in compliance management from the ECC perspective
Establish the executive-level constraints and priorities that shape the meta-model scope

Success Criteria:

Stakeholder confirms that we have accurately mapped the key decision points in policy compliance
We have identified at least 3 concrete pain points in the current workflow
We understand which actors are involved in each decision gate and their role/authority
We have artifacts or references to validate organizational structure and process

Roles (Rollen)¶

Who is involved and what are their responsibilities?

Interviewer: Research lead responsible for question flow, clarification, and evidence validation
Notetaker: Captures direct quotes, decisions, identified pain points, and artifact references; flags follow-up items
ECC General Manager (Subject): Provides strategic perspective on governance workflows, organizational constraints, and executive priorities
Optional Observers: If permitted, engineering or compliance lead to provide contextual input on technical feasibility

Pre-Interview Coordination:

Confirm availability and duration (suggest 60–90 minutes)
Request permission to record or take detailed notes
Provide brief agenda so stakeholder can prepare relevant examples or process documents

Topics (Onderwerpen)¶

What will we ask? What themes will we explore?

Theme 1: Current Compliance Workflow¶

Walk me through how a new healthcare regulation (e.g., a change in NEN 7510 or an organization-wide policy update) flows through your organization
Who are the key decision-makers at each stage?
What happens between the initial regulation announcement and implementation?
Where do things typically stall or require escalation?

Theme 2: Pain Points and Bottlenecks¶

What aspects of the current compliance process are most time-consuming or error-prone?
Are there recurring misunderstandings between policy makers and technical teams?
How do you currently ensure evidence of compliance is captured and retained?
What metrics do you use to measure compliance success?

Theme 3: Evidence and Audit Trail¶

What artifacts are required to demonstrate compliance (policy documents, audit logs, approval records)?
How are these artifacts currently collected, stored, and validated?
What gaps exist in the current evidence trail?

Theme 4: Scope and Constraints¶

What is in scope for the compliance automation effort? What is explicitly out of scope?
What organizational or regulatory constraints would shape any new process or tooling?
Are there existing tools or systems that must integrate with any solution?

Theme 5: Success Indicators¶

How would you measure success of an improved compliance workflow?
What would "machine-assisted" or "automated" compliance look like to you?

Procedures (Procedures)¶

Where, when, how long, and with what logistics?

Location: [To be determined — in-person preferred for rapport-building; virtual acceptable]
Duration: 60–90 minutes (confirm availability in advance)
Recording/Notes: [Explicit permission requested; notetaker present]
Setup: Quiet space; minimal interruptions; access to reference documents if stakeholder wishes to share examples
Follow-Up: Schedule follow-up confirmation call (30 min) within 1 week to validate interpretation of key findings
Artifacts to Bring: Any process diagrams, policy documents, or audit templates relevant to the discussion; optional examples of recent compliance decisions

EXECUTION¶

Pre-Interview Checklist¶

Date, time, and location confirmed with stakeholder
Recording/note-taking permission secured
Agenda shared with stakeholder (optional but recommended)
Backup contact provided in case of scheduling conflict
Notetaker briefed on key themes and evidence targets

Interview Notes¶

[Record key statements, stakeholder priorities, pain points, and artifacts mentioned below.]

Date: [To be filled]

Attendees:

Opening Remarks/Context from Stakeholder:

Theme 1: Current Compliance Workflow

Findings:

Evidence/Artifacts Mentioned:

Theme 2: Pain Points and Bottlenecks

Findings:

Evidence/Artifacts Mentioned:

Theme 3: Evidence and Audit Trail

Findings:

Evidence/Artifacts Mentioned:

Theme 4: Scope and Constraints

Findings:

Evidence/Artifacts Mentioned:

Theme 5: Success Indicators

Findings:

Evidence/Artifacts Mentioned:

Post-Interview Analysis¶

Key Findings¶

[Synthesize major takeaways that inform SQ0/SQ1 evidence.]

Identified Pain Points¶

[Description, impact, frequency]
[Description, impact, frequency]
[Description, impact, frequency]

Evidence Collected¶

Process workflow map (provided / to be requested)
Policy document or regulation reference (provided / to be requested)
Audit log sample or evidence artifact (provided / to be requested)
Stakeholder confirmation of key process steps
Other: [Specify]

Mapping to Research Questions¶

SQ0 (Existing Work):

What did we learn about current tools, processes, or approaches?
What gaps or limitations did the stakeholder highlight?

SQ1 (Meta-Model Definition):

What did we learn about what attributes or elements the meta-model must capture?
What organizational or technical constraints must the meta-model respect?

Follow-Up Items¶

Item: [Action], Owner: [Name], Due: [Date]
Item: [Action], Owner: [Name], Due: [Date]
Item: [Action], Owner: [Name], Due: [Date]

Next Steps¶

[Describe how findings inform next interview or research step.]