Healthcare CIOs - It's Time To Build Your Disaster Recovery MVP

(Photo by PAUL ELLIS/AFP via Getty Images)
AFP via Getty Images
Cybersecurity attacks in healthcare have made headlines again over the past few weeks, highlighting just how vulnerable critical systems still are. While many organizations talk about running tabletop exercises to prepare for incidents, there's another essential angle that healthcare CIOs should focus on: building a minimal viable product (MVP) to keep core operations running during an outage. It's not just about planning. It's about having something ready to use when systems go down.
A Disaster Recovery MVP will include critical systems scaled down to their essential functions to keep operations running during a crisis. Unlike full-scale backup environments, which are often complex and expensive, an MVP focuses on speed, simplicity, and effectiveness. The goal is to get the organization back to a minimal, yet safe and stable, level of function as quickly as possible. Most healthcare organizations don't have an MVP but rely heavily on downtime procedures. Organizations need a reliable downtime procedure and a ready-to-deploy MVP to prepare for outages.
Healthcare CIOs should prioritize clinical and communication systems when building a disaster recovery MVP. Start by focusing on lightweight EMR solutions that mimic the core functions of your backup environment. If you host your EMR off-site, you must set up an on-premise environment that provides more than just patient lookup. Empower clinicians with the ability to document electronically during an outage rather than relying on downtime forms documentation. Most staff don't know how to document on paper or understand the manual processes, often leading to delays and increased financial strain.
Communication systems, such as the telephone system, also need serious attention. Redundancy in telephone systems and unified communications is essential. I recommend implementing redundancy of UCaaS (Unified Communications as a Service) to ensure critical communication lines remain open. More CIOs are actively requesting UCaaS backups as part of their disaster recovery plans, and it's quickly becoming a non-negotiable part of modern healthcare continuity strategies.
The MVP approach shifts the mindset from 'everything must be restored' to 'what's good enough to keep going.' Traditional disaster recovery plans aim to bring back full systems, often leading to high costs, long downtimes, and unnecessary complexity. The MVP model cuts through that by focusing only on the essential systems needed to maintain operations.
By using an MVP, healthcare organizations can continue delivering patient care and keeping revenue flowing rather than relying on manual, paper-based processes that slow everything down. This approach allows teams to adapt as crises unfold because the core business stays functional. In high-pressure situations, aiming for perfect recovery can stall action—the MVP mindset recognizes that 'good enough' is often what keeps the doors open.
Healthcare CIOs must start thinking like product owners, not just commercial technology buyers. When organizations rely on SaaS products and shift accountability to vendors during outages, they miss the opportunity to lead recovery efforts. CIOs who take ownership and apply the MVP approach to disaster recovery put their organizations in a stronger position when disruption hits. In today's environment, every second of downtime erodes trust and costs money. CIOs who build smart, strategic MVPs in advance drive real resilience and ensure patient care keeps moving when it matters most.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Forbes

an hour ago

• Forbes

What The June 28 European Accessibility Act Deadline Means For Brands

This photograph taken on March 19, 2025 shows European flags outside the EU headquarters in ... More Brussels. (Photo by Nicolas TUCAT / AFP) (Photo by NICOLAS TUCAT/AFP via Getty Images) In less than a week from now, on June 28, 2025, the requirements of the European Accessibility Act come into force. The intention behind the EAA is to provide fair and equitable access to digital products to the more than 100 million consumers with disabilities living across the European Union. One of the key things to keep in mind about the EEA is that it doesn't just affect European companies. It applies to any organization from around the world selling into the EU market. It goes beyond standard web accessibility and e-commerce, incorporating areas such as computers and operating systems, smartphones, digital TV services, ATMS, ticketing machines and other digital kiosks within its remit. The legislation requires companies to do more than simply make digital products and content accessible. Instead, it seeks to embed accessibility commitments and best practices at a more fundamental organizational level through requirements like official accessibility statements and providing specialized training to staff. Non-compliance with the EAA can lead to fines and ultimately the termination of EU market access. The proximity of the deadline may for some be a cause for panic but cutting through the noise, here are what some digital accessibility specialists are urging organizations to keep in mind with less than a week to go: It's still not too late to get started 'It's not too late to start addressing accessibility. Starting now is better than not doing anything about EAA compliance,' says Jon Avila, Chief Accessibility Officer at Level Access, one of the leading providers of digital accessibility services in the United States. Avila continues, 'For organizations just getting started, the most important steps to take now to mitigate risk are demonstrating that you're taking action to make sustained progress, and beginning to put processes in place aligned with EAA requirements. One of the biggest gaps we observe is third-party content. Companies often assume that embedded tools or plugins are outside their responsibility, but under the EAA, they're very much in scope. We recommend that organizations make accessibility a requirement during the procurement process and request documented proof of accessibility (e.g., a completed VPAT report) from vendors prior to making a purchase.' Eric Portis, a Developer Evangelist at Cloudinary, a software company that helps organizations manage their visual content online, also agrees that it's still not too late to get started with EAA compliance. 'The best time to consider the accessibility of a project was before you shipped it, but the second-best time is today. The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines are just a big checklist. And while checking every item off the list before June is not a realistic goal for many teams, everyone can start tackling an item or two and begin building momentum towards full compliance. All progress is good progress,' Portis says. The AI landscape has changed Back in 2020, when AI website accessibility overlay widgets hit the market, they were met with a degree of skepticism. That's because the marketing claims were bold – buy a software subscription and let AI do its magic in both spotting and fixing accessibility fails, saving you time and money. It quickly became widely accepted that the technology was, in fact, nowhere near ready to entirely replace human oversight for accessibility remediation. Fast forward five years, and the same remains true but the technology has undoubtedly gotten a lot better meaning that, though AI won't solve all digital accessibility issues, it can now do a lot more of the heavy lifting which genuinely allows teams to focus more precisely on the more nuanced human elements related to user experience. What this ultimately means for the market was recently brought into sharp relief in a report authored by AAAnow, leading digital compliance benchmarking specialists based in London. AAAnow's report looked at the websites of organizations comprising The Valuable 500, a collective of some of the most profitable companies on the planet with long-standing pledges to accessibility and inclusion, including the likes of Apple, Google and BP. According to the V500 scorecard, the average member organization manages around 178 websites, each comprising around 211 pages. To remediate accessibility on the average of 85% of pages where it is required would take 3,480 workdays, or 13 full-time staff working for a year (per org). In terms of cost, this equates to $767,000 per company just for initial compliance, let alone maintenance. Scaled across the full Valuable 500, that's over $380 million and 9 years of full-time work at current capacity. 'We argue that only a risk-managed, AI-powered approach can address the scale, cost, and operational complexity. It's not a 'nice-to-have' - it's fundamental,' commented AAAnow CEO Lawrence Shaw in an earlier interview. Regulation is not something to fear Instinctively, when any type of new regulation comes into force, particularly one that potentially involves fines and other punitive measures, fear and trepidation tend to be the most common reactions off the bat. Yet, it can be argued that brands should welcome the new regulations from the EU as they provide clarity and a roadmap into areas of technical compliance that have previously been murky. In a recent company press release, Amit Borsok, CEO of Italy-based Accessiway, which takes an end-to-end approach to accessibility remediation involving both automation and human testers, said, 'European regulations have shifted the narrative around accessibility from a compliance issue to a strategic investment. Until now, regulatory fragmentation across member states has prevented companies from fully capitalizing on this potential, increasing compliance costs and limiting competitiveness. 'Now, instead of being a hurdle, the new framework provides clarity that encourages companies to invest in accessible technologies and services to expand their market reach. For many organizations, accessibility has evolved from a nice-to-have to a competitive necessity. With regulation now offering predictability and standardization, uncertainty is reduced for investors, and new opportunities for innovation are unlocked.' Though the word deadline usually implies finality, whether, as an organization, you are right at the start of your digital accessibility journey and anxiously playing catch-up, or significantly further down the line, June 28 will surely be the opening of a new chapter for all involved. The story about to unfold will be one of whether human intention layered onto ever more advanced technology can ultimately help make access to the digital realm an equitable experience for everyone.

Yahoo

a day ago

• Yahoo

Tech-fueled misinformation distorts Iran-Israel fighting

AI deepfakes, video game footage passed off as real combat, and chatbot-generated falsehoods -- such tech-enabled misinformation is distorting the Israel-Iran conflict, fueling a war of narratives across social media. The information warfare unfolding alongside ground combat -- sparked by Israel's strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities and military leadership -- underscores a digital crisis in the age of rapidly advancing AI tools that have blurred the lines between truth and fabrication. The surge in wartime misinformation has exposed an urgent need for stronger detection tools, experts say, as major tech platforms have largely weakened safeguards by scaling back content moderation and reducing reliance on human fact-checkers. After Iran struck Israel with barrages of missiles last week, AI-generated videos falsely claimed to show damage inflicted on Tel Aviv and Ben Gurion Airport. The videos were widely shared across Facebook, Instagram and X. Using a reverse image search, AFP's fact-checkers found that the clips were originally posted by a TikTok account that produces AI-generated content. There has been a "surge in generative AI misinformation, specifically related to the Iran-Israel conflict," Ken Jon Miyachi, founder of the Austin-based firm BitMindAI, told AFP. "These tools are being leveraged to manipulate public perception, often amplifying divisive or misleading narratives with unprecedented scale and sophistication." - 'Photo-realism' - GetReal Security, a US company focused on detecting manipulated media including AI deepfakes, also identified a wave of fabricated videos related to the Israel-Iran conflict. The company linked the visually compelling videos -- depicting apocalyptic scenes of war-damaged Israeli aircraft and buildings as well as Iranian missiles mounted on a trailer -- to Google's Veo 3 AI generator, known for hyper-realistic visuals. The Veo watermark is visible at the bottom of an online video posted by the news outlet Tehran Times, which claims to show "the moment an Iranian missile" struck Tel Aviv. "It is no surprise that as generative-AI tools continue to improve in photo-realism, they are being misused to spread misinformation and sow confusion," said Hany Farid, the co-founder of GetReal Security and a professor at the University of California, Berkeley. Farid offered one tip to spot such deepfakes: the Veo 3 videos were normally eight seconds in length or a combination of clips of a similar duration. "This eight-second limit obviously doesn't prove a video is fake, but should be a good reason to give you pause and fact-check before you re-share," he said. The falsehoods are not confined to social media. Disinformation watchdog NewsGuard has identified 51 websites that have advanced more than a dozen false claims -- ranging from AI-generated photos purporting to show mass destruction in Tel Aviv to fabricated reports of Iran capturing Israeli pilots. Sources spreading these false narratives include Iranian military-linked Telegram channels and state media sources affiliated with the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB), sanctioned by the US Treasury Department, NewsGuard said. - 'Control the narrative' - "We're seeing a flood of false claims and ordinary Iranians appear to be the core targeted audience," McKenzie Sadeghi, a researcher with NewsGuard, told AFP. Sadeghi described Iranian citizens as "trapped in a sealed information environment," where state media outlets dominate in a chaotic attempt to "control the narrative." Iran itself claimed to be a victim of tech manipulation, with local media reporting that Israel briefly hacked a state television broadcast, airing footage of women's protests and urging people to take to the streets. Adding to the information chaos were online clips lifted from war-themed video games. AFP's fact-checkers identified one such clip posted on X, which falsely claimed to show an Israeli jet being shot down by Iran. The footage bore striking similarities to the military simulation game Arma 3. Israel's military has rejected Iranian media reports claiming its fighter jets were downed over Iran as "fake news." Chatbots such as xAI's Grok, which online users are increasingly turning to for instant fact-checking, falsely identified some of the manipulated visuals as real, researchers said. "This highlights a broader crisis in today's online information landscape: the erosion of trust in digital content," BitMindAI's Miyachi said. "There is an urgent need for better detection tools, media literacy, and platform accountability to safeguard the integrity of public discourse." burs-ac/jgc

New York Post

2 days ago

• New York Post

Apple sued by shareholdrs, accues of lying about AI progress — causing iPhone sales, stock to slump

Apple was sued on Friday by shareholders in a proposed securities fraud class action that accused it of downplaying how long it needed to integrate advanced artificial intelligence into its Siri voice assistant, hurting iPhone sales and its stock price. The complaint covers shareholders who suffered potentially hundreds of billions of dollars of losses in the year ending June 9, when Apple introduced several features and esthetic improvements for its products but kept AI changes modest. Apple did not immediately respond to requests for comment. CEO Tim Cook, Chief Financial Officer Kevan Parekh and former CFO Luca Maestri are also defendants in the lawsuit filed in San Francisco federal court. 3 Apple shareholders accused the company and CEO Tim Cook of downplaying how long it needed to integrate advanced artificial intelligence into its Siri voice assistant, hurting iPhone sales and its stock price. AFP via Getty Images Shareholders led by Eric Tucker said that at its June 2024 Worldwide Developers Conference, Apple led them to believe AI would be a key driver of iPhone 16 devices, when it launched Apple Intelligence to make Siri more powerful and user-friendly. But they said the Cupertino, Calif.-based company lacked a functional prototype of AI-based Siri features, and could not reasonably believe the features would ever be ready for iPhone 16s. Shareholders said the truth began to emerge on March 7 when Apple delayed some Siri upgrades to 2026, and continued through this year's Worldwide Developers Conference on June 9 when Apple's assessment of its AI progress disappointed analysts. Apple shares have lost nearly one-fourth of their value since their Dec. 26, 2024 record high, wiping out approximately $900 billion of market value. 3 Shareholders said the truth began to emerge on March 7 when Apple delayed some Siri upgrades to 2026. PixieMe – 3 Cook at this year's developers' conference held earlier this month. Getty Images The case is Tucker v. Apple Inc et al, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, No. 25-05197.