Clients count on us to be smart, daring, and responsible.   We untangle complexities and challenge conventions, and we’re as concerned about the business aspects of our solutions as we are about the creative.

Bridge got Mojo!

Bridge Design  |  Feb 12, 2013  |   Comments (0)  |   Trackbacks (0)  |   Permalink
One of the most exciting and fascinating advents of technology in the last decade is the rise of affordable 3D printing. Think (expensive) Play-Doh for adults.  The materials are created from digital blueprints into plastic materials.  However, 3D printers are much more akin to their cousin the 2D inkjet printer, though objects are being printed not only on the traditional X-Y coordinates but with the Z axis.  In addition, advancements in 3D CAD software are making it increasingly easier for the novice DIY designer and budding 3D model artist to make their own designs a reality.

With trends towards affordability & ease of use, Bridge decided to purchase the all-in-one 3D desktop Mojo printer by Stratasys in November 2012.  It might not scan, copy or fax, but it’s a modern tool for improving our capacity to do rapid prototyping fast and in-house.  We have already seen enormous benefits on multiple projects.  "Having a quality in house 3D printer augments our design process by allowing us to produce complex prototypes (mechanisms, ergonomics, and industrial design) and test them without being reliant on an outside vendor.  This allows for faster, more integrated prototyping, leading us to better ideas and better solutions for our clients,” said Pete Gleason, Sr. Product Design Engineer.

   
Pete Gleason brings his design idea to life.




The printed prototype.




The Convergence of Medical Devices & Consumer Products

Bridge Design  |  Oct 07, 2010  |   Comments (3)  |   Trackbacks (0)  |   Permalink
Bill Evans Principal of Bridge Design San Francisco speaking at a GlobalSpec eVent "Medical Equipment Design" on March 3rd 2010.

After a short introduction by the moderator, Bill discusses the opportunities and design approaches for
medical device manufacturers to create convergent products.  For Bill, the way the term convergence is
used in this context is not the same as it might be used to describe a smart-phone that converges a
music player and PDA into itself. For him it’s about the convergence of consumer product design
thinking with medical device design thinking, creating products that delight users and exceed
expectations.

Especially in highly competitive areas of medicine the biggest opportunity for device manufacturers is
to create more consumer product-like experiences for their users rather than just trying to leverage
consumer product technology. Certainly inexpensive color LCD screens and powerful processors help
in this convergence but it is not the only way. Medical devices without any electronics in them can
benefit from this thinking. Bill gives specific examples of products and describes where he gets his
inspiration for convergence and the design processes that are likely to be successful in achieving
such customer-satisfying devices.. 

Stork Prenatal Portable Ultrasound

Matt Presta  |  Apr 06, 2009  |   Comments (5)  |   Trackbacks (0)  |   Permalink

From our vantage point of spending a great deal of time in the field and always working on the next great medical product that’s 2 to 5 years away from release, we have an interesting relationship to medical product design trends.  On the one hand we help establish the trends with the products we do. On other hand we observe changing cultural trends and incorporate those into our design thinking.

One of the larger trends we are seeing is that some of the thinking behind what makes a great consumer product is finding its way into forming medical products, especially those that are very patient-centric in their use.  Nowhere is this more obvious than in application specific products where we have an opportunity to design for a much more specific group of users, the product can be designed for a much better patient experience without the need to be all-things to all users like many of the general medical products out there.  To give an example of this trend and be able to show it now the Bridge ID team designed our interpretation of what an ultrasound device could be like in the near future.  Our press release below.

San Francisco – April 6, 2009 – Bridge Design, Inc. - Portability is the fastest growing segment in the ultrasound market. Imagine fast-forwarding a few years when technology becomes less expensive and more powerful and compact. What would a birthing-specific ultrasound, designed specifically for the mother–to-be, look like?San Francisco-based Bridge Design has come up with an innovative, mother-centric device that focuses on making the ultrasound experience pleasant and hassle-free. The Stork provides a number of features not yet on the market, including a second display so the mother won’t have to strain her neck to look at the screen. It also allows the mother to email electronic images directly to family and friends from the device instead of receiving paper printouts. Unlike the average ultrasound machine, the Stork is unintimidating, even playful, with a flip screen and basket-like portability which contains “cup holders” for probe and gel. The Stork’s color, materials, and finishes forgo the clinical white and gray palette for a much more soothing birthing experience.Bridge’s Director of Industrial Design, Matt Presta, who also happens to be a parent, explains:“Any mother who has had an ultrasound is familiar with the cart of equipment, probes, gels, screens, printouts, and everything else that comes with it. And although the experience is necessary for clinical reasons, many parents just want to see their baby. For years, Bridge has observed trends clearly pointing towards designing for the patient’s experience. Since we’re still a few years away from seeing the tipping point of the patient-centric trend in health care, we wanted to provide a glimpse into the future based on what we’re seeing happening in the industry.”It’s worth noting that although this device has not yet been manufactured it reflects a trend that Bridge sees growing, with more application-specific medical products likely to appear at healthcare facilities in the not-too-distant future. “As a given technology matures, its cost and size typically shrinks. This opens up exciting possibilities to those forward-thinking medical equipment manufacturers who understand that if you change your design thinking to be more user and patient-centric, then new market opportunities can be created. Addressing baseline functionality and reliability at low cost is not enough to stay ahead of the game in mature markets,” says Presta.

A description of services can be found at http://www.bridgedesign.com.  SOURCE Bridge Design, Inc.  Contact Matt Presta of Bridge Design, Inc. +1-415-487-7100, ext 300, mpresta@bridgedesign.com

Taking Risks and Cultivating an Innovative Environment

Bill Evans  |  Aug 22, 2006  |   Comments (0)  |   Trackbacks (0)  |   Permalink
This article first appeared in MDDI on August 2006.  

Device OEMs should strive to create company cultures that promote creative thinking. Doing so just might help foster innovation.

Innovation is important to companies' competitiveness and their ability to create medical products that will improve the lives of customers. In the last 15 years, medical manufacturers have seen many trends aiming to improve their products. But total quality or six-sigma environments sometimes feel more like regimes. Design has also been touted as a savior, and OEMs are often beseeched to listen to the voice of the customer. Such trends attempt to give companies tools, processes, and management structures to improve their ability to innovate.

These trends are exactly that trendy. Like any new method, they go out of fashion after a time. Sometimes it ’s for a good reason, but occasionally they are wrongfully discarded for the next new thing. Although many aspects of these trends have something to offer, the biggest improvement will come from taking a more-holistic view of innovation by focusing on three core areas of a business: culture, process, and resources. Try introducing six sigma into the wrong culture and it is bound to fail. Pour resources into a development program with a bad process and it is unlikely to create breakthrough products. This article provides insight into the aspects of company culture that make many successful innovations possible.

Culturing Innovation
Company culture is one of the main reasons well-meaning eff o rts to innovate have failed. In many ways, being innovative is a state of mind that must suffuse throughout an organization.  Obviously, leadership that allows this state of mind to thrive starts at the top.  Sometimes midlevel managers cannot affect the top as quickly as they might like—but they can nurt u re their development teams. The cultural factors within a company that are most likely to lead to innovation include many things that make most people uncomfortable: taking risk, the possibility of failure, bucking conventional wisdom, and the democracy of ideas. Innovation is an inherently risky process. To innovate, manufacturers need to explore ideas and potential solutions, and sometimes that exploration takes a direction that inevitably leads to failure .

But it does not matter that there are occasional failures; in fact, it is inherent in the creative process. What is important is that the members of the development teams are encouraged to put new and sometimes radical ideas out in front of the team.

The trick is to experience failures quickly. Test ideas in the first months of the development project, way before any serious engineering has been done.  Use every trick in the book to visualize the product and get it in front of customers.  Show sketches, prototypes, and simple foam models. Cheat prototypes into existence by cobbling together existing products or hijacking technology from other industries.  Show early ideas to potential customers.  Get ideas out in the open for people to criticize, but do it as soon as possible.

We have all met an R&D engineer who is a perfectionist, who labors for weeks to get an idea right before sharing it with other team members. Certainly great ideas can come from this approach. However, it is just as likely that valuable time and resources will be wasted pursuing a specific solution with an inappropriate amount of engineering sophistication. Regardless of how crude or polished a prototype is, it can easily be sunk by a faulty premise about what is right for the market.


Paradoxically, teams that learn to be good at failing quickly often learn to become better at succeeding quickly.  To encourage risk, and hence innovation, all team members must become comfortable with this paradox and adjust their expectations as a project moves from concept to refinement.  Taking risks early is inexpensive and potentially rewarding. Taking risks later in a project is much less desirable.  Then, the die has been cast, and linear, predictable behaviors are essential.  This takes almost superhuman management abilities, because unpredictable behaviors must be encouraged early on, but later, when the project progresses or employee reviews come along, the same manager must hold employees accountable to their management by objectives. Or the managers must account for the team’s progress to an upper management that is more skilled at counting beans than at growing them.

Who Is to Blame for That Great Idea?
Shifting a business from a blame culture to a healthy, risk-taking culture is difficult. Doing so is all about another important dimension of company culture: the people.

A project leader with great interpersonal skills as well as technical chops is key to a successful team. But people are not born this way—they are cultivated.  Along with the top leader, every significant project should have submanagers who are being mentored to take the leadership position on future programs.  Train for the soft people skills as well as the technical know how to cultivate a team.

Project leaders need to be supported by upper management with realistic budget and scheduling that has contingency built in. The entire team does not need to know exactly how much contingency there is; instead, the leader listens to each subteam’s needs and allots it some of the scarce resources.  Other team members must quickly learn the reasons for the allotment so that it is understood that there is sound logic behind it.

But even without a contingency, the schedule needs to be plausible. There is nothing less motivating to a team than shooting at a target that is hopelessly out of range. Obviously, there is never enough time to get every detail of a p roject perfect.

It is inevitable that a team leader will ask for a few miracles and, as the joke goes, these will take a little longer. But when the entire team understands the bigger project goals both technically and from a business perspective, and it is plausible that with a little extra effort these goals can be grasped, people rally to meet the objective.

One thing that helps a team’s motivation is to be in touch with customers.  This can be achieved by talking to them, watching them work, reading their journals, going to their trade shows, and hiring some of them.  The team then becomes aligned with the customers’ needs much more fluidly. Don’t restrict this contact to a select few; it should be spread around.  Also, it’s important to include the cost and time of customer contact travel into a project.

Get Critical of Criticism
At a more personal level, management and team leaders must eliminate the tendency to be critical of both themselves and other team members when ideas initially come up. This opportunity certainly arises in brainstorming sessions, where team members are exhorted to suspend criticism. In that context, discipline is easy to enforce.

But in subtle ways, such situations can come up all over an organization as a project unfolds. Sarcastic comments around the water cooler about nascent ideas or overheard phone conversations that poke fun at a part of a project that failed puts innovation in a straitjacket.

For example, imagine new, bright technical hires that join the project team and get exposed to such critical remarks. They quickly learn what it takes to fit in. They either conform and lose that desire to push for the new and risky, or eventually seek more fertile pastures elsewhere.  

Thinking of those bright new hires brings up the question of who will have the best ideas and how much weight should be given to each person’s opinions and ideas, considering factors such as experience, seniority, and education.  The best ideas can come from anyone, and in trying to break the mold, team leaders must beware the so-called wise expert.

Experience often gets in the way of new thinking, but it is an important partner in making things actually happen. Therefore, the entire team needs to encourage a democracy of ideas, especially in the early concept stage.

Do not dismiss ideas from team members who are either inexperienced or not technicians (such as marketing people). Instead, critical thoughts should be turned into insights about how to build on the seeds of the good ideas that often come from nontechnical people. It is really the whole team that creates the product.

Japanese industry from the 1970s onward showed the power of the democracy of ideas. Driven by its relentless pursuit of quality with methods taught by W. Edwards Deming, the country demonstrated that everyone who is involved in the creation of a p roduct has the power to influence it positively.  The quality circles made famous by the Japanese automotive industry allowed the traditionally unheard production workers a voice in product improvements that led to globally competitive and highly reliable automobiles. Even though one rarely sees these circles written about today, there is still much that the average product development team can learn from the core idea: those closest to the problem are often the best able to suggest solutions.

Hiring Diversity
The type of people who are hired for development teams is also crucial.  What is perhaps surprising is the notion that some highly innovative and focused individuals might have had checkered academic success, degrees from diff e rent areas (liberal arts and technical majors), or résumés with unfamiliar jobs or extended foreign travel experience.

For management positions, companies often hire people who have had a very linear and predictable path. Certainly such people are talented and have worked hard for their success.  However, they may never have really grappled with adversity. Organizations staffed this way are often highly risk averse and poor at innovation.

Innovation is nonlinear by nature.  People who have experienced hardships and have learned how to multitask and deal with adversity are often able to think cre atively. Individuals who had diverse interests at school may bring more breadth to a project team. Time spent traveling abroad in different cultures may give people a head start in understanding differing customer and cultural practices, which would be expensive and timeconsuming to learn about otherwise. Famously, both Bill Gates and Michael Dell dropped out of school.  In the medical arena, Thomas Fogert y, a cardiologist and prolific medical innovator whose first invention was the angioplasty balloon, worked his way through his early medical education in an auto repair shop. He made his first angioplasty balloon from the finger of a rubber glove tied to a thin tube with knots gleaned from his fly-fishing abilities.

Industrial designers make many companies nervous because their discipline re quires a combination of a rtistic, interpersonal, and technical skills. Yet it is precisely such cross-disciplinary performers who can help bridge some of the traditional divides within development teams. Whether increasing the emotional appeal of products to a company’s customers or using illustrations to communicate marketing ’s goals to the engineers early in the project, industrial designers provide expertise that is not easily found elsewhere.

Insiders versus Outsiders
Lastly we come to the importance of NIH. This is not the National Institutes of Health, but the much more common dampener of innovation: the not- invented- here syndrome. Increasingly, progressive companies realize that they need to seek innovation both near and far. This means consulting with outsiders to gain insights, technologies, and new processes to help reseed their idea pastures.

Medical device companies often think of themselves as being focused on their core technologies. As a result, they sometimes ignore or are reluctant to enter new markets because they lack important pieces of the jigsaw puzzle.  Sometimes they know they are missing the pieces; sometimes they don’t. Outsiders have different vision. If chosen carefully, they can help a development team find the necessary pieces.

Consultants from many different technical and management disciplines can help stimulate innovation either with new processes and research techniques, or with actual new product designs or specialty technical knowledge.  But if manufacturers call in outsiders without actually changing their own company’s culture, the consultants’ efforts are likely to be sub-optimal.  Ideas are useful, but execution of those ideas often needs an innovative attitude as well.

Some medical manufacturers are now using external advisory boards to help guide product design by better connecting the technical team with trends in the marketplace and providing frequent reviews of the developments in progress. Other companies are seeking outside help to tune their innovation process.

Conclusion
Creativity is a muscle. It has to be exercised to make it more effective.  Thinking outside the box requiresteam members to get out of the box called the office more often. Changing company culture begins with individuals, but it is greatly improved if an organization feeds its employees the proper creative juices. It’s important to cast wide for inspiration and look for it in new places. Seek input from people both senior and junior to you, and pick your next team hire with slightly different criteria from the previous one, looking more closely at the extracurricular activities portion of a résumé.

People who create innovative ideas never come to work in the morning and say, “Now I’ll begin the innovation process for today.” Most of them never stop thinking creatively, fro m their hobbies to their approach to parenting.  As management guru Peter Drucker said, “The greatest praise an innovation can receive is for people to say, ‘This is obvious. Why didn’t I think of it?’” In the right culture, you will think of it.

References
1. M ary Walton, The Deming Management Method (New York City: Putnam, 1986).
2 . H e n ry W Chesbrough, Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Te chnology (Boston: Harvard Business School Publishing Press,
2003).

Riding the Long Wave

Bill Evans  |  May 20, 2006  |   Comments (0)  |   Trackbacks (0)  |   Permalink

This article was originally published in MDDI on May 2006.

Looking at broad trends in technology and society can help medtech companies in their long-term technology forecasting.

In few industries do the words of British industrialist James Goldsmith ring as true as they do in medtech: “If you see a bandwagon, it’s too late.” Success in the medical device realm requires disciplined foresight and advance planning.Yet even intelligent people can be spectacularly wrong when predicting the impact of technological trends and making investment decisions accordingly. Banker JP Morgan, after reviewing the new invention of the telephone, stated, “Mr. Bell, after careful consideration of your invention, while it is a very interesting novelty, we have come to the conclusion that it has no commercial possibilities.”

Predicting the impact of technological and social change in the three to five-year future is arguably easier for themedtech industry than for consumer industries; medtech product cycles are longer and change happens more slowly. It can take a medical device company two years to get its next-generation product to market, and it is not uncommon for a product to have a life of five to seven years.

Regardless of such relative predictability, fast-moving changes driven by other industries and new technologies can sometimes wreak havoc on a medical device company’s planning.  However, it is from these slightly chaotic and disruptive events that great new opportunities are born.  When it comes to looking ahead 10 or more years, the medtech industry needs a different perspective to shake up linear thinking and unearth new opportunities.

Long-wave economic theory provides a historical perspective on the major technical revolutions of the past 250 years, and a little immersion in it can have a refreshing effect on one’s thinking about future technological change on the 10- to 15-year horizon.  This article briefly reviews this theory and suggests some ways in which medtech companies can apply long-wave theory for longerterm forecasting.

Long-Wave Economic Theory

Long-wave theory focuses on the technological revolutions that have characterized the significant surges of economic growth since the start of the Industrial Revolution in the late 18th century. Long-wave theorists say society is in the middle of such a revolution right now, and if the current revolution follows the pattern of previous ones, the world is in for some exciting long-wave riding.

According to theorists, each revolution lasts about 30–40 years and is characterized by two distinct phases of roughly equal length. First there is the installation phase, during which the technology is developed, refined, and installed around the world. This is the period of greatest upheaval in the established order of business and society. The deployment phase follows, during which the technology begins to improve economic prosperity through increased productivity and spreads significant social advantages in the form of lifestyle improvements.

 Long-wave theory offers four examples of past revolutionary change: the initial Industrial Revolution of the 1770s, the mechanization of steam and transport of the 1830s, the growth of heavy engineering in the 1870s, and the automobile in the 1910s. According to long-wave theorists, the fifth revolution, occurring today, was started by the genesis of the microprocessor in the 1970s.

As a means of understanding the two phases of each revolutionary spurt, one can consider the revolution of heavy engineering,when rapid advances in civil, chemical, electrical, telegraph, and naval engineering laid down a new infrastructure. One effect was the globalization of the food industry: during the northern winter, producers in the southern hemisphere could start shipping vast quan- tities of fresh foods to northern markets.  As a result, established industries went through massive upheavals as their business models were turned on their head by new economies of scale and speedier communication. In the northern economies, however, the resultant growth and cheaper fresh winter foods had an undeniable benefit across wide swaths of society.  

Taking a long-wave view requires one to rethink society’s current revolution. For example, many herald the Internet as a revolution. While the Internet certainly is revolutionary, it is not in itself the revolution of the present; it is an inextricable element of the microprocessor age that has yet to fully play out its potential for economic upheaval and global prosperity.

Under long-wave theory, revolutions are like tides in a harbor. They are large, cyclical forces that raise all boats. Medtech has had its own upheavals, including surgery, antibiotics, imaging, and genetics. However, for the purposes of riding the long wave, these must be viewed as components of society’s larger revolutions rather than revolutions in themselves. Just as the transistor’s development in the 1950s can be thought of as the microprocessor revolution in gestation, the combination of biotechnology, bioelectronics, nanotechnology, and new materials may well be the gestation phase of the next revolution 20 years on the horizon.

Developing Better Foresight

When it comes to developing a future vision, medtech manufacturers often get in their own way. Today’s executives and the inertia of their companies represent the old guard, still pursuing goals in the same way they always have. Riding the long wave can help executives broaden their vision. Recognizing broad changes and currents in the past can help stimulate an interdisciplinary perspective on the future. This can be accomplished by analyzing nascent technologies and speculating on potential long-term social, technological, and economic outcomes.  Executives can then work backward from these end points to create a map of products and technological platforms that could be in a position to take advantage of the shakeups of a revolution’s deployment period.

Of course, executives can’t predict the future. However, looking toward distant horizons and developing an appreciation for where the medtech industry is in the current upheaval process can lead to betterinformed management decisions.  Even when predictions for the future lead in the wrong direction, they can still offer solid vantage points from which a company can adjust its route.

Venture Advisory Boards

Companies seeking strategic innovations should strike a balance between internally driven initiatives and incorporating external perspectives.  Historically, the innovations that have disrupted industries or created new growth opportunities have rarely come from established companies.  “Internal approaches to innovation are critical since priorities, commitment, and investment for the future must come from within,” says Soren Kaplan, a principal at strategic innovation consulting firm InnovationPoint (Piedmont, CA). But he also notes, “Incorporating the external viewpoint—from industry thought leaders, consultants, academia, start-ups, customers, and partners is absolutely essential for moving beyond today’s assumptions and identifying beyond-incremental opportunities.”

One of the methodologies Kaplan advocates is the establishment of a venture advisory board to provide an immediate infusion of outside expertise into the organization.“By pulling together industry experts with complementary perspectives and inviting them to join an advisory board focused on future growth opportunities, companies can create a new capability that delivers significant new insight almost overnight,”Kaplan says.

Such venture advisory boards are similar to the industry advisory boards that are becoming popular among progressive medtech companies, which seek a panel of outside experts to advise on the customer and disease-management trends within given specialties. The difference is that venture board members are chosen based on their perspectives outside of a particular medical specialty. In fact, they may not even be from the medtech industry. For example, a company might be interested in longer-term healthcare trends in the wireless networking arena. To gain a broader perspective, a company may invite a senior executive from a software and network solutions provider to join its venture board. To reciprocate, an executive at the medtech company might consider taking on a healthcare trend advisory role at the software company.After all, the business of technology forecasting is a two-way street.

Future Forecasting

In forecasting future scenarios, most companies look at existing trends and extrapolate from there. If they are creative, they may even explore the implications of intersecting trends within their industry.  While this might be useful in near term predictions, it is less useful for the longer view.  According to Kaplan, “Real growth opportunities don’t usually come from looking at what everyone else can already see. The longer-term breakthroughs result when companies consider alternative future scenarios—ones that incorporate potentially disruptive trends and events beyond today’s radar screen.  Of course, the goal is to tie all this back to your current business, but you need to start with the future and then jump backward from there.”

To create a future scenario that looks at prospects 10 or 20 years into the future, a company will need to poll a variety of sources, beginning with its internal R&D staff who are immersed in near-term technical trends and attend all kinds of industry forums. The marketing team and others with substantial customer contact should also contribute information that might hint at broad social and technical trends that may influence customer expectations. The company may also poll existing advisory boards and seek input from experts outside its immediate sector—especially from those who are in a position to know of disruptive technologies that might have a large effect on a long-term scenario.

The types of elements that might be expected to arise as part of a future scenario—in this case emphasizing developments that could influence the business of a company with a specialty in patient-monitoring technologies. Some aspects of this scenario are based on a linear extrapolation from present-day products and technologies—such as the development of intelligent implants and broader use of information technologies—showing how the synergies of intersecting technology trends may result in new products and market opportunities.

However, the illustrated scenario also incorporates two disruptive events—developments that cannot be predicted but could have a nonlinear influence on the product and market opportunities available in the future. By considering several such disruptive events, companies can ensure that their future scenarios move beyond mere description of step-by-step product development to reveal events with true market-altering potential.  In the case illustrated here, the disruptive events are a radical new drug-device combination that relies on very sophisticated closed-loop in vivo monitoring, and the unexpected demographic shift resulting from greater life expectancy. With a disruptive drug-device combination successfully increasing life expectancy, the aging population would continue to increase, putting massive pressure on the healthcare reimbursement system and exerting significant downward pressure on the price of medical products.With such a large and growing elderly population, the Medicare system would require a radical overhaul.

Reviewing such a scenario, a medtech company in the patientmonitoring business might gain ideas about the types of technologies it should be working on in order to best position itself for the projected future. A company whose present-day monitoring technology is based on a relatively small number of vital signs and is used primarily in hospitals and clinical laboratories, for instance, might want to consider whether its market niche is likely to exist in the long term. As advances in microelectromechanical systems (MEMS), microelectronics, and sensor technologies act in concert to make subtle and less-invasive measurements possible for widespread home use, it seems likely that tests now performed infrequently in the lab could soon become noninvasive and frequent.  If the patient-monitoring company’s technologies and products do not already anticipate such a possibility, the company might want to consider gaining some firsthand experience with the relevant technologies in order to become better positioned for the future.

The illustrated scenario also suggests the continued inevitability of price pressure on the medtech industry.  Unlike the consumer electronics and automotive industries, the medtech industry has historically not responded readily to such routine pressure. The patient-monitoring company of this scenario might anticipate such long-wave-driven cost pressures by routinely leveraging broad technological advances to lower its costs progressively. A company’s prices may not need to fall as rapidly as its costs, but companies will be better prepared if they anticipate that the unexpected might force them to make dramatic pricing changes.

Given the rapidity of technical and social change in the wider world, managers of medtech companies can gain insight into potential disruptive events by asking what could destroy their business as well as what might grow it. Such issues might include technical, medical, or demographic trends, but they might also include competitive strategies and shifts in customer behavior.

In the case of the illustrated scenario, for instance, the patient-monitoring company might want to consider how the globalization of high-speed communications and the strong growth of knowledge-based service industries in the developing world might affect its business.  When data from a wireless personal monitor can elicit a real-time advisory from a healthcare professional viewing a computer screen in Delhi, for instance,what would be the effects on the company’s products and market presence?

Setting a Pace

It is always hard to act today on the basis of uncertain events tomorrow.  If a medical device manufacturer asks its customers what they want within the next 10 years, the manufacturer will receive notoriously bad advice.Customers are often not capable of envisioning scenarios that are radical departures from the way they have always done their jobs. As Kaplan notes, “Before they existed, how many consumers would have asked for Microsoft’s Office or an iPod, let alone a home defibrillator?  Today all these things are mainstream, and the organizations behind them have seen nothing but growth.”

In contrast, companies occasionally move on innovative ideas for which the market is not ready. The keyhole heart surgery system developed by Heartport Inc. failed to achieve widespread adoption because it was considerably ahead of its time.  Despite the fact that leading heart surgeons expect coronary artery bypass graft procedures to become less invasive in the future, the Heartport system did not meet market expectations when the company went public.

One way to tackle the difficult job of identifying winning technology opportunities is to approach these investments in a manner similar to the way the venture capital community proceeds once it identifies broad opportunity areas. Venture capital firms rarely try to pick a single winner; instead, they back several different players and technologies and meter their investments according to strict performance milestones. Successful venture capital firms reward an atmosphere that encourages taking risks. They nurture small, highly focused,multidisciplinary teams that can act fast but also respond quickly to changes in the wider world. However, they rarely back technology platforms that are looking for a problem to solve. Instead, they fund ideas that are focused on specific market needs—even if such needs are further on the horizon than those typically addressed by an established company.  Unfocused advanced technology research groups rarely lead to breakthrough products. In order to surf the big wave, medtech companies have to learn to ride the smaller ones first and be willing to fall off a few times before succeeding.


References
1.A Kleiner, “Carlota Perez: The Thought Leader Interview,” strategy+business magazine 41 (Winter 2005): 131–137; available from Internet: www.strategy-business.com/press/article/05410.
2. C Perez,Technological Revolutions and Financial Capital: The Dynamics of Bubbles and Golden Ages (Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, 2002).
3. S Kaplan, “Discontinuous Innovation and the Growth Paradox,” Strategy & Leadership 27, 2 (March–April 1999): 16–21.