The Healthcare industry is being mandated by the Government and HIPAA legislation to convert from X12 version 4010 to version 5010. Most companies aren’t being mandated by the government to switch versions, but by their strongly influential Trading Partners.
I think back to the late nineties when version 4010 came out and what a struggle it was for many Trading Partners to convert to that version. Most EDI Coordinators are fearful of those same struggles when going from 4010 to 5010 or any other version. Converting from one version to another version doesn’t have to be a major headache.
There are two main areas of consideration during your Version Conversion project: translation support and application support. Continue reading →
For my inaugural post on this blog, I want to revisit one of those “solved problems” that still dogs many of the companies we talk with, namely, how to handle B2B integration requirements that don’t involve standard EDI. Companies still find it difficult to cope with the full range of B2B connections and content types needed to integrate with large and small trading partners, including:
Standard EDI (and in some cases, EDI that does not fully conform to standards)
“Standard” XML, which ranges from well-developed, horizontal standards like RosettaNet to hundreds of loosely-defined vertical transaction sets
EDI-like flat file standards (most of these are older, vertically-focused cases)
EDI-based web forms
Proprietary, partner-defined flat files
Proprietary, partner-defined spreadsheets
Proprietary, partner-defined web portals
Proprietary, partner-defined documents sent by email or fax
Did I miss any? Probably. But the point is that standard EDI is just one of numerous conventions used for B2B integration. Of course, standard X12 and EDIFACT EDI are still the mainstay of B2B integration. And there is little evidence to suggest that companies are ready to invest in replacing all of their EDI connections with something “better”. In fact, EDI adoption is increasing.