Tag

Tagged: Medical Technology

Sponsored
  • Navigating the dynamic MedTech landscape demands agility, adaptability, and the ability to manage regulatory shifts, global crises, and rapid technological advancements
  • Leaders must blend forward-thinking with strategic focus, ensuring R&D efforts align with emerging healthcare trends and patient needs
  • Inspiring cross-functional collaboration is important and requires cultivating a culture rooted in accountability, innovation, and ethical responsibility
  • MedTech executives must drive innovation while maintaining rigorous regulatory compliance to protect patient safety and uphold corporate integrity
 
Shaping the Future: MedTech Leadership in a Fast-Changing World

Leading a well-established MedTech company requires a blend of vision, technical expertise, regulatory understanding, agility, and emotional intelligence. While financial acumen is fundamental, what sets exceptional executives apart is their ability to navigate the complexities of healthcare, champion innovation, and maintain a strong ethical foundation. These individuals are not just driving their companies toward commercial success; they are actively shaping the future of healthcare by delivering innovative products that enhance patient outcomes and push the boundaries of medical science.

Cultivating these qualities helps ensure that organisations stay competitive, compliant, and focused on creating real value for patients and healthcare systems. As companies navigate an era defined by rapid technological advancements, shifting regulations, and evolving patient expectations, the ability to lead with integrity and strategic foresight becomes ever more critical. With the right mindset, MedTech executives can not only thrive in this fast-paced environment but also leave a lasting impact on the industry and the future of healthcare.

 
In this Commentary

This Commentary highlights seven key leadership capabilities essential for success in large MedTech companies. With rapid technological advancements, shifting regulations, and increasing demands for better patient outcomes, leaders must balance innovation with regulatory compliance. We emphasise the need for visionary thinking, strategic focus, regulatory expertise, technical knowledge, and emotional intelligence. By cultivating collaboration, adaptability, and ethical responsibility, leaders can steer organisations through disruption, navigate global markets, and drive impactful medical technologies that improve patient outcomes and ensure corporate success.
 
1. Visionary Thinking with a Strategic Focus
 
An effective MedTech executive thrives by combining visionary thinking with strategic execution. Looking beyond the present landscape can open opportunities to anticipate advancements in medical technologies, shifts in healthcare delivery models, and evolving expectations from patients and providers. In a sector driven by innovation, those who can envision the future of healthcare and identify how their companies can contribute meaningfully are well-positioned for success.

Yet, vision alone will not get the job done. Translating ambitious ideas into actionable strategies is essential. This involves setting clear corporate goals, allocating resources wisely, and building the infrastructure to support both immediate operational success and long-term innovation. Balancing growth ambitions with a disciplined approach to risk management and regulatory compliance is especially important in the highly regulated MedTech industry.

Effective portfolio management also plays a role. With a diverse range of products - from medical devices to diagnostic tools - focusing on research and development (R&D) projects that align with both the company’s strengths and emerging healthcare needs is crucial. An understanding of the science behind MedTech and the market forces shaping the industry can positively influence where to invest for future success.
 
2. Mastery of Regulatory and Compliance Issues

Navigating regulatory frameworks presents a challenge in the MedTech industry. With agencies like the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) imposing rigorous requirements for product approval, quality control, and post-market surveillance, understanding these environments is essential. The ability to anticipate policy changes and ensure ongoing compliance can impact a company's success.

Beyond market entry, regulatory mastery helps protect a company's reputation. Ensuring that all departments - particularly R&D, manufacturing, and quality assurance - adhere to strict standards is crucial for safeguarding patient safety and product efficacy. Non-compliance risks fines, product recalls, and reputational damage making a strong grasp of regulatory issues indispensable.
In a global market, navigating international regulations adds another layer of complexity. For instance, the European Medical Device Directive (MDD) requires different compliance measures than those of the FDA in the US. Forward-thinking approach involves preparing teams to meet diverse regulatory demands and working closely with legal, regulatory affairs, and quality management professionals to foster a culture of proactive compliance.
You might also like:
 
3. Technical Savvy and a Commitment to Innovation
 
Innovation is the lifeblood of the MedTech sector. Executives at the helm of large companies benefit from a strong grasp of the technologies driving their products, as well as staying attuned to advancements in medical science and digital health. Staying informed about cutting-edge developments like artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning, robotics, and 3D printing is essential, as these innovations are shaping the future of medical devices and diagnostics.

Encouraging a culture of innovation means fostering an environment where teams can experiment, collaborate across disciplines, and take calculated risks. This atmosphere of exploration allows R&D teams to push boundaries and iterate quickly. Success in this space often involves investing in talent, infrastructure, and strategic partnerships. Collaborating with academic institutions, start-ups, technology companies, or healthcare providers can spark the development of breakthrough technologies and expand a company’s capabilities.

Balancing innovation with regulatory demands is equally important. With MedTech products directly impacting patient health, ensuring that innovations undergo thorough testing and validation is critical. Striking the right balance between speed and safety ensures that new technologies are brought to market efficiently without compromising patient wellbeing.
 
4. Customer-Centricity and Patient Outcomes Focus
 
In today's healthcare ecosystem, MedTech companies are increasingly accountable for the outcomes their products deliver, not just for the products themselves. A strong focus on customer-centricity - whether the customer is a healthcare provider, patient, or payer - has become essential. Shifting priorities toward products and services that improve patient outcomes requires an understanding of end-users, from surgeons operating complex devices to patients managing chronic conditions at home.

Developing solutions that provide real-world benefits involves actively engaging healthcare professionals and patients throughout the product lifecycle, from concept through post-market evaluation. This approach ensures that offerings are not only innovative but also address genuine needs in the clinical setting.

As value-based healthcare models gain traction, with reimbursement increasingly tied to patient outcomes, demonstrating both clinical and economic value is critical. This means providing robust clinical evidence while collaborating with healthcare providers, payers, and policymakers to showcase how MedTech solutions improve patient care and reduce overall healthcare costs.
 
5. Agility in Decision-Making and Crisis Management
 
The MedTech industry is characterised by constant change, driven by rapid technological advancements, evolving regulatory requirements, and unexpected challenges like global health crises. Navigating these complexities demands agility in decision-making, allowing organisations to pivot quickly and remain resilient during periods of uncertainty.

This agility comes from a blend of strategic foresight and operational flexibility. Staying ahead of emerging trends and risks, making informed decisions in real time, and adjusting plans as circumstances evolve are all important. For instance, during the COVID-19 pandemic, many MedTechs shifted their focus to produce essential supplies like ventilators and personal protective equipment  (PPE). This involved reallocating resources, adapting supply chains, and safeguarding the workforce - all while ensuring regulatory compliance.
You might also like:

Reimagining Boards
Effective crisis management also plays a role. Whether facing product recalls, quality issues, regulatory challenges, or broader industry disruptions, the ability to respond swiftly is essential. Clear communication, decisive action, and maintaining the trust of key stakeholders - including employees, healthcare providers, patients, and investors - are crucial in navigating crises successfully.
6. Emotional Intelligence

In the MedTech industry, effective leadership goes beyond strategic decision-making and technical expertise - it also requires emotional intelligence and an ability to lead teams. Inspiring and motivating teams is key to fostering a culture of collaboration, innovation, and accountability, especially in a field where success depends on cooperation between engineers, scientists, regulatory experts, and business professionals.

Emotional intelligence plays a role in this dynamic, enabling self-awareness, empathy, and the ability to manage emotions both personally and within teams. Those who exhibit strong emotional intelligence can build stronger relationships, navigate conflicts with ease, and cultivate a positive organisational culture. This also enhances their ability to communicate vision and goals effectively, uniting teams around a shared purpose.

In larger MedTech companies, managing diverse and geographically dispersed teams requires exceptional communication skills and the capacity to foster cohesion and shared responsibility. Encouraging diversity, equity, and inclusion is also critical, as varied perspectives contribute to stronger problem-solving and drive innovation forward.
 
7. Ethical Integrity and Corporate Responsibility

Given the direct impact MedTech products have on patient health, ethical integrity is essential. Ensuring that corporations uphold the highest ethical standards across all operations - from R&D to marketing - is crucial. This means maintaining transparency in clinical trials, avoiding conflicts of interest, and committing to honest and transparent marketing practices that present both the benefits and risks of products accurately.

Beyond ethics, corporate responsibility also involves sustainability and social impact. MedTech companies must acknowledge their broader role in society, not only in improving health outcomes but also in reducing their environmental footprint and contributing to social good. Manufacturing processes should be assessed for their environmental impact, with efforts made to minimise carbon emissions. Additionally, engaging in corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives that promote healthcare access in underserved communities is essential for fostering global health equity.

Maintaining the trust of stakeholders - whether healthcare providers, patients, regulators, or investors - depends on a commitment to ethical practices. In an industry where safety and efficacy are non-negotiable, safeguarding trust is vital for protecting both a company’s reputation and its long-term success.

 
Takeaways

In today's MedTech landscape, financial acumen is no longer a differentiator; it is a baseline requirement. What truly sets leaders apart is their ability to navigate an era defined by rapid technological change and global complexity. The future of MedTech leadership hinges on understanding, embracing, and leveraging new technologies to drive meaningful innovation while maintaining the highest standards of regulatory compliance and patient safety.

The seven leadership traits outlined in this Commentary - visionary thinking, regulatory mastery, technical savvy, customer-centricity, agility, emotional intelligence, and ethical integrity - are more critical than ever. These qualities empower leaders to steer their organisations through disruption, inspire cross-functional teams, and deliver cutting-edge solutions that meet market demands and improve patient outcomes.

In this new era, MedTech executives must go beyond the basics of finance and operations. They must be architects of the future, blending strategic foresight with a deep understanding of the technologies that are reshaping the industry. By fostering a culture of innovation, accountability, and ethical responsibility, these leaders will not only ensure corporate success but also make a lasting, transformative impact on global healthcare.
view in full page
  • Corporate culture shapes the identity and values of MedTech companies, influencing their approach to innovation, patient care, and business ethics
  • It encourages robust employee engagement, collaboration, and commitment, crucial for driving advancements in medical technology and enhancing patient outcomes 
  • The alignment of corporate culture with regulatory standards and industry best practices is essential for enterprises to maintain compliance and trust among stakeholders
  • Ethical decision-making and integrity are cornerstones of a positive corporate culture in the MedTech sector, impacting public perception and investor confidence
  • Embracing a supportive and inclusive ethos attracts top talent, nurtures development, and sharpens competitive edge in healthcare's dynamic landscape
 
The Power of Corporate Culture
 
In the ever-evolving environment of the medical technology industry, where innovation and precision are essential, an often underestimated yet indispensable element stands out: corporate culture. It serves as the foundation upon which organisational cohesion and effectiveness are built, encompassing the shared values, beliefs, attitudes, and behaviours that guide employee interactions and shape decision-making processes. A unified corporate environment fosters collaboration, streamlines operations, and boosts productivity, optimising resource allocation and reducing waste. Conversely, fragmented cultures breed discord, hampering communication, impeding progress, and depleting valuable resources in the process. An integrated corporate ethos that empowers individuals and aligns them with the company’s strategic vision can unlock their full potential, nurturing sustainable growth and gaining a competitive edge. 

As the medical technology sector continues its pursuit of innovations and personalised solutions, the role of a robust corporate culture becomes indispensable. It acts as the crucial element for success, helping companies manage challenges effectively while also empowering them to seize opportunities with agility and foresight. Furthermore, a unified corporate ethos strengthens companies to achieve important results that connect with patients and stakeholders, solidifying their leadership role in advancing healthcare and shaping the industry's future.
 
The sustained success of Medtronic, Siemens Healthineers and Boston Scientific in the global MedTech industry partly can be attributed to their distinctive corporate cultures, which serve as a competitive advantage. These companies have strategically cultivated cultures that set them apart from competitors and strike a chord with their stakeholders. For instance, Medtronic's emphasis on innovation and patient-centricity encourages advancements and instils trust among patients and healthcare professionals. Similarly, Siemens Healthineers' commitment to quality and continuous improvement not only drives advancements in medical technology but also ensures reliability and excellence in their products and services. Boston Scientific's focus on integrity, inclusion, and accountability strengthens internal cohesion and enhances customer trust and loyalty. By prioritising values such as collaboration, excellence, integrity, and customer satisfaction, these corporations differentiate themselves within the industry and contribute positively to healthcare outcomes worldwide.
 
In this Commentary

This Commentary highlights the pivotal role of corporate culture in the MedTech industry, advocating for strategies to maximise its impact. It shows how culture can drive success through innovation, employee engagement, and performance. The discussion describes actionable approaches, such as leadership commitment, clear vision, open communication, empowerment, diversity, inclusion, and continuous learning. By implementing these, companies can benefit from culture's potential for sustained growth and innovation, thereby significantly improving healthcare delivery. We present a brief case study of MedCo, a lesser-known UK MedTech, which has gained a reputation for proactive innovation. We illustrate how the company purposefully developed a distinct corporate culture. This differentiated it in an increasingly competitive market, exemplifying the transformative influence of a carefully crafted and implemented corporate culture. Furthermore, the Commentary tackles challenges and provides practical insights to assist enterprises in overcoming these obstacles, directing them toward a culture that promotes innovation, engages employees, and ensures long-term success.
 
Culture a Catalyst for MedTech Success

At its core, corporate culture in MedTechs fuels an environment where employees are inspired to push boundaries, collaborate, and engage in continuous improvement, encouraging creativity and empowering individuals to challenge the status quo. These dynamics facilitate the creation of innovative technologies and solutions poised to improve healthcare delivery. Simultaneously, it nurtures a sense of purpose and belonging within employees, aligning their endeavours with the organisation's mission to advance patient outcomes and elevate quality of life. Corporate ethos can help shape an environment where innovation flourishes, employees excel, and enterprises differentiate themselves. It stimulates collaboration, inspires creativity, encourages quality processes, and promotes continuous improvement, ultimately driving success, and impacting healthcare while building trust, attracting top talent, and strengthening a company's reputation.

Enhanced Employee Engagement and Productivity
When employees feel valued, supported, and appreciated within a positive work environment, they are motivated to contribute their best efforts. Clear communication channels, recognition programmes, and opportunities for professional growth further bolster engagement. A strong corporate culture promotes collaboration, teamwork, and a shared commitment to excellence, leading to increased efficiency and quality output. 
 

Fostering Innovation and Adaptability
Corporate culture is a catalyst for innovation and adaptability by nurturing an environment that values creativity, experimentation, and continuous learning. Employees who are encouraged to think outside the box and challenge conventional norms often generate new ideas and breakthrough solutions.
An ethos that embraces change and risk-taking enables teams to adapt swiftly to evolving market dynamics and technological advancements. Open communication channels and collaboration across departments and functions facilitate the exchange of diverse perspectives and insights, supporting a culture of innovation. Furthermore, an emphasis on learning and development ensures that people remain agile and equipped to manage challenges effectively, driving creativity and adaptability.
You might also like:

Optimising MedTechs’ People Operations for AI and Market Changes

Building Trust and Reputation
By embedding values such as integrity, transparency, and accountability throughout every facet of an enterprise's operations, corporate culture becomes instrumental in promoting trust and shaping reputation, positioning the organisation as a dependable industry partner. When employees observe ethical behaviours and fair treatment they can foster a sense of trust and loyalty. Upholding high standards of conduct and fulfilling commitments enables MedTechs to solidify their reputation as reliable, ethical, and trustworthy entities.
 
Cultivating an Effective Corporate Culture
 
Corporate culture begins at the top and hinges upon the unwavering commitment and alignment of leaders, who serve as the catalysts for its development. Central to this process is the relentless communication of the company's vision, mission, and values, coupled with the demonstration of these principles through leaders' actions. Collaborative goal setting, the establishment of clear objectives, and the implementation of receptive feedback mechanisms all serve to strengthen alignment with organisational objectives and bolster accountability throughout the entire workforce.
 
Open communication channels are essential for promoting transparency and trust. Establishing platforms for candid dialogue, such as regular team meetings and anonymous feedback systems, encourages active participation and fosters an inclusive culture. Leaders play a crucial role by modelling open communication, actively soliciting, and responding to feedback, thus supporting a culture of mutual respect and trust.
 
Employee empowerment lies at the heart of this process. MedTechs can enhance their people by delegating decision-making authority, granting autonomy in tasks, and developing an environment that champions innovation and encourages risk-taking. Recognition programmes that celebrate individual and collective achievements reinforce a culture of appreciation and motivate employees to pursue excellence. Additionally, offering opportunities for career development elevates people to map out their professional growth within the organisation.

You might also like:

The Silent Obstacle to MedTech Growth and Value Creation

Embracing diversity and inclusion stimulates innovation and enhances employee satisfaction and retention. Corporations can implement initiatives such as diverse hiring practices, unconscious bias training, and affinity groups to nurture an inclusive culture where all voices are valued. Mentorship programmes and promoting diverse leadership representation further emphasises an enterprise’s commitment to creating an environment where everyone can excel.
Continuous learning and development are vital for maintaining a culture of growth and improvement. Providing access to training programmes, workshops, and educational resources encourages people to pursue professional development opportunities. Furthermore, cross-functional collaboration and mentorship programmes facilitate the sharing of knowledge, drive innovation, and support continuous professional development.
 
Overcoming Challenges in Developing Corporate Culture

Successfully navigating the complexities of corporate culture development demands a multifaceted approach and steadfast commitment from leaders. Proactively tackling challenges entails more than just addressing them; it requires a strategic orchestration of efforts. Initially, overcoming resistance to change necessitates transparent communication elucidating the rationale behind cultural shifts, while actively involving employees to advance their buy-in and acceptance. Further, dismantling siloed departments and hierarchical structures mandates fostering cross-functional collaboration and flattening organisational hierarchies to promote inclusivity and teamwork. Facilitating an inclusive environment acknowledges and respects cultural differences within diverse teams, promoting a sense of belonging and empowerment. Also, ensuring the longevity and efficacy of cultural initiatives demands consistent reinforcement and alignment with company objectives. And, overcoming resource constraints mandates judicious prioritisation of cultural investments and the efficient utilisation of available resources. By adroitly addressing these challenges and implementing tailored strategies, MedTechs can forge robust corporate cultures that drive success and foster sustainable growth.
 
MedCo: A Case Study

Traditional MedTech enterprises seeking transformative strategies for growth and value enhancement can glean valuable insights from the journey of MedCo. Positioned as a leader in personalised healthcare solutions, the company has forged a successful path by integrating data analytics, genetics, and artificial intelligence (AI) to significantly enhance medical treatments with tailored solutions. However, what distinguishes MedCo is the emphasis its leaders place on corporate culture. Unlike many traditional players who prioritise financial and technological advancements, the company leaders recognise the importance of fostering a dynamic corporate culture that encourages experimentation, embraces diversity, and champions agility. This strategic alignment between technological innovation and a progressive corporate culture has propelled the corporation to the forefront of the industry and enabled it to continuously adapt and prosper in an ever-evolving healthcare ecosystem. Thus, for traditional MedTech enterprises aspiring for transformative growth and value enhancement, the journey of MedCo serves as a testament to the influence of corporate culture in driving innovation and strategic success.
 
With unwavering determination, MedCo's leaders refused to confine themselves to the status quo of conventional healthcare provision. Recognising the transformative potential of corporate culture, they embarked on a journey, fully cognisant that the foundation of such culture rests with leaders, encapsulated by a well-defined vision, mission, and values. Their resolve was to carve out a reputation synonymous with excellence, offering innovative products alongside exceptional service and after-sale support. With a focus on enhancing usability, saving healthcare professionals time and resources, and prioritising patient comfort and emotional wellbeing, the leaders pursued their objectives. They developed a culture characterised by innovation, quality, and employee engagement, which was aligned with the enterprise’s strategic vision.

 
Recognising that corporate culture starts from the highest levels, leaders outlined the company’s vision, mission, and values. Then, through proactive involvement with employees, these principles were collaboratively honed to align with strategic imperatives. Their goal? To forge a legacy characterised by unmatched product excellence, innovation, and comprehensive service: a pledge to substantially enhance usability, mitigate healthcare expenditures, and improve patient outcomes.
 
Establishing open channels of communication emerged as a cornerstone of its cultural blueprint. Town hall meetings, feedback sessions, and online forums became conduits for transparent dialogue, promoting collaboration and encouraging employees to contribute to strategic initiatives. Embracing employee empowerment and recognition, MedCo delegated decision-making authority and celebrated achievements, engendering a culture where every individual felt valued and motivated to take ownership of their contributions. In tandem with strengthening their employees, the company prioritised continuous learning and development, offering comprehensive training programmes, workshops, and mentorship opportunities. This bolstered employee satisfaction and retention and ensured the corporation's continued innovation in a fast-moving sector.
 
The tangible outcomes of MedCo's corporate culture are manifested in elevated levels of employee engagement, heightened productivity, and pioneering innovation. This culture serves as an advantage, attracting top talent, enhancing the company's reputation, and driving technological advancements. This case study is a testament to the transformative potential of corporate culture: a narrative from which traditional MedTechs can glean valuable insights to help in their strategic evolution.
 
Takeaways

Corporate culture is pivotal for MedTech companies, fuelling innovation, engaging employees, and establishing a competitive edge. A cohesive culture, rooted in shared values and collaboration, unleashes companies' full potential for sustained quality growth. Prioritising initiatives like open communication, employee empowerment, and ongoing learning enables firms to tackle challenges, adapt to market shifts, and deliver cutting-edge solutions that improve patient outcomes. A robust corporate culture not only attracts top talent and bolsters reputation but also positions companies as industry leaders. As MedTechs innovate and personalise healthcare, developing and nurturing a vibrant corporate culture remains essential to their mission of transforming healthcare delivery. By embracing corporate culture's power, enterprises can chart a path to sustained success, innovation, and excellence in creating a healthier future.
view in full page
  • Since 2000 healthcare has been transformed by genomics, AI, the internet, robotics, and data-driven solutions
  • Traditional providers, anchored in outdated technologies, struggle to keep pace with the evolving healthcare landscape
  • Over the next two decades anticipate another seismic shift, bringing further disruptions to medical technology and healthcare delivery
  • In the face of this imminent transformation, risk-averse leaders may cling to outdated portfolios, showing little interest in adapting to a 2040 healthcare ecosystem
  • Providers must decide; embrace change now and thrive in a transformed healthcare landscape, or stick to the status quo and risk losing value and competitiveness
 
Healthcare 2040
 
Abstract

By 2040, the landscape of healthcare will have undergone a seismic shift, discarding antiquated models in favour of cutting-edge AI-genomic-data-driven approaches that will radically change both medical technology and healthcare delivery. This transformation signifies a departure from the conventional one-size-fits-all system, ushering in an era of targeted therapies grounded in molecular-level insights that challenge entrenched healthcare paradigms. The evolving healthcare narrative emphasises prevention, wellbeing, personalised care, and heightened accessibility. This departure from the norm is not a trend but a significant reconfiguration, where the fusion of biomedical science, technology, and expansive datasets merge to facilitate early detection and proactive interventions. This not only deepens our comprehension of diseases but also elevates the efficacy of therapies. At the core of this transformation is the empowerment of individuals within a framework that champions choice and fosters virtual communities. Genetic advancements, far from just addressing hereditary conditions, play an important role in enhancing diagnostic accuracy, optimising patient outcomes, and fundamentally shifting the focus from reactive diagnosis and treatment to a proactive commitment to prevention and holistic wellbeing. The indispensable roles played by genomics and AI-driven care in reshaping healthcare are not isolated occurrences; they will catalyse the emergence of new data-intensive R&D enterprises, which are poised to redefine the healthcare landscape against a backdrop of multifaceted influencing factors. Successfully navigating this transformative period necessitates a distinct set of capabilities and strategic alignment with an envisioned 2040 healthcare environment.

Providers find themselves at a crossroads, confronted with a choice: adapt and thrive or risk losing value and competitiveness in a rapidly evolving landscape. Recognising potential resistance to change and the scarcity of pertinent capabilities, leaders of traditional enterprises must acknowledge that immediate strategic action is not just beneficial but a prerequisite for success in the redefined healthcare ecosystem of 2040. The urgency of this call to action cannot be overstated, as the window of opportunity for adaptation narrows with each passing moment.

 
In this Commentary

This Commentary aims to help healthcare professionals to strategically reposition their organizations for success in the next two decades. Leaders must evaluate their strengths and weaknesses in the context of an envisioned future and implement strategies to align their organisations with the demands of a rapidly changing health ecosystem. Failure to do so will dent enterprises’ competitiveness and threaten their survival. Leaders should anticipate and address resistance to change among executives with a preference for the status quo. The Commentary has two sections: Part 1, Looking Back 20 Years, describes the scale and pace of change since 2000 and emphasises how genomics, the internet, AI, digitalization, data-driven solutions, robotics, telehealth, outpatient services, personalised care, ubiquitous communications, and strategic responses to demographic shifts have transformed medical technology and healthcare delivery. Part 2, Looking Forward 20 Years, seeks to stimulate discussions about the future of healthcare. While we highlight a range of factors positioned to impact medical technology and healthcare deliver in the future, we emphasise the significance of genomics, varied and vast datasets, and AI. We suggest the emergence of specialised agile, AI-driven research boutiques with capabilities to leverage untapped genomic, personal, and medical data. The proliferation of such entities will oblige traditional healthcare enterprises to reduce their R&D activities and concentrate on manufacturing. Over the next 20 years, anticipate an accelerated shift towards patient-centric, cell-based prevention and wellbeing care modalities, large hospitals replaced with smaller hubs of medical excellence, the rapid growth of outpatient centres, and the acceleration of home care and care-enabled virtual communities. The future dynamic healthcare ecosystem necessitates stakeholders to change immediately if they are to survive and prosper. Takeaways posit a choice for healthcare leaders: either stick to the status quo and risk losing value and competitiveness or embrace change and stay relevant.
 
Part 1
 
Looking Back 20 Years

Reflecting on the past two decades shows the rapid evolution and interplay of factors shaping medical technology and healthcare delivery. Appreciating the speed and scale of change helps to envision the future. Factors such as genomics, the Internet, AI, robotics, digitalisation, data-driven health solutions, telehealth, outpatient services, home care, personalised wellbeing, ubiquitous personal telephony, and strategic responses to demographic shifts have all influenced medical technology and healthcare delivery and will continue to do so in the future. Here we describe a few of these factors.

The completion of the Human Genome Project in 2003 was a pivotal moment in the direction of medical advancement, laying the foundations for the emergence of genomics. Genomics, encapsulating the mapping, sequencing, and analysis of DNA, is a pivotal tool for unravelling molecular information, variations, and their implications in both traits and diseases. This achievement not only transformed biomedical research but also changed healthcare, shifting it from a generic one-size-fits-all approach to finely tuned care tailored to the unique genetic makeup of individuals.

Over the past two decades, the decoding of the human genetic blueprint has provided unprecedented insights into diseases at the molecular level, triggering a paradigm shift in medicine. This ushered in an era of personalised and precision approaches to diagnoses, treatments, and prevention. From the advent of targeted therapies to the implementation of genetic screening, genomic research has had a transformative influence and is positioned to continue its impact on healthcare.

Indeed, genomic testing has become a standard practice, and US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved genomic care modalities have advanced medicine. For example, pharmacogenonics tailors drug treatments to individual patients by utilising genetic information, with FDA-approved tests for specific biomarkers that predict medication responses. Hereditary assessments evaluate an individual's cancer risk based on genetic makeup, such as identifying BRCA gene mutations linked to elevated risks of breast and ovarian cancers. Gene expression profiling analyses a patient's tumour genetics to guide targeted cancer therapies, with FDA-approved companion diagnostic tests for specific cancer treatments. Carrier testing identifies genetic mutations that could be passed on to children, which contribute to family planning and prenatal care. Pharmacodiagnostic tests help pinpoint patients that would benefit from specific drug treatments, predicting responses, especially in cancer therapies.

In 2012, the UK government inaugurated Genomics England, an initiative designed to spearhead the 100,000 Genomes Project, which aimed to sequence the genomes of 100,000 patients with infectious diseases and specific cancers. The project’s goals included the enhancement of our understanding of various genetic factors in diseases, the facilitation of targeted treatments and establishing a framework for the integration of genomics into everyday clinical practice. The successful completion of the project in 2018, provided a basis for genomic medicine and a deeper understanding of the genetic framework influencing health and disease.

In addition to genomic data, since 2000, there has been a significant increase in health-related data, driven by the proliferation of electronic health records (EHRs), developments in information management technologies, initiatives to improve healthcare efficiency, and enhanced communications among stakeholders. The growth in data has, in turn, created opportunities for the utilisation of AI and machine learning (ML) algorithms. Over the last two decades, AI has changed medical technology and healthcare delivery by enhancing diagnostics, personalising treatment plans, streamlining administrative tasks, and facilitating research through efficient data analysis, which has improved patient outcomes, and advanced the field. As of January 2023, the FDA has approved >520 AI and ML algorithms for medical use, which are primarily related to the analysis of medical images and videos. Indeed, the rise of algorithms has transformed healthcare, with many of them focusing on predictions using EHRs that do not require FDA approval.

In addition to EHRs there has been the evolution of wearable technologies like the Apple Watch and Fitbit, which have transformed personal health. Initially focusing on fitness tracking, these devices have expanded to monitor an array of health metrics. Over the years, they have amassed vast amounts of personalised data, ranging from activity levels to heart rate patterns. These data reservoirs are a goldmine for healthcare and wellbeing strategies, enabling individuals, healthcare professionals and providers to gain unprecedented insights into health trends, customised care routines, and the early detection of health issues. This combination of technology and health data has created opportunities for proactive healthcare management and personalised wellbeing interventions.

Targeted medicine not only benefitted from AI but also from personalised telephony, which experienced a significant boost in the early 2000s by the widespread internet access in households across the globe. The period was marked by the introduction of the iPad in 2001, closely followed by the launch of the iPhone. These innovations triggered widespread smartphone use and accessible internet connectivity, laying the foundations for the emergence of telehealth and telemedicine. In the early 2000s, global cell phone subscriptions numbered ~740m. Today, the figure is >8bn, surpassing the world's population. This increase was driven by the proliferation of broadband, the evolution of mobile technologies and the rise of social media, all contributing to the ubiquitous presence of the internet. By the 2010s, the internet had integrated into the daily lives of a substantial portion of the global population. Initially, in 2000, ~7% of the world’s population had access online. Contrastingly, today, >50% enjoy internet connectivity. In a similar vein, broadband access in American homes has surged from ~50% in 2000 to >90% in the present day. Personal telephony has evolved into an omnipresent force, and has become an integral part of billions of lives, actively enhancing health and wellbeing on a global scale. After 2010, patient-centric wellbeing evolved and later was helped by Covid-19 pandemic lockdowns, with telehealth and telemedicine offering remote consultations and treatments, empowering patients, and emphasising shared decision-making between healthcare providers and patients.

On a more prosaic level, consider how robotics has changed surgery over the past two decades by offering enhanced precision, reduced invasiveness, and improved recovery times. The use of robotic systems, like the da Vinci Surgical System, which gained FDA-approval in 2000, has allowed surgeons to perform complex procedures with greater accuracy. Between 2012 and 2022, the percentage of surgical procedures using robotic systems rose from 1.8% to 17%. Robotic surgery is becoming increasingly popular, with an annual growth rate of ~15%. In 2020, its global volume was 1.24m, with the US accounting for >70% of all robotic surgeries.

The shifting demographics over the past few decades, marked by decreasing birth rates, prolonged life expectancy, and immigration, has transformed prosperous industrial economies, resulting in a substantial rise in the proportion of the elderly population. For instance, in the US in 2000, there were ~35m citizens ≥65; today, this figure has risen to ~56m, ~17% of the population. Concurrently, there has been an increase of chronic lifetime illnesses such as heart disease, diabetes, cancer, and respiratory disorders. In 2000, ~125m Americans suffered from at least one chronic condition. Today, this figure has increased to ~133m - ~50% of the population. Simultaneously, there is a shrinking pool of health professionals. Research suggests that by 2030, there will be ~5m fewer physicians than society will require. This, together with ageing populations, the growing burden of chronic diseases and rising costs of healthcare globally are challenging governments, payers, regulators, and providers to innovate and transform medical technology and healthcare delivery.

 
Part 2
 
Looking Forward 20 Years

This section aims to encourage healthcare professionals to envision the future. Over the next two decades, medical technology and healthcare delivery are likely to be affected by numerous interconnected factors, which include: (i) continued progress in AI and ML, internet of things (IoT), robotics, nanotechnology, and biotechnology, (ii) advances in genomics, (iii) increasing availability of multi-modal data (genomics, economic, demographic, clinical and phenotypic) coupled with technology innovations, (iv) accelerated adoption of telemedicine and virtual monitoring technologies, (v) changes in healthcare regulations, (vi) an increase of patient-cantered care and greater patient involvement in decision-making, (vii) emerging infectious diseases, antimicrobial resistance, and other global health issues, (viii) Investments in healthcare infrastructure, both physical and digital, (ix) an evolving and shrinking healthcare workforce, including the further integration of AI technologies and changes in roles, (x) economic conditions and healthcare funding, (xi) the ethical use of technology, privacy concerns, and societal attitudes towards healthcare innovations, and (xii) environmental changes and their impact on health and wellbeing. Such factors and their interconnectivity are expected to drive significant healthcare transformation over the next two decades. Healthcare systems throughout the world are tasked with: (i) improving population health, (ii) enhancing patients’ therapeutic journeys and outcomes, (iii) strengthening caregivers’ experience and (iv) reducing the rising cost of care. There appears to be unanimous agreement among healthcare leaders that these goals will not be achieved by business as usual.
 
In November 2023, BTIG, a leading global financial services firm, organised its Digital Health Forum, bringing together >30 healthcare companies that offer a diverse range of products and services. During the event, executives discussed business models, reimbursement, and commercial strategies, and unanimously agreed that: "The market is primed for the mainstream integration of digital diagnostics and therapeutics."  Here we focus on the anticipated accelerated convergence of genomics and AI technologies, and foresee the emergence of agile, AI-driven R&D boutiques as key players in reshaping medical technology and healthcare delivery.
 
These dynamic research entities thrive on the power of data. Currently, ~79% of the hospital data generated annually goes untapped, and medical information is doubling every 73 days. This emphasises the vast latent potential within these repositories. Traditional enterprises and healthcare professionals, constrained by a dearth of data management capabilities, have struggled to unlock the full potential inherent in these vast stores of information. By contrast, the adept data processing capabilities of these new innovative enterprises position them strategically to harness untapped data sources, extracting valuable insights into disease states and refining treatment modalities. Moreover, they boast advanced technology stacks, seamless connections between semiconductors, software, and systems, and are well-prepared to leverage specialised generative AI applications as they emerge in the market. Armed with cutting-edge technology and extensive datasets, they stand ready to enhance diagnostic precision, streamline treatment approaches, and reduce overall healthcare costs. Private equity firms will be eager to invest in these disruptive AI start-ups, anticipating M&A activities focused on specific therapeutic areas that will make them appealing to public markets.

These innovative entities are set to expedite the introduction of disruptive solutions, improve patients' therapeutic journeys, and optimise outcomes while driving operational efficiencies. Anticipate them to overshadow their traditional counterparts, many of which have outdated legacy offerings and historically have treated R&D as small adjustments to existing portfolios. Given that many conventional healthcare enterprises have: (i) failed to keep pace with technological developments, (ii) a dearth of in-house data-handling capabilities, and (iii) no experience in data-heavy disruptive R&D, it seems reasonable to suggest that they will most likely retreat into their core manufacturing activities, relinquish their R&D roles and lose value.

In the forefront of seismic change, the integration of digitalisation, AI, and cutting-edge decision support tools propels the emerging agile, data-driven R&D enterprises into a pivotal role within the landscape of well-informed, personalised healthcare. Meticulously safeguarding sensitive information, these enterprises not only adhere to the highest standards of privacy but also elevate security measures through state-of-the-art encryption techniques and decentralised storage solutions. As staunch guardians of privacy, they go beyond conventional approaches, crafting data repositories that not only shield confidential information but also facilitate the seamless flow of critical insights crucial for advancing medical technology and elevating care delivery. The seamless synergy between vast genomic, economic, demographic, clinical, and phenotypic data repositories and advanced AI techniques is poised to radically change healthcare R&D, redirecting it away from refining traditional products towards disruptive endeavours. Moreover, these agile research entities are anticipated to encourage widespread industry cooperation, harnessing the power of diverse data sources to innovate health solutions and services that transcend boundaries, thereby playing an important role in shaping a borderless health and wellbeing ecosystem.

In the regulatory arena, a transformation is anticipated by 2040. Regulators are likely to evolve from enforcers to stewards of progress, collaborating with industry stakeholders to promote a consumer-centric healthcare. Advocating transparency, patients' rights, and ethical innovation, regulators will become influential drivers of progress, contributing to a shared and equitable healthcare future. This collaborative effort is expected to contribute to a data-driven healthcare ecosystem that prioritises individual wellbeing, innovation, and accessibility in equal measure.

By 2040, expect healthcare payers to have undergone a transformative change, fuelled by a seismic shift in medical technology and healthcare delivery. New payment models will prioritise individualised therapies and patient outcomes, leveraging real-time health data for customised coverage. AI will streamline administration, reduce costs, and enhance overall healthcare efficiency. Increased patient engagement and collaboration among payers, providers, and patients will drive a holistic, patient-centred approach, ultimately improving the quality and accessibility of healthcare services.


This section has emphasised the transformative forces of genomics and AI shaping a personalised healthcare ecosystem. While traditional medical technology and healthcare delivery may be predicated upon physical devices and a one-size-fits-all approach, the future lies in the fusion of data and smart software to accelerate targeted care, which marks a significant departure from the conventional.
 
Takeaways

The shift towards genomic-driven healthcare marks a transformation in the medical landscape expected by 2040. Moving away from outdated models, the trend towards personalised care, rooted in molecular insights, necessitates a revaluation from health professionals. This shift, facilitated by the fusion of biomedical science, advanced technologies, and vast amounts of varied data, foresees a future where prevention, individualised wellbeing, and improved accessibility become the new norm. The convergence of genomics and AI not only improves diagnostics and treatments but also points to prevention and overall wellness. This Commentary has highlighted the transformative impact of genomics and AI-driven healthcare at the cellular level, making way for data-intensive R&D enterprises that will shape the future of medical technology and healthcare delivery. The path to 2040 demands a departure from conventional norms of the past, requiring strategic realignment and specific capabilities. Traditional providers find themselves at a juncture: those that adapt to an envisioned care environment of 2040 are more likely to succeed, while those that resist risk becoming obsolete. By acknowledging potential obstacles to change and the scarcity of relevant capabilities, leaders are encouraged to recognise the urgency of strategic action as a prerequisite for success in the redefined healthcare landscape of 2040. The future is imminent, and the time for transformative readiness is now.
view in full page
MedTechs Battle with AI for Sustainable Growth and Enhanced Value
 
Preface
 
The medical technology industry has experienced significant growth, consistently surpassing the S&P index by ~15 percentage points. This success is rooted in the early 1990s, a time when capital was costly, with interest rates ~10%. However, as we moved closer to 1998, interest rates began to recede, settling just below 7%. This early era of growth was not devoid of challenges. The US was still grappling with the aftermath of the oil embargo imposed in 1973 by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), which was a response to the American government's support for Israel during the Yom Kippur War and had lasting consequences. The oil crisis triggered hyperinflation, leading to a rapid escalation in the prices of goods and services. In response, the US Federal Reserve (Fed) raised interest rates to a historic high of 17% in 1981, which was aimed at curbing inflation but came at the price of increasing the cost of borrowing. As we entered the 1990s, the landscape shifted. The Fed’s monetary policies began to work, inflation started to decline, and interest rates fell to ~10%, eventually dipping below 7% in 1998. This created conditions for increased investments in research and development (R&D) and the American economy blossomed and benefitted from the internet becoming mainstream. It was during this period that many medical technology companies developed innovative medical devices, which were not only disruptive but also found a receptive global market characterized by significant unmet needs and substantial entry barriers. In the ensuing years, the industry thrived and matured. Fast-forward to the present (2023), and we find ourselves in a different scenario. Over the past five years, numerous large, diversified MedTechs have struggled to deliver value. One explanation for this is that growth of these enterprises over the past three decades, except for the early years, was primarily driven by mergers and acquisitions (M&A), often at the expense of prioritizing R&D. Consequently, many large MedTechs did not leverage evolving technologies to update and renew their offerings and are now heavily reliant on slow-growth markets and aging product portfolios. Navigating a successful path forward would be helped by a comprehensive embrace of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) strategies, since these technologies possess the potential to transform how MedTechs operate, innovate, and serve their stakeholders.
 
In this Commentary

This Commentary explores the role of artificial intelligence (AI) in reshaping the future landscape of the MedTech industry in pursuit of sustainable growth and added value. We focus on the impact AI can have on transforming operational methodologies, fostering innovation, and enhancing stakeholder services. Our aim is to address five key areas: (i) Defining Artificial Intelligence (AI): Describes how AI differs from any other technology in history and sheds light on its relevance within the MedTech sector. (ii) Highlighting AI-Driven MedTech Success: In this section, we preview three leading corporations that have utilized AI to gain access to new revenue streams. (iii) Showcasing a Disruptive AI-Powered Medical Device: Here, we provide an overview of the IDx-DR system, an innovation that has brought disruptive change to the field of ophthalmology. (iv) The Potential Benefits of Full AI Integration for MedTechs: This section briefly describes 10 potential benefits that can be expected from a comprehensive embrace of AI by MedTechs. (v) Potential Obstacles to the Adoption of AI by MedTechs: Finally, we describe some obstacles that help to explain some MedTechs reluctance to embrace AI strategies. Despite the substantial advantages that AI offers, not many large, diversified enterprises have fully integrated these transformative technologies into their operations. Takeaways outline the options facing enterprises.
 
Part 1

Defining Artificial Intelligence (AI)

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is a ground-breaking concept that transcends the simulation of human intelligence. Unlike human cognition, AI operates devoid of consciousness, emotions, and feelings. Thus, it is indifferent to victory or defeat, tirelessly working without rest, sustenance, or encouragement. AI empowers machines to perform tasks once exclusive to human intelligence, including deciphering natural language, recognizing intricate patterns, making complex decisions, and iterating towards self-improvement. AI is significantly different to any technology that precedes it. It is the first instance of a tool with the unique capabilities of autonomous decision making and the generation of novel ideas. While all predecessor technologies augment human capabilities, AI takes power away from individuals.
You might also like:

Forging a path for digital excellence in the MedTech Industry


Unleashing MedTech's Competitive Edge through Transformational Technologies
AI employs various techniques, including machine learning (ML), neural networks, natural language processing, and robotics, enabling computers to autonomously tackle increasingly complex tasks. ML, a subset of AI, develops algorithms that learn, adapt, and improve through experience, rather than explicit programming. The technology’s versatile applications span image and speech recognition, recommendation systems, and predictive analytics. In the quest to comprehend the intersection of artificial and human intelligence, we encounter Large Language Models (LLMs), like ChatGPT, which recently have gained prominence in corporate contexts. These advanced AI models grasp and generate human-like text by discerning patterns and context from extensive textual datasets. LLMs excel in language translation, content generation, and engaging in human-like conversations, effectively harnessing our linguistic abilities.


Part 2

Highlighting AI-Driven MedTech Success

This section briefly describes three examples of MedTechs that have successfully leveraged AI technologies to illustrate how AI’s growing influence drives improvements in accuracy, efficiency, patient outcomes and in the reduction of costs, which together, and in time, are positioned to transform healthcare.
 
Merative, formally Watson Health, a division of IBM that specialised in applying AI and data analytics to healthcare. In 2022, the company was acquired by Francisco Partners, an American  private equity firm, and rebranded Merative. The company leverages AI, ML, and LLMs to analyse extensive medical datasets that encompass patient records, clinical trials, medical literature, and genomic information. These technologies empower healthcare professionals by facilitating more informed decisions, identifying potential treatment options, and predicting disease outcomes. For instance, Merative employs ML to offer personalised treatment recommendations for cancer patients based on their medical histories and the latest research. Integrating LLMs enables natural language processing to extract insights from medical literature, helping healthcare providers stay current with scientific and medical advancements.
 
Google Health, a subsidiary of Alphabet Inc., focuses on using AI and data analysis to improve healthcare services and patient outcomes. It employs AI and ML to develop predictive models that can identify patterns and trends in medical data, which improve early disease detection and prevention. One notable application is in medical imaging, where the company's algorithms can assist radiologists to identify anomalies in X-rays, MRIs, and other images. LLMs are used to interpret and summarize medical documents, making it easier for healthcare professionals to access relevant information quickly. Google Health also works on projects related to drug discovery and genomics, leveraging ML to analyze molecular structures and predict potential drug candidates.
Medtronic is a global leader in medical technology, specializing in devices and therapies to treat various medical conditions. The company incorporates AI, ML, and LLMs into their devices and systems to enhance patient care. For instance, in the field of cardiology, Medtronic's pacemakers and defibrillators collect data on a patient's heart rhythms, which are then analyzed using AI algorithms to detect irregularities and adjust device settings accordingly. This real-time analysis helps to optimize patient treatment. Medtronic also employs AI in insulin pumps for diabetes management that can learn from a patient's blood sugar patterns and adjust insulin delivery accordingly. Additionally, LLMs are used to extract insights from electronic health records (EHR) and clinical notes, which help healthcare providers to make more personalized treatment decisions.
You might also like:
 

 
Part 3

Showcasing a Disruptive AI-Powered Medical Device

AI has been applied to various medical imaging tasks, including interpreting radiological images like X-rays, CT scans, and MRIs and there are numerous AI-driven medical devices and systems that have emerged and evolved in recent years. As of January 2023, the US Federal Drug Administration (FDA) has approved >520 AI medical algorithms, the majority of which are related to medical imaging. Here we describe just one, the IDx-DR system, which was developed by Digital Diagnostics. In 2018, it became the first FDA-approved AI-based diagnostic system for detecting diabetic retinopathy. If left untreated, the condition can lead to blindness. Globally, the prevalence of the disease among people living with diabetes is ~27% and every year, >0.4m people go blind from the disorder. In 2021, globally there were ~529m people with diabetes, which is expected to double to ~1.31bn by 2050.
 
The IDx-DR device utilizes AI algorithms to analyze retinal images taken with a specialized camera and accurately detects the presence of retinopathy that occurs in individuals with diabetes when high blood sugar levels cause damage to blood vessels in the retina. Significantly, the device produces decisions without the need for retinal images to be interpreted by either radiologists or ophthalmologists, which allows the system to be used outside specialist centres, such as in primary care clinics. Advantages of the system include: (i) Early detection, which can improve outcomes and quality of life for individuals with diabetes. (ii) Efficiency. The system analyzes images quickly and accurately, providing results within minutes, which allows healthcare providers to screen a larger number of patients in a shorter amount of time. (iii) Reduced healthcare costs. By detecting retinopathy at an early stage, the system helps prevent costly interventions, such as surgeries and treatments for advanced stages of the disease, which can lead to significant cost savings for healthcare systems. (iv) Patient convenience. Patients undergo retinal imaging as part of their regular diabetes check-ups, reducing the need for separate appointments with eye specialists, which encourages enhanced compliance.

 
Part 4

The Potential Benefits of Full AI Integration for MedTechs

Large, diversified MedTechs stand to gain significant benefits by fully embracing AI technologies that extend across all aspects of their operations, innovation, and overall value propositions. In this section we briefly describe 10 such advantages, which include enhanced innovation, improved patient outcomes, increased operational efficiency, cost savings, and access to new revenue streams. Companies that harness the full potential of AI will be better positioned to thrive in the highly competitive and rapidly evolving healthcare industry.
 
1. Enhanced innovation and product development
AI technologies have the potential to enhance R&D endeavours. They accomplish this through the ability to dig deep into vast repositories of complex medical data, identifying patterns, and forecasting outcomes. This translates into a shorter timeline for the conception and creation of novel medical technologies, devices, and therapies. In essence, AI quickens the pace of innovation in healthcare. The capabilities of AI-driven simulations and modeling further amplifies its impact. These virtual tools enable comprehensive testing in a digital environment, obviating the need for protracted physical prototyping and iterative cycles, which can shorten the development phase and conserve resources, making the innovation process more cost-effective, and environmentally sustainable.
 
2. Improved patient outcomes
Beyond improving the research landscape, AI improves the quality of patient care by enhancing diagnostic precision through the analysis of medical images, patient data, and clinical histories. Early detection of diseases becomes more precise and reliable, leading to timelier intervention and improved patient outcomes. Additionally, AI facilitates the personalization of treatment recommendations, tailoring them to individual patient profiles and current medical research. This optimizes therapies and increases the chances of successful outcomes and improved patient wellbeing.
 
3. Efficient clinical trials
Increasingly AI algorithms are being used in clinical studies to identify suitable patient cohorts for participation in trials, effectively addressing recruitment challenges and streamlining participant selection. Further, predictive analytics play a role in enhancing the efficiency of trial design. By providing insights into trial protocols and patient outcomes, AI reduces both the time and costs associated with bringing novel medical technologies to market, which speeds up the availability of treatments and facilitates the accessibility of healthcare innovations to a broader population.
 
4. Operational efficiency
Operational efficiency is improved with the integration of AI technologies by refining operations. AI-driven supply chains and inventory management systems play a significant role in optimizing procurement processes. They analyze demand patterns, reduce wastage, and ensure the timely availability of critical supplies. By doing so, companies can maintain uninterrupted operations, enhancing their overall efficiency and responsiveness. Another component of operational efficiency lies in predictive maintenance, which can be improved by AI. Through continuous monitoring and data analysis, AI can predict equipment failures before they occur. Such a proactive approach minimizes downtime and ensures manufacturing facilities remain compliant and in optimal working condition. Consequently, healthcare providers experience improved operational efficiency, strengthened compliance, and a reduction in costly disruptions. The automation of routine tasks and processes via AI relieves healthcare professionals from repetitive duties and frees up resources that can be redirected towards more strategic and patient-centric initiatives. This reallocation reduces operational costs while enhancing the quality of care provided.
 
5. Cost savings
Beyond automation, AI-driven insights further uncover cost efficiencies within healthcare organizations. AI identifies areas where resource allocation and utilization can be optimized, which can result in cost reduction strategies that are both data-informed and effective. AI's potential extends to the generation of innovative revenue streams. Corporations can develop data-driven solutions and services that transcend traditional medical devices. For instance, offering AI-driven diagnostic services or remote patient monitoring solutions provides access to new revenue streams. Such services improve patient care and contribute to the financial sustainability of enterprises. Further, AI-enabled healthcare services lend themselves to subscription-based models, ensuring consistent and reliable revenue over time. Companies can offer subscription services that provide access to AI-powered diagnostics, personalized treatment recommendations, or remote monitoring, which have the capacity to diversify revenue streams and enhance longer-term financial stability.
 
6. New revenue streams
AI's ability to analyze vast datasets positions MedTechs to unravel the interplay of genetic, environmental, and lifestyle factors that shape individual health profiles. With such knowledge, personalized treatment plans and interventions can be developed, ensuring that medical care is tailored to each patient's unique needs and characteristics. This level of customization optimizes outcomes and minimizes potential side effects and complications. AI's ability to process vast amounts of patient data and detect patterns, anomalies, and correlations, equips healthcare professionals with the knowledge needed to make more informed decisions. Such insights extend beyond individual care, serving as the basis for effective population health management and proactive disease prevention strategies. In short, AI transforms data into actionable intelligence, creating a basis for more proactive and efficient healthcare practices.
You might also like:

Leaning-in on digital and AI
7. Regulatory compliance and safety
In an era of stringent healthcare regulations, AI is a reliable ally to ensure compliance and enhance safety standards. Through automation, AI streamlines documentation, data tracking, and quality control processes, reducing the risk of errors and oversights. Also, AI-powered systems excel in the early detection of anomalies and potential safety issues, which increase patient safety and the overall quality of healthcare solutions and services. This safeguards patient wellbeing and protects the reputation and credibility of companies.
8. Competitive advantage
MedTechs that are early adopters of AI stand to gain a distinct competitive advantage. They can offer AI-powered solutions and services that deliver superior clinical outcomes and improve overall patient experience. By harnessing the potential of AI, companies can position themselves as leaders in innovation and technological capabilities, likely drawing a loyal customer base, valuable partnerships, collaborations, and investments.
 
9. Talent attraction and retention
Embracing AI technologies also has an impact on talent attraction and retention. The allure of working on novel AI projects that improve lives attracts scarce tech-savvy professionals who seek to be part of dynamic, purposeful, and forward-thinking teams. Such talent contributes to a skilled workforce capable of extending the boundaries of AI innovation within MedTech companies. Further, fostering a culture of innovation through AI adoption encourages employee engagement and job satisfaction, leading to improved talent retention.
 
10. Long-term sustainability
The integration of AI goes beyond immediate advantages; it positions MedTechs for longer-term strategic growth and resilience. As the healthcare landscape continues to evolve, adaptability and innovation become more important. AI enables companies to adapt to changing market dynamics, navigate regulatory challenges, and remain relevant amidst industry transformations. By staying at the forefront of technological advancements, companies ensure their relevance and contribute to shaping the future healthcare landscape.
 
Part 5

Potential Obstacles to the Adoption of AI by MedTechs

The integration of AI technologies into numerous industries has demonstrated its potential to significantly enhance operations, improve R&D, and create new revenue streams. However, despite AI’s potential to contribute significant benefits for business enterprises, its adoption by many large, diversified medical technology companies has been limited and slow. This section describes some factors that help to explain the reluctance of senior MedTech executives to fully embrace AI technologies, which include an interplay of organizational, technical, and industry-specific issues. Without overcoming these obstacles, MedTechs risk losing the growth and value creation they once experienced in an earlier era.

Demographics of senior leadership teams
According to Korn Ferry, an international consultancy and search firm, the average age for a C-suite member is 56 and their average tenure is 4.9 years, although the numbers vary depending on the industry. The average age of a CEO across all industries is 59. If we assume that the MedTech industry mirrors this demographic, it seems reasonable to suggest that many corporations have executives approaching retirement who may be more risk averse and oppose the comprehensive introduction of AI technologies due to a fear of losing benefits they stand to receive upon retirement.

Organizational inertia and risk aversion
Large medical technology companies often have well-established structures, processes, and cultures that resist rapid change. In such an environment, executives might be hesitant to introduce AI technologies due to concerns about disrupting existing workflows, employee resistance to learning new skills, and the fear of failure. The risk-averse nature of the medical technology industry, where patient safety is critical, further amplifies executives' cautious approach to implementing unproven AI solutions.
 

Technical challenges and skill gaps
AI implementation requires technical expertise and resources. Many MedTech executives might lack a deep understanding of AI's technical capabilities, making it difficult for them to evaluate potential applications. Further, attracting and retaining AI talent is highly competitive, and the scarcity of professionals skilled in both medical technology and AI can hinder successful implementation.
Regulatory and ethical concerns
The medical field is heavily regulated to ensure patient safety and data privacy. Incorporating AI technologies introduces additional layers of complexity in terms of regulatory compliance and ethical considerations. Executives might hesitate to navigate these legal frameworks, fearing potential liabilities and negative consequences if AI systems are not properly controlled or if they lead to adverse patient outcomes.
Long development cycles and uncertain ROI
The R&D cycle in the medical technology industry is prolonged due to rigorous testing, clinical trials, and regulatory approvals. Although AI technologies have the capabilities to enhance R&D efficiency, they can introduce additional uncertainty and complexity, potentially extending development timelines. Executives could be apprehensive about the time and resources required to integrate AI into their R&D processes, especially if the return on investment (ROI) remains uncertain or delayed.
 

Industry-specific challenges
The medical technology industry has unique challenges compared to other sectors. Patient data privacy concerns, interoperability issues, and the need for rigorous clinical validation can pose barriers to AI adoption. Executives might view these complexities as additional hurdles that could hinder the successful implementation and deployment of AI solutions.
  

Existing Revenue Streams and Incremental Innovation
Many large, diversified MedTechs generate substantial revenue from their existing products and services. Executives might be reluctant to divert resources towards AI-based ventures, fearing that these investments could jeopardize their core revenue streams. Additionally, a culture of incremental innovation prevalent in the industry might discourage radical technological shifts like those associated with AI.

 
Takeaways
 
Hesitation among MedTechs to integrate AI technologies poses the threat of missed opportunities, diminished competitiveness, and sluggish growth. This reluctance hinders innovation and limits the potential for enhanced patient care. Embracing AI is not an option but a strategic imperative. Failure to do so means missing opportunities to address unmet medical needs, explore new markets, and access new revenue streams. The potential for efficiency gains, streamlined operations, and cost reductions across R&D, manufacturing and supply chains is significant. Companies fully embracing AI gain a competitive advantage, delivering innovative solutions and services that improve patient outcomes and cut healthcare costs. Conversely, those resisting AI risk losing market share to more agile rivals. AI’s impact on analysing vast amounts of complex medical data, accelerating discovery, and enhancing diagnostics is well established. MedTechs slow to leverage AI may endure prolonged R&D cycles, fewer breakthroughs, and suboptimal resource allocation, jeopardising competitiveness and branding them as ‘outdated’. In today’s environment, attracting top talent relies on being perceived as innovative, a quality lacking in AI-resistant MedTechs. As AI disrupts industries, start-ups and smaller agile players can overtake established corporations failing to adapt. A delayed embrace of AI impedes progress in patient care, diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes, preventing companies from realising their full potential in shaping healthcare. The time to embrace AI is now to avoid irreversible setbacks in a rapidly evolving MedTech ecosystem.
view in full page
  • The MedTech industry has undergone a transformative journey marked by prolific mergers and acquisitions (M&A)
  • Between 2006 and 2016, the industry witnessed 2,680 acquisitions totaling US$607.8bn
  • In the pursuit of efficient integrations corporations often overlooked the significance of fostering a distinct organisational culture
  • In many cases this resulted in cultural dissonance, which is a silent but substantial obstacle to growth and value creation
  • Stories can overcome this obstacle and help to bridge gaps, align interests, and cultivate a shared sense of purpose among employees and stakeholders for long-term MedTech success
 
 The Silent Obstacle to MedTech Growth and Value Creation
 
The MedTech industry, marked by decades of prolific mergers and acquisitions (M&A), has undergone a transformative journey fuelled by factors like the pursuit of economies of scale, technological access, and navigating regulatory challenges. While strategic consolidations have yielded financial and organisational benefits, often they have inadvertently overlooked the softer facet of corporate identity - organisational culture.
 
Illustrating the magnitude of M&A within the industry, the decade from 2006 to 2016 witnessed 2,680 acquisitions with a value totaling US$607.8bn. Noteworthy is the consistency in the frequency of these acquisitions, juxtaposed against the variability in the consideration of individual deals.
                                                                                                                     
By 2023, a notable shift occurred within the MedTech M&A landscape. The deceleration of M&A activity led to a saturation in market segments with products and services, which intensified competition for market share and exerted pressure on pricing and profit margins. As the M&A market cooled, the accessibility to cutting-edge technologies became more elusive, putting companies at a disadvantage in terms of product development and maintaining competitiveness. Simultaneously, heightened geopolitical tensions and trade restrictions further complicated supply chains and distribution channels. The constrained M&A environment raised hurdles for expanding into emerging markets, which narrowed potential growth opportunities. Integrating talent from acquired companies, a common practice in M&A, also faced challenges amid the slowdown, which impacted the ability to sustain a competitive edge in expertise and innovation. Without the efficiency gains typically associated with M&A, numerous companies encountered escalating cost pressures, which encompassed R&D costs, manufacturing expenses, and other operational outlays that adversely affected overall profitability. The heighted expectations from shareholders for consistent growth, a hallmark for large diversified MedTechs, faced added difficulties due to the deceleration of M&A activity, potentially influencing stock prices and investor confidence.
 
Periods of integrating acquired enterprises tend to be dominated by the pursuit of efficiency, cost savings, and regulatory compliance, which often means relegating the significance of cultivating a distinct and cohesive organisational culture. In the current landscape, where M&A activity has decelerated and corporate values have plateaued, the ramifications of this neglect are becoming increasingly evident. Some enterprises are finding themselves with fragmented cultures, which have low levels of solidarity: employees disagree about organisational objectives, critical success factors, and performance standards. This can make organisations challenging to manage, and leaders unable to affect change. Organisational culture is not simply rhetoric; it is a critical element that molds how employees perceive their roles, comprehend their company's mission, and ultimately contribute to innovation and value creation. Further, a robust and distinctive culture plays a role in attracting and retaining top talent. In an industry driven by innovation, retaining the brightest minds is important for success. When employees sense a misalignment between their personal values and the organisational culture, it can result in disengagement, increased turnover rates, and a depletion of institutional knowledge - all of which undermine long-term growth.
 
Consider this scenario: A MedTech company with a clear and supportive culture is well equipped to navigate the intricacies of the industry. Such an environment fosters a shared sense of purpose and identity among employees, creating a collaborative space where diverse talents can thrive. This, in turn, augments a company's capacity to adapt to industry changes, respond to emerging healthcare needs, and drive sustainable value creation.
 
Culture embodies community; it is the essence of how individuals connect with each other. Flourishing communities arise from shared interests, mutual obligations, and a foundation of cooperation and camaraderie. A common oversight in certain management literature concerning corporate culture is the assumption that organisations are inherently homogeneous. However, just as one organisation differs from another, so do its internal units. Consider the contrasting nature of, for instance, the R&D function compared to manufacturing within a MedTech company. Moreover, hierarchical distinctions within an enterprise add layers of diversity; the cultural dynamics of senior leadership teams may differ markedly from those of middle managers and blue-collar workers.
 
In the MedTech industry, where financial and organisational factors maintain their importance, a strategy that develops a distinctive organisational culture is equally important. Overlooking cultural integration presents a nuanced yet potentially significant barrier to growth and value creation. This challenge manifests itself through indicators such as disengaged employees, talent attrition, and a lack of adaptability in meeting the evolving demands of the industry. Recognizing and addressing this cultural deficit extends beyond employee satisfaction; it emerges as a strategic imperative for long-term success in the dynamic landscape of MedTech.
 
Further, as corporations expand globally they encounter challenges to unite and motivate their constituencies. Internationalization means transcending geographical, linguistic, cultural, and religious boundaries. Multinational corporations operate in a world where employees are from various countries, speak different languages, and possess diverse cultural backgrounds, which emphasises the significance of establishing common ground and fostering a sense of belonging. Moreover, modern organisations are linked to an array of stakeholders, including governments, patients, insurance firms, advocacy groups, and a wide spectrum of customers. These often hold distinct interests and priorities, occasionally leading to conflicts with both each other, and the organisation's objectives.
You might also like:

Forging a path for digital excellence in the MedTech Industry

 
The power of stories

In this interconnected ecosystem, a cohesive and inspiring narrative emerges as a potential remedy for dissonance. A well-crafted story has the capacity to bridge divides, align interests, and instil a collective sense of purpose among both employees and stakeholders. This, in turn, contributes to a corporation's overall success.
The impact of a unifying narrative does not confine itself to an organisation's internal boundaries. It acts as a catalyst for collective action, motivating employees, and stakeholders alike toward shared objectives. This shared story becomes the driving force behind innovation, it bolsters problem-solving capabilities, and shapes the organisation into a responsive and adaptable entity. In a world where trust, differentiation, innovation, talent attraction, stakeholder engagement, and customer loyalty wield substantial influence, a captivating narrative emerges as a positive force for a diversified MedTech company. It adeptly communicates the company's mission, values, and impact, establishing trust, distinguishing the brand, fostering innovation, attracting top talent, engaging stakeholders, and cultivating customer loyalty. Ultimately, it solidifies a company's brand identity, nurtures relationships, and fuels long-term commercial success.
 
The potency of an inspiring company narrative lies in its ability to weave a common thread through the diverse interests of employees, creating unity and a shared company culture. A compelling story acts as a connective tissue, transcending departmental and hierarchical boundaries, resonating universally regardless of individual roles or backgrounds. Such narratives instill a collective sense of purpose and pride, fostering a shared identity embraced by every employee. When everyone is tethered to a common story, it encourages a cohesive culture where values and goals are not just communicated but lived and upheld by each member of the organisation. This shared narrative becomes a wellspring of motivation, aligning the workforce toward a singular vision and propelling the company forward as a unified and harmonious entity.
 
These claims may seem exaggerated when applied to a company narrative. However, to grasp the potential impact of storytelling, let us briefly examine the realms of religion, politics, finance, and the women’s movement. All these domains are predicated upon narratives that not only inspire and motivate diverse groups of individuals but also make them reshape their lives and dedicate their time and energy to the causes these narratives portray.
 
Religion

Religion plays an important part in the spiritual lives of billions of people around the world. Religious stories hold a significant influence over the beliefs and practices of faith communities, providing them with a sense of meaning and purpose. The potency of a narrative's impact is exemplified in the case of Jerusalem, a city that embodies the enduring power of stories.
 
For Jews, Jerusalem is a testament to the divine intervention of their narrative, where God commanded Abraham not to sacrifice his son Isaac. For Christians, Jerusalem holds multifaceted significance across various church factions, but it universally marks the hallowed ground where Jesus Christ delivered his teachings and shared the Last Supper with his disciples before his crucifixion. Similarly, for Muslims, Jerusalem bears importance as the place where the Prophet Mohammad started his mission and experienced a divine vision.
 
What is striking about these narratives is that they have endured through centuries, despite the absence of any scientific evidence, relying on the power of spiritual belief. This emphasises the influence of storytelling. People hold these stories dear to their hearts, embracing them with unwavering faith. Such narratives have the power to shape cultures, societies, and even geopolitical landscapes. The enduring power of religious narratives, like those surrounding Jerusalem, teaches us that stories are more than tales, but the scaffolding upon which belief systems are constructed, and they have the potential to move nations and shape destinies.
 
Politics

Consider politics. Political ideologies are founded upon stories that individuals hold so firmly that they are prepared to resolutely defend their convictions, even at the cost of armed conflict. These ideologies shape the governance, policies, and destinies of nations, and their power lies in the stories they tell.
 
Consider democracy, for instance. It is a powerful narrative that extols the virtues of power vested in the hands of the people or their elected representatives. Democracy's story emphasizes principles of equality, individual rights, and the regular exercise of those rights through elections. It speaks to the idea that citizens should actively participate in shaping their government and society through voting and civic engagement. This narrative has led people to fight for democratic values, even in the face of oppressive regimes, as they believe in the story of democracy's inherent worth.
 
Socialism is another political ideology grounded in a compelling narrative. It advocates for collective or state ownership and control of the means of production, distribution, and exchange. The story of socialism centres on reducing economic inequality and ensuring that resources and wealth are more equitably distributed among society's members. This narrative has inspired revolutions, social movements, and political changes across the world, as believers are motivated by the story of a fairer and more just society.
 
In contrast, authoritarian states are political systems characterised by centralised power and limited political freedoms. They too are predicated on stories. Such states often feature a single leader or a small group of individuals with substantial control over the government, little or no opposition, restricted civil liberties, and limited or no free elections. They prioritize order and control over individual rights and freedoms, often relying on censorship, propaganda, and coercion to maintain their authority. Despite its repressive nature, it has garnered fervent adherents who are willing to defend their vision of a disciplined and ordered society, sometimes at great human cost.
 
These political narratives are strong forces that shape the world we live in. They are stories that compel people to action, and at times, to support and engage in conflict. Understanding the power of these narratives is essential for comprehending the dynamics of political movements, governance, and global affairs. It emphasises that the stories we believe in are not just words; they are forces capable of reshaping societies and history itself.
 
Money

Money, in its essence, is a symbol devoid of inherent value. Take a $100 bill, for instance. It possesses no intrinsic worth; you cannot eat it, clothe yourself with it, or find shelter beneath its folds. In today's digital age, most monetary transactions occur virtually, further emphasizing that money is not a tangible commodity but a representation of value. What makes money intriguing is that its value is predicated upon a story, a narrative that commands the largest following worldwide, surpassing the collective adherents of all religions combined. Money, in essence, is a story with believers numbering billions.
 
This narrative begins with the idea that a particular piece of paper or digital entry holds value. It is a shared belief system, one upheld by individuals, corporations, and governments across the globe. This shared belief is what allows us to exchange money for goods, services, and even intangible assets like trust or promise. Consider the notion of a banknote. Its value exists because we believe in the authority and stability of the issuing government or institution. It is a mutual understanding that a piece of paper, despite its lack of intrinsic value, can be exchanged for something tangible or intangible in the real world.
 
This shared belief in money's value creates a complex web of economic interactions and relationships. It fuels trade, investment, and economic growth. It enables people to plan, save for retirement, and invest in education and healthcare. Money, as a story, is a unifying force in the modern world, transcending borders, cultures, and languages. Yet, like all narratives, money is not without its challenges and contradictions. Economic disparities, financial crises, and questions about the fairness of wealth distribution persist. But the fact remains that money, as a story, is a force of unparalleled influence, guiding the decisions and actions of individuals and nations alike. In a world where the value of money is woven into the fabric of society, it becomes clear that its true worth lies not in the physical notes or digital records but in the collective trust and beliefs that sustain this narrative. Money, in the end, is a story that shapes our lives, economies, and the world at large.
 
Women’s movement

The women's movement is a testament to the power and influence of a story about equality. Over decades, this movement has enhanced the status of women worldwide. What makes this narrative particularly interesting is that, unlike the stories underpinning religion, politics, and money, the pursuit of women's rights has largely been achieved through peaceful means, which is a testament to the millions of people around the world who embraced the story that activists told.
 
The narrative of the women's movement is simple: equality. It tells a story of a world where women and men stand on equal footings, where gender should not be a barrier to opportunities, rights, or dignity. This story resonated with countless individuals who recognized the inherent justice in this vision. The power of this story lies in its ability to inspire action. It mobilized women and men from all walks of life to come together and advocate for change. Grassroots activists, iconic leaders, and ordinary citizens joined forces, fuelled by the belief in the story's inherent truth. They organised rallies, signed petitions, and engaged in peaceful demonstrations, all with the goal of dismantling systemic inequalities and securing equal rights for women.
 
What sets the women's movement apart from many other stories that shape our world is its peaceful nature. While religious, political, and economic narratives have often been associated with conflict and violence, the women's movement has predominantly relied on peaceful activism and advocacy. This nonviolent approach has garnered widespread support and sympathy from people of diverse backgrounds, fostering a sense of unity and shared purpose.
 
The influence of this narrative has been significant. It has led to legal and societal changes, from suffrage and reproductive rights to workplace equality and gender representation in leadership roles. Women's rights have advanced on a global scale, improving the lives of millions. The women's movement is a powerful example of how a story can shape the world when embraced by a collective of individuals who believe in its message. It demonstrates that narratives grounded in principles of justice and equality can bring about transformative change, even without resorting to violence. The women's movement serves as a reminder that stories have the power to move societies and bend the arc of history toward progress and justice.
 
Takeaways

The MedTech industry's journey through decades of M&A activity has been a transformative one, marked by the pursuit of economies of scale, technological access, and regulatory mastery. The resulting financial and organisational benefits, however, have inadvertently overlooked a critical aspect: organisational culture. The magnitude of M&A activity, exemplified by 2,680 acquisitions totaling US$607.8bn between 2006 to 2016, showcases both consistency and variability in deal considerations. As we fast forward to 2023, global uncertainties prompted a recalibration of strategic initiatives, especially as MedTech companies aimed for operational scaling and global expansion. The challenges of uniting diverse constituencies in an internationalized context - spanning geographical, linguistic, cultural, and religious boundaries – emphasized the importance of establishing common ground and fostering a sense of belonging. The consequences of prioritizing efficiency and not cultivating a cohesive organisational culture during the integration of acquired enterprises has become increasingly apparent. Some companies find themselves with fragmented cultures, marked by low solidarity and disagreements about organisational objectives. This cultural deficit makes organisations challenging to manage, and leaders often feel powerless to effect change. In the MedTech sector, where collaboration and creativity are important for healthcare breakthroughs, cultural dissonance poses a significant risk. A robust and distinctive culture, however, is instrumental in attracting and retaining top talent, which is essential for success in an innovation-driven industry. A MedTech with a clear and supportive culture is better equipped to navigate industry intricacies, respond to emerging healthcare needs, and drive sustainable value creation.
 
This Commentary suggests that culture is community: a network of shared interests and obligations that thrive on cooperation and friendships. Acknowledging the heterogeneity within organisations is crucial, recognizing differences across departments and hierarchical levels. While financial and organisational considerations are critical, an approach encouraging a distinctive organisational culture is equally important. Neglecting cultural integration poses a silent yet substantial obstacle to growth and value creation - a challenge manifested through disengaged employees, talent attrition, and a lack of agility in meeting industry demands. Recognizing and redressing this cultural deficit transcends employee satisfaction; it emerges as a strategic imperative for long-term success in the dynamic landscape of MedTechs. As MedTech companies expand globally, the challenges to unite and motivate constituencies intensify. We have suggested that within this interconnected ecosystem, a unifying and motivating narrative emerges as a potential solution. A well-crafted story has the power to bridge gaps, align interests, and cultivate a shared sense of purpose among employees and stakeholders alike, contributing to a company’s success. The influence of a unifying narrative extends beyond an organisation's boundaries, serving as an inspiration for collective action. This shared story fuels innovation, enhances problem-solving, and transforms an organisation into a responsive and adaptable entity. In a world where trust, differentiation, innovation, talent attraction, stakeholder engagement, and customer loyalty are important, a captivating narrative becomes a positive contribution to the success of a diversified MedTech company. In the grand scheme of human endeavours, the power of stories seems undeniable. Whether in religion, politics, finance, or the women's movement, it is through stories that movements are built and legacies are shaped. Thus, for MedTechs to overcome the silent obstacle to growth and value creation, they might consider harnessing the power of narratives to fortify their brand identities, nurture relationships, and fuel long-term commercial success.
view in full page
  • After decades of high growth and high valuations, large diversified medical technology companies (MedTechs) are faced with low growth and challenged to create long-term value
  • This is partly due to exogenous macroeconomic conditions and partly due to companies themselves eschewing broader strategic considerations and focussing on short-term performance
  • MedTechs’ past period of stellar performance benefited from company concentrations in large rapidly growing wealthy markets and benign fee-for-service business models that rewarded volume
  • During this time, large diversified MedTechs engaged in weak competition at a level of health plans, payers, and hospitals - an institutional level - and ignored competition at a patient level
  • Creating long-term future value for all stakeholders will require companies to compete at a patient level and accelerate the adoption of value-based care programmes that remunerate patient outcomes
  • To compete effectively at such a level requires vast amounts of patient data and sophisticated data handling and security capabilities, which many companies do not have
  • MedTechs that respond efficaciously to the rapidly evolving healthcare ecosystem and develop data and competences to compete at a patient level will have opportunities to create future long-term value  
  • Companies that continue with the status quo are likely to struggle to create long-term value and shall become acquisition targets
 
Have diversified medical technology companies blown their competitive advantage?
 
 
In the current fiscally constrained healthcare environment, creating long term value for medical technology companies (MedTechs) is challenging and many industry leaders have accepted ~5% annual revenue growth rate as the “new normal”. It has not always been like this. Between ~1990 and the late 2010s, medium and large diversified MedTechs were high growth, high value enterprises, which benefited from weak competition, large and rapidly growing underserved wealthy markets, barriers to entry, advancing medical technologies and benign fee-for-service business models that rewarded volume.
 
MedTechs’ recent decline in enterprise growth rates is partly due to worsening macroeconomic conditions, but a big part is due to companies themselves. Many became trapped in an outdated, narrow approach to creating value where a significant proportion of scarce corporate resources are focused on optimizing short-term financial performance. Albeit essential, this often meant that unmet market needs, and broader long-term strategic influences tended to be overlooked. We explore how this happened and what can be done about it.
 
In this Commentary

This Commentary describes how after ~3 decades of stellar growth many medium to large diversified medical technology companies (MedTechs) have become trapped in short-term performance-oriented cultures and struggle to create long-term value for all stakeholders. During their stellar years these companies operated at the level of payers, health plans and hospitals - an institutional level - where competition was, at best, weak, and patients’ therapeutic pathways largely ignored. Today, many diversified MedTechs struggle to create long-term value in the face of low growth rates, fiscal and regulatory constraints, vast and escalating healthcare costs, and increasing competition from giant tech companies and innovative start-ups. Further headwinds come from payers shifting away from benign fee-for-service payment models that reward volume to value-based care, which remunerates patient outcomes. To create long-term value MedTechs will need to radically change their strategies and business models. This will entail replacing legacy technology systems that hinder efficiency and innovation, tightening their security risks and improving their business process flows. If corporations do this efficaciously, they will be positioned to compete at a patient level where value is created and destroyed. However, competing at this level requires vast amounts of patient data and sophisticated data handling capabilities. Many companies neither have such data nor the capabilities to analyse and manage them. It seems reasonable to suggest therefore that, in the near- to medium-term, MedTechs that eschew retooling and competing at a patient level will struggle to create long-term value and likely become acquisition targets.
 
Structural challenges

As populations in wealthy economies age and shrink, due to increasing longevity and declining fertility, so healthcare headwinds increase and challenge MedTechs. Consider the US, which is an exemplar of most wealthy nations. Today, >56m Americans are ≥65, which accounts for ~17% of the nation's population. By 2030, when the last of the baby boomer generation ages into older adulthood, it is projected there will be >73m older adults, which means  >1 in 5 Americans will be of retirement age. As the American population ages a growing number of people present with age-related chronic conditions, which are costly to treat. Today, in the US, ~86% of people ≥65 is living with a chronic disease. This increases the risk of insuring the average US citizen, and the higher the risk, the higher the cost of annual health insurance premiums. According to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, in 2020, the US national health expenditure (NHE) grew ~10% to ~US$4trn, which equates to ~US$12,530 per person, and ~20% of the nation’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP). By 2030, US NHE is expected to reach ~US$7trn.
 
In 2020, Medicare spending rose by 3.5% to ~US$830bn or ~20% of total NHE. In the same year, Medicaid spending grew by 9% to ~US$671bn, or ~16% of total NHE. The largest shares of America’s total health spending are provided by the federal government (~36%) and households (~26%).  The private business share accounts for ~17%, local state governments account for ~14%, and other private revenues account for ~6.5%. According to the 2022 annual Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF) healthcare survey the average insurance premium for family healthcare coverage in the US increased 20% over the previous 5 years and 43% over the past decade. The average premiums for employer-sponsored health insurance are US$7,911 for single coverage and US$22,463 for family coverage.
 
Such changes are forcing the medical technology industry to adjust what products and services it develops and how value is created.
 
Stellar growth and short-term performance

During ~3 decades before ~2015, the medical device industry benefitted from unmet clinical needs, significant barriers to entry, technological advances, benign fee-for-service payment systems that reimbursed volume and industry concentrations. During this time MedTechs enjoyed stellar growth, and high valuations. Investors prioritized revenues over profit and cash flow, which encouraged enterprises to engage in portfolio moves: M&A, divestitures, and spin-offs. This had the advantage of helping companies to exit low-growth businesses and enter higher-growth segments, without engaging in years of uncertain and expensive R&D. It had the disadvantage of encouraging short-term performance rather than long-term value creation. During this period many senior leadership teams became weighed down with the demands of quarterly reporting and grew accustomed to using a variety of short-term accounting measures and ratios as their principal means to drive business and reward executives.
 
As a result, ‘successful’ medical technology companies had high growth rates but a deficit in ideas to unlock transformative new treatments for underserved patients and plans to seize opportunities presented by technological advances. The industry’s indifference to develop and leverage digitalization is indicative of corporations overlooking broader strategic influences and unmet market needs. Consequently, by ~2015, many large diversified MedTechs had fragmented technology systems that hindered efficiency and innovation and were overburdened by legacy products overexposed in slow growth markets. This made them ill-equipped to either respond quickly to innovative trends or compete with disrupters. According to a McKinsey & Company report published in June 2022, “84% of CEOs believe that innovation is critical to growth, but only 6% are satisfied with their company’s innovation performance”. To survive and stand a chance to create long-term value MedTech functions from R&D to sales will need to change.
Slow response to market changes

As MedTechs’ performance slowed and executives accepted ~5% growth as the “new normal”, markets continued to evolve: consumer-centred healthcare increased, clinical procedures moved out of hospitals into daycare centres and homes, regulation tightened, international markets expanded, medical technology continued to advance at pace, and tech giants and new entrants disrupted healthcare markets with innovative solutions and digital platforms that served patients rather than surgeons and hospitals. Because of MedTech companies’ lack of preparedness to respond positively to such changes, many doubled down on their traditional business models. This meant their M&A ecosystems were kept intact and active, and R&D continued with incremental additions to legacy products that mostly served the needs of surgeons and hospitals rather than patients.
You might also like: 

Should MedTechs follow surgeons or patients?


 
According to the Center for Studying Health System Change, the prominent trend of M&A in America’s healthcare industry increased consolidation and decreased competition, which is critical for lowering costs and improving productivity and innovation. With weak competition providers and insurers were able to drive up their prices unopposed. Findings of a study published in the American Journal of Managed Care found that hospitals in concentrated markets could charge considerably higher prices for the same procedures offered by hospitals in competitive markets. Although price increases often exceeded 20% when mergers occurred, studies suggest such increases neither improved healthcare quality nor patient outcomes.
 
With MedTechs focussed on consolidations and increasing the prices of their legacy offerings as a way of maintaining and increasing their revenue growth rates, many failed to keep current with the accelerating pace of technologies that were transforming healthcare. For example, over the three decades of stellar growth in the medical device industry, digitalization improved customer experience, connected devices, integrated, and leveraged external data sources and patients’ electronic health records, and connected with other stakeholders. This changed the way patients were diagnosed and treated, changed the way healthcare professionals communicated and collaborated, and changed how biomedical research was conducted. Notwithstanding, MedTechs were reluctant to digitize and continued to employ outdated labour-intensive business processes to market their product offerings. Today, providers, payers and patients are increasingly demanding digital solutions that are easier to use and more cost effective. This presents a challenge for traditional medical technology companies slow to adapt their business models to meet the needs of changing market conditions.  

 
The impact of Covid-19

The medical technology industry, along with many others, was adversely impacted by the Covid-19 crisis. In 2020, most medium to large MedTechs saw their revenues drop significantly. During lockdowns many experienced reductions in sales mobility, changed purchase demand profiles, supply chain disruptions, and increased risk aversion towards unnecessary spending. Such headwinds prompted some companies to re-evaluate their business models and set new directions for future success. This included digitally enhancing existing products, unlocking customers in new geographies, and monetizing data from existing devices to create new patient-centred solutions. Notwithstanding, today many MedTechs with reduced growth rates struggle to create long-term value for all their stakeholders.
 
There is no single answer to how value might be achieved as strategies will vary depending on specific industry segments and specific product offerings. However, some general suggestions include: (i) continue portfolio moves to divest low growth legacy products and reduce risk pathways to innovative offerings and growth. Target acquisitions with healthy growth prospects, well-stocked innovation pipelines and product offerings positioned to benefit from leveraging larger company infrastructures,  (ii) establish a pro-active venture function aimed at early-stage companies with disruptive offerings, (iii) invest in R&D to create new products and services that enhance patients’ therapeutic journeys, (iv) look beyond core devices and increase digital offerings and capabilities as software and digital solutions have become an essential part of patient journeys and clinical practice, (iv) shift away from volume-based care and accelerate value-based care to improve patient outcomes and reduce costs.
 
Value-based care

Healthcare experts have suggested that the fee-for-service healthcare payment model is wasteful, outmoded and partly responsible for US healthcare spending being significantly higher than other Western nations, but with patient outcomes no better and often worse. During the past two decades health plans, payers, employers, and patients have been requesting that healthcare systems deliver on value. The market responded to this with a shift towards value-based care, which instead of rewarding volume, pays providers based on patient-centric health outcomes. According to America’s Health Care Payment Learning & Action Network’s (LAN) annual survey; >60% of US healthcare payments in 2020 included some form of value component, which is up from ~53% in 2017 and ~11% in 2012. Similarly, 49% of primary care practices responding to the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) 2022 Value-Based Care Survey said they are participating in some form of value-based payment, and 18% are developing the capabilities to do so.

Much of the energy for value-based care comes from America’s Affordable Care Act (ACA), (“Obamacare”), which is the most significant regulatory overhaul and expansion of healthcare coverage since the enactment of Medicare and Medicaid in 1965. The 2010 Act was originally developed to help reduce the rate of hospitalizations and readmissions by focussing on quality outcomes rather than quantity of patient visits. Value-based healthcare concepts have grown, and the ACA has created new incentives and penalties designed to encourage providers to deliver higher quality care at lower costs. These include the Hospital Value-Based Purchasing Program, which ties Medicare reimbursement to hospital performance on a set of quality measures, and the Medicare Shared Savings Program, which rewards provider groups for achieving cost savings while meeting agreed quality targets. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) supports value-based care as part of its “larger quality strategy to reform how health care is delivered and paid for”.
Omar Ishrak and value-based care
 
Omar Ishrak, CEO and chairperson of Medtronic plc  between 2011 and 2020, championed value-based care by incentivizing and leading discussions about how MedTechs should align value and price and how suppliers should get paid according to patient outcomes. He believed “[clinical] value has to be tied to economic value, otherwise people will not be able to afford the care we provide”. Before joining Medtronic, Omar Ishrak was the head of GE HealthCare and was well-versed in global politico-economic challenges associated with markets with a deep understanding of the human toll that comes from inadequate healthcare systems. “We live in a world where we get paid for our technology with a promise to improve outcomes, not a guarantee, a promise”, said Ishrak. While at Medtronic he extended value-based healthcare by insisting that efficacy is aligned with patient expectations and MedTechs get paid for medical outcomes rather than medical devices. He was convinced that value-based care incentivises MedTechs to develop and deploy products, services, and solutions, which improve patient outcomes per dollar spent, and measure value in terms of long-term patient outcomes rather than short-term transactions.

In 2016 Medtronic established a value-based care partnership with UnitedHealthcare, an American multinational managed healthcare and insurance company, which gave its customers living with diabetes access to Medtronic’s insulin pump and support services. After the first year, the partnership reported ~27% decline in the rate of preventable hospital admissions compared to patients using traditional daily insulin injections. Between 2015 and 2018, UnitedHealthcare's payments to physicians and hospitals tied to value-based care programmes were reported to be ~US$65bn and projected to grow to ~US$75bn within two years.

In February 2018, Medtronic signed a 5-year value-based care partnership with Lehigh Valley Health Network, (LVHN) based in Allentown, Pennsylvania. The two organizations established processes to treat more than 70 medical conditions using Medtronic devices to improve patient outcomes and cut costs. The endeavour reached ~0.5m patients in Northeast Pennsylvania and cut the cost of care by ~US$100m. Another benefit of the partnership was Medtronic obtained access to thousands of patient insights to their products, which the company used to establish baselines to monitor and improve outcomes. Another example of Medtronic linking a product directly to outcomes is its Tyrx Absorbable Antibacterial Envelope, a mesh used to hold pacemakers and implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD) in a stable environment and release antimicrobial agents over a period when the chance of infection related to surgery is high. These are just a few examples of devices that Ishrak linked to value-based payment schemes, there are many others. Cumulatively they “had a real differentiating value for Medtronic”, said Ishrak.

Although manufacturers of medical devices were slow to follow Ishrak’s example, the economic slowdown has led to a heightened cost-consciousness among healthcare providers and accelerated a shift towards value-based care and a growing influence of healthcare group purchasing organizations (GPOs). This, in turn, has incentivized MedTechs to increase their M&A activity to expand their portfolios and allow them to provide high-volume, discounted product bundles. Furthermore, value-based care has moved purchasing decisions away from physicians toward hospital administrators, who are more focused on costs than devices and their features. This has resulted in a downward pricing pressure across the MedTech landscape and rendered market entry more challenging for small companies, which provides large diversified MedTechs with further potential acquisition targets.
You might also like:

Low Back Pain and the global spine industry


 
Spinal surgery and value-based care
 
A segment of the medical technology industry that looks ripe to benefit from value-based care is spinal surgery for low back pain (LBP), which is a common age-related health condition associated with degenerative spinal disorders. According to the World Health Organisation (WHO), LBP is one of the top ten global disease burdens and ~80% of all individuals will experience the condition at some point in their lifetime.
In the US, ~3 in 10 adults - ~72m - currently suffer from chronic LBP.  Each year, ~0.3m people present with LBP but only ~0.7-4.5% of these will have specific identifiable causes for their condition. This is because LBP is challenging to diagnose as there is no established protocol to evaluate the condition and it may be a symptom of many different causes. Notwithstanding, American third-party payers have tended to reimburse spine surgery for LBP more than non-invasive therapies, but this is changing.  America has the highest rate of spine surgeries in the world, and each year, clinicians perform ~1.6m spinal fusions in an attempt to cure LBP. Between 2004 and 2015, the volume of spinal fusions increased by 62% and aggregate hospital costs increased ~177%, exceeding US$10bn in 2015, and averaging >US$50,000 per admission. A 1994 international comparative study found that, “the rate of back surgery in the US was at least 40% higher than in any other country and was more than five times that in England. Back surgery rates increased almost linearly with the per capita supply of orthopaedic and neurosurgeons in the US”.
 
A significant percentage of patients with LBP continue to experience pain after surgery, which is referred to as ‘failed back syndrome’ (FBS) and is characterized by an inability to return to normal activities. A study reported in the American Journal of Medicine suggests that recurrent spine surgeries do not necessarily mean success. Notwithstanding, when a primary surgery fails to cure LBP, a significant percentage of patients have further surgeries. However, with each recurrent surgery the probability of a successful outcome drops: ~50% success rate after the first repeat surgery, ~30% after the second, ~15% after the third and ~5% after the fourth.
 
Research published in theBritish Journal of Pain, suggests that the overall failure rate of lumbar spine surgeries is between ~10 and 46%. A study reported in a 1992 edition ofSpine, followed 53 patients for an average of 20 months after a spinal fusion surgery and found that only 50% reported improved outcomes. Another study, published in the journal Trials, suggests that ~40% of lumbar fusion patients experience ongoing back pain and limited function two years after surgery; and research findings published in the Asian Spine Journalfound ~5 and 36% of people who undergo a discectomy for a lumbar herniated disc saw their leg and back pain return two years after surgery.
 
Such failure rates have prompted health insurers in the US to reassess their fee-for-service payment policies.According to a New York Times article,  reimbursements for spine surgeries are becoming tighter, and “financial disincentives accomplished something that scientific evidence alone didn’t”. The  article draws on research published in the journal Spinewhich found that, “spinal fusion rates continued to soar in the US until 2012 and shortly afterwards Blue Cross of North Carolina said it would no longer pay for such surgeries”. It seems reasonable to assume that benign fee-for-service reimbursement policies are partly responsible for the increase in spine surgeries that fail to cure LBP. Following the Blue Cross decision other insurers followed, and US payers started to move away from fee-for-service models towards  reimbursing “value. This transfers the costs of over-treatment, revision surgeries and adverse clinical outcomes from payers to providers and is expected to utilize resources more efficiently. Such shifts are beginning to happen in all the major medical technology markets. For example, in Europe fiscal pressure on healthcare systems has meant rationing and/or delaying elective spine surgeries, and in Japan more spine surgery costs are being shifted to employers and patients.
 
Given the changing ecosystem in the spine market, a potential opportunity for MedTechs might be to apply machine learning AI techniques to patient data in an endeavour to determine what products and procedures are most likely to produce optimal solutions for individuals contemplating spine surgery for LBP. Assuming enough relevant data are collected, and successful algorithms developed, this process might help to reduce the high failure rates of spine surgeries for LBP, improve patient outcomes and lower healthcare costs.

 
Weak competition at the wrong level

Value-based care has the potential to: (i) improve patient outcomes by incentivising providers to focus on the quality of care, (ii) create a more efficient healthcare system by eliminating wasteful spending, (iii) improve patient satisfaction by making the healthcare system more patient-centered, (iv) make it easier for enterprises to commercialize new products and services by providing a pathway to reimbursement, and (v) provide a platform for companies to partner with other healthcare stakeholders to improve care delivery and patient outcomes.
 
However, MedTechs are not well positioned to transition expeditiously to value-based care. This is because, for decades they have benefited from a benign fee-for-service business model and participated in weak competition at an institutional level: the level of health plans, providers, and hospital groups. Competition at this level is weak and neither creates value nor benefits patients. This is because the principal actors behave as if playing 'pass the parcel', i.e. shifting costs onto one another, restricting services, stifling innovation, and hoarding information.
 
In the medical technology industry value can only be created or destroyed by competition at a patient level, but this has been absent throughout the history of the industry. Because of this deficit company costs are high and rising, services are restricted, clinical procedures overused, standards of care often fail to adhere to clinical guidelines, diagnosis errors are common, quality and cost differences persist across providers and geographies, best practices are slow to spread, and innovation is resisted. In most other industries such outcomes are inconceivable.
 
The future for MedTechs must be at a patient level where costs and quality persist and where competition can drive improvements in efficiency and effectiveness, reduce clinical errors and incentivize innovation. Notwithstanding, competition at this level requires devising patient outcome measures for specific devices and procedures that are acceptable to all industry stakeholders. Data are essential to develop such measures and may be provided by surveys, electronic health records, personal devices and clinical studies or a combination of all four. However, the analysis and utility of such data require sophisticated data handling and security capabilities, which many MedTechs do not have. Companies that successfully re-tool and become eloquent at competing at a patient level will be well positioned to create long-term value for all stakeholders. Companies that fail in these endeavours will likely become targets for acquisitions.
 
Takeaways

MedTech companies have become trapped by their former commercial success and legacy structures and operating models that were neither set up to respond quickly to innovative trends nor to compete with disrupters. For ~3 decades high growth rates and valuations persisted in the medical technology industry despite companies ‘competing’ weakly at the wrong level and their cultures being defined by short-term financial performance. Such entrenched business models and the time and resources they consumed did not leave room for broader in-depth strategic considerations that could influence long term value creation. Today, MedTechs are at a crossroad: they can either change their strategies and business models and compete at a patient level or they can continue their weak competition at an institutional level. The former positions companies well to create long-term value for all stakeholders while the latter does not.
view in full page

 

"When you fail to reach your goals don’t adjust your goals, adjust your actions"
 
On Saturday 20th October 2022, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) ended its twice-a-decade Congress. It amended its charter and elected Xi Jinping for a historic third 5-year term, making him China's most powerful ruler since Mao Zedong, the founding leader of the People's Republic. Given these outcomes, followers of HealthPad suggested we re-publish the Commentary, ‘Learn from the Chinese, but don’t misjudge Beijing’, which we do below. The Commentary describes the tightening of China’s regulatory and competitive environments and suggests that Western corporations, with interests in China or thinking of entering the Chinese market, should not underestimate: (i) the large and growing differences between China and the US, and (ii) the CCP’s uncompromising ambition to become economically self-reliant, a world superpower and a global high-tech leader.

Deteriorating East-West relationships
Xi Jinping used the Congress to tighten his hold over the CCP by evicting all remnants of factional opposition, placing political allies in key positions and establishing complete control over the Party and the country. Xi re-emphasized the significance of making science and technology cornerstones of China’s strategy for national economic and military “self-reliance”. He also hinted that China will further decouple its economic links with the US and Europe and increase market restrictions on Western companies trading in China. With Xi’s increased authority and China’s increased global power and influence, it seems reasonable to assume that, in the near-term, China is likely to develop a more aggressive foreign policy, and the US and its Western allies will doubtless respond with a more confrontational approach to China. This significantly raises the possibility that East-West geopolitical relationships will deteriorate further.
 

Guanxi
China and the Chinese are different to the West and Westerners. Whereas most Western nations, have a deep sense of individualism based on democracy with social and political freedoms, China and the Chinese are rooted in Confucian collectivist principles with a top-down hierarchical structure that views individuals as part of a community with ordered and friendly relationships. This is perhaps best understood by the Chinese term, ‘Guanxi’ (关系), which refers to tacit mutual commitments, reciprocity, and trust, and is central to all personal, business, and politico-economic relationships.

China’s ambition
None of China’s renewed global posturing should surprise Western corporate leaders with their fingers on the pulse of their international strategies. For decades China has been increasing its power and influence in the world. In his 2017 report to the 19th Party Congress, Xi Jinping stressed the decline of America’s  international authority and the “substantial and rapidly growing” global power and influence of China. He predicted that, by the mid-21st century, China will have become “a global leader in terms of comprehensive national power and international influence,” and will be a development model for the world.

The past 5-years
Also in 2017, Xi advocated a more aggressive and activist Chinese foreign policy, and over the ensuring 5 years, Beijing has: (i) weakened foreign enterprises trading in China and raised the bar for new entrants, (ii) strengthened Chinese domestic companies and incentivized them to trade internationally, (iii) ratcheted-up pressure on Taiwan, (iv) exerted greater control over Hong Kong, and (v) increased China’s rhetoric and tactics in defence of its interests.
 

Business-as-usual versus strategically active
Over the past 3 decades, China has strategically invested in innovation-driven development, which has helped the nation improve its core competitiveness, and significantly shape its international leadership role. During this time, many Western companies with interests in China have been strategically passive and pursued ‘business-as-usual’ policies, which often meant they: (i) continued to invest in products and services that had been overtaken by technology and were losing market share, (ii) were relatively slow to invest in emerging technologies and develop new offerings, (ii) tended to fixate on their initial success and failed to quickly recognise that something new was replacing it, and (iii) focused scarce resources on short-term performance rather than long-term value. For many corporates, such policies resulted in missed commercial opportunities and weakened global competitiveness.
 

Reducing the healthcare gap
Over the past decades while many Western companies have been strategically passive, China, by contrast, has been strategically active, aggressively developing innovative and technologically advanced solutions to narrow its healthcare gaps caused by increased healthcare demand and shrinking numbers of healthcare professionals. Witness Chinese start-ups that rapidly grew to become significant companies by leveraging data and artificial intelligence (AI) to develop digital healthcare solutions that enhanced patient outcomes and reduced costs. Examples include: WeDoctorAlibaba HealthJD Health, DXY.cn. and Ping An Good Doctor. These, and other digital innovations, provide a range of health services including, online consultations, hospital referrals and appointments, health management, medication regimens, medical insurance, and wellness and prevention programmes. Such initiatives have provided vast numbers of Chinese citizens with easier access to healthcare and enhanced patients’ therapeutic journeys while reducing vast and escalating healthcare costs and shifted many healthcare services out hospitals into peoples’ homes.

Hospital services shifting to the home
This shift is nothing new and not exclusively Chinese. Twelve years ago, Devi Shetty, a world-renowned heart surgeon, was emphasising the impact that digitalization would have on traditional hospital based services. In just 2 decades, Shetty built Narayana Health (NH), India’s 2nd largest hospital group. In 2019, Narayana was recognised by  Fortune Magazine as, “one of the world’s most innovative healthcare providers”. In 2000, Shetty, like his Chinese counterparts, was emphasising that the “next big thing in healthcare is not going to be a magic pill, or a faster scanner, or a new operation. The next big thing in healthcare is going to be IT, which will change the way a health professional will interact with the patient. Every step of patient care will be dictated by a protocol stored on a handheld device. That will make healthcare safer for the patient and shift most hospital activities to the home. The doctor and patient can interact regardless of time and place”. See video.
 
 
Two types of capitalism
The difference between Western and Chinese corporates reflects two different types of capitalist systems: liberal meritocratic capitalism in the West, and state-led authoritarian capitalism in China. In the former, the emphasise on quarterly reporting and the time, effort and costs associated with it tends to encourage short-term performance while the latter creates more opportunities for generating long-term value. There is plenty of evidence to suggest that when executives consistently invest in long-term strategic objectives their companies’ productivity increases, they generate more shareholder value, create more jobs, and contribute to higher levels of economic growth than do comparable companies that focus on the short-term performance. Data also suggest companies that implement effective environmental, social and governance (ESG) strategies, which address the interests of all stakeholders, achieve better long-term value.

Fink criticizes business executives
In 2014, Laurence Fink, chairman of Black Rock, the world’s largest asset manager, criticized Fortune 500 CEOs for their focus on short term corporate behaviour. While recognising the market pressures on company executives, Fink said, “It concerns us that many companies have shied away from investing in the future growth of their companies” and increasingly engaged in actions that “deliver immediate returns to shareholders, such as buybacks or dividend increases, while underinvesting in innovation, skilled workforces, or essential capital expenditures necessary to sustain long-term growth”.

Takeaways
Western corporate leaders are challenged to devise ethical strategies that create long-term value rather than just short-term performance. Following Fink’s suggestions policies to create long-term value might include: (i) developing a suite of strategic initiatives expected to deliver returns that exceed the cost of capital (ii) allocating resources to initiatives that create most value, (ii) focusing on generating value not only for shareholders but for all stakeholders, and (iii) resisting actions that only boost short term profits.
 
  • China is the world’s second largest economy after the US
  • Its MedTech sector is the world’s second largest after the US and accounts for 20% of the global market
  • The size of China’s market is attractive to Western MedTechs but its regulatory and competitive environments are changing, which makes it more challenging for foreign corporations to enter or grow their franchises in China
  • China’s healthcare system has similar structural challenges as those of the US and other wealthy nations: the demand for care is increasing and overwhelming health professionals, which creates care gaps
  • China is ahead of the US and other nations in attempting to reduce such gaps with patient-centric innovative digital therapeutic solutions, which is supported by a deep bench of capabilities
  • Western MedTechs have a lot to learn from Chinese digital health innovations
  • However, Beijing is engaged in an unprecedented mission to become a self-reliant, high-tech economy and a world superpower within the not-too-distant future
  • Misjudging Beijing can have significant commercial consequences
 
Learn from the Chinese, but don’t misjudge Beijing


An earlier Commentary ended by posing the question whether Western MedTechs can compete with China’s large and rapidly growing domestic medical device industry, which benefits from China being the second largest MedTech market in the world behind the US, with annual sales revenues of ~US$84bn in 2020. China now accounts for ~20% of the global medical device market, which is expected to continue an upward trajectory, supported by the nation’s quickly aging population, rising incomes, and the continued enhancement of health services.
 
With this foundation, Beijing is incentivising its domestic MedTech companies to expand internationally. Beijing’s 14th Medical Equipment 5-Year Plan (2021–25) sets a goal to have >6 Chinese MedTechs among the top 50 global industry corporations by 2025. The policy complements Made in China 2025, which is a macroeconomic strategy to reduce China’s reliance on imported foreign products including medical devices. So, while China’s domestic market is becoming more challenging for foreign MedTechs, Beijing is supporting the growth and expansion internationally of its local medical device companies to compete with their Western counterparts. For example, Mindray Medical International, China’s biggest medical device corporation by sales revenue, is the #4 ultrasound vendor in the world and over the next 5 years, expects to increase its overseas sales revenues from <50% today to ~70%.
 
Despite Beijing’s ‘for China’ policies, many Western MedTech leaders view China as a significant commercial opportunity, recall foreign corporations that have prospered in the nation over the past two decades and suggest that it is important to do business there if one of your company’s objectives is to grow its international franchise. But China has changed, and its regulatory and competitive ecosystems are tightening, which present headwinds for Western MedTechs that were not present a decade ago. Further, China has an ambition to become a self-reliant, world leading high tech nation in the not-too-distant future, which could have consequences for foreign companies participating in the Chinese market.
 
With ~400m chronic disease patients, a fast-aging society, vast and rapidly rising healthcare costs, and an economy that has slowed, China is resolute in developing a new model of digitally enabled, patient-centred integrated healthcare. This ambition is supported by significant resources and a deep-bench of capabilities positioned to enable China to achieve its goals, which include transforming its medical devices sector by supporting the development of world class, high tech, patient-centric, digital enterprises.
 
All these factors suggests a dilemma for Western MedTech leaders: China is too big to ignore, but Beijing is too powerful and unrelenting to misjudge.

 
In this Commentary

This Commentary has 3 sections. The first, entitled ‘Reducing care gaps with digital therapeutic innovations’, suggests that China, the US, and other developed nations share a common challenge of care gaps created-by a limited supply of health professionals and a large and increasing demand for care. China’s attempts to resolve these gaps differ from other nations in their scale and nature. They are nationwide innovations predicated upon digital AI strategies, which manifest themselves in digital platforms that directly address patients’ healthcare needs. We briefly describe a few examples of these and suggest that they are advantaged by China’s data policies and AI competencies. Section 2, entitled ‘Capabilities’, describes Beijing’s plans for China to become the world’s leader in AI technologies within the next decade and suggests that China has the capabilities to achieve this goal in the proposed timeframe. The final section entitled, ‘Understanding Beijing’, briefly describes the tightened regulatory and competitive environments and suggests how this impacts the business models of Western corporations seeking to enter the Chinese market or increasing their existing franchises. We posit that China and the Chinese are significantly different to Western democracies and Westerners and emphasize the Chinese Communist Party’s uncompromising ambition to become economically self-reliant, a world superpower and a global high-tech leader. Misjudging Beijing could be commercially damaging for foreign corporations.
 
 
1: Reducing care gaps with digital therapeutic innovations
 
China has similar structural healthcare challenges to the US and other developed economies, which manifest themselves in care gaps caused by a limited supply of overworked healthcare professionals and a vast and rapidly growing demand for care from aging populations. The Chinese population ≥65 years is ~140m, and this cohort is expected to grow to ~230m by 2030. By that time, the nation’s aging middle class will have grown from today’s ~0.3bn to ~0.7bn. High-risk behaviours like smoking, sedentary lifestyles, and alcohol consumption as well as environmental factors such as air pollution take a huge toll on health and increase the demand for care. According to Statista, a large portion of the Chinese population suffer from chronic lifestyle diseases, which account for >80% of the nation’s ~10m deaths each year; >0.5bn people are overweight or obese, while high blood pressure is a common illness among >0.4bn people. China’s healthcare expenditure is growing at >8% a year, and without reform, the nation’s health spending could increase to >US$2trn by 2030. Such factors, together with the nation’s economic slowdown motivate Beijing to prioritize the transformation of its healthcare system.
Significant differences in tackling care gaps

A significant difference between China and the US and other wealthy nations, whose healthcare systems are all in need of reform, is that China has been quicker to develop digital therapeutic technologies to reduce care gaps and relieve its large and rapidly growing burden on hospitals, care systems and families caring for the sick and elderly.
You might also like: 

Should MedTechs follow surgeons or patients?

In any healthcare system, people should be the priority, but because of a dearth of health professionals, overburdened hospitals, soaring health costs and overworked physicians, patients’ needs are often not prioritized. China has been no exception but expects to reverse this trend with the help of artificial intelligence (AI) enabled digital therapeutic solutions that put patients first. Examples include: WeDoctor, Alibaba Health, JD Health, DXY.cn. and Ping An Good Doctor. These, and other digital innovations, provide a range of health services including, online consultations, hospital referrals and appointments, health management, medication regimens, medical insurance, and wellness and prevention programmes. China’s early adoption of AI medical solutions has benefitted from Beijing’s “Healthy China 2030” policy, which, since its launch in 2016, has directed substantial funds to Chinese AI start-ups developing technological innovations to ease the burden of care gaps. According to Tracxn, one of the world’s largest tracking platforms, there are ~227 AI driven healthcare start-ups in China. Let us briefly describe three established ones: WeDoctor, DXY.cn and Ping An Good Doctor.
 
WeDoctor

Tencent-backed WeDoctor, founded in 2010 to provide people with physician appointments, is based in Hangzhou, a city of ~11m and the capital of China’s Zhejiang province. Since its inception, the company has grown into a multi-functional platform offering a range of medical services predicated upon a database of >2,000 Western treatment plans, online pharmacies, health insurance, cloud-based enterprise software for hospitals and other services. Today, WeDoctor hosts >270,000 doctors and ~222m registered patients. It has an impact on reducing care gaps and is one of the few online healthcare providers qualified to accept payments from China's public health insurance system, which covers >95% of the population. WeDoctor's services are especially valued in rural areas, where there are fewer physicians than the national average of 1.5 per 1,000 people.

In response to the COVID-19 crisis the company launched the WeDoctor Global Consultation and Prevention Center (GCPC),  which provided a free 24/7 global online health enquiry service, psychological support, prevention guidelines and real-time pandemic reports. Just before the pandemic, WeDoctor planned to float its medical and health service function on the Hong Kong stock exchange at a valuation ~US$7bn. However, it was pulled because of the Beijing-Hong Kong tensions. WeDoctor’s. other business functions, which include health insurance and health data services, were not included in its proposed flotation, and are likely to stay private to appease Chinese regulators.
 
DXY.cn
 
DXY.cn is an online healthcare community for doctors, patients, and healthcare organizations. It was founded in 2000 and is also based in Hangzhou. Over the past 2 decades it has evolved into the world’s largest community of physicians who use the platform to gain insights from colleagues, discuss new medical research, and report unusual clinical events. More recently, DXY has added a consumer-facing service that brings wellbeing advice and medical consultations to the public. DXY generates revenues from public-facing medical advertising and job recruitment for its life science clients, as well as clinics where patients can receive in-person medical care. According to TechCrunch, in 2021, DXY reached ~130m consumers, >9,000 medical organizations, and had a registered user base of ~20m.
 
Ping An Good Doctor

Ping An Insurance (Group), is one of the world’s largest financial services companies with >210m retail customers and ~560m internet users and is headquartered in Shenzhen, southeastern China. In 2014, it launched Ping An Good Doctor to provide end-to-end, AI-powered health services directly to patients. These include 24/7 online consultations, diagnoses, treatment planning, second opinions, and prescription management solutions. Today, Good Doctor has ~400m registered users and drives synergies across China’s healthcare ecosystem. The platform collaborates with >3,700 hospitals and is supported by an off-line healthcare network of >2,200 in-house medical staff and ~21,000 contracted experts to ensure quality and accuracy of its medical services. The company provides insurance coverage for both users and physicians, which helps to ease China’s healthcare payment pressures. Ping An Good Doctor’s technology also assists patients to manage their personal health records, treatment plans, and medical histories.
 
In 2019, the company launched the world's first AI-powered, un-manned healthcare service: the One-minute Clinic. This is a 3m2 booth, which patients walk into, enter their digitized medical history from their mobile phones, and add their symptoms. The clinic’s algorithms, which have been trained on data from >300m medical records, then make a diagnosis, prescribe drugs, and provide a treatment plan. Medications are purchased from an adjacent vending machine. Within a year of the start of the first clinic, Good Doctor rolled out ~1,000 units in shopping malls, airports and other public spaces throughout China providing onsite medical and pharmaceutical services 24/7. Today, the clinics provide accessible and affordable medical and health services to >3m users. Good Doctor believes that its AI-driven, un-manned clinics have a promising future helping to reduce China’s care gaps and has plans to expand its services into Southeast Asia. In December 2019, the company signed a strategic collaboration with Merck, an American pharmaceutical multinational to advance further intelligent healthcare in China.

 
Internet hospitals

Digital initiatives like those described above have led to the development and spread of internet hospitals, which are online medical platforms associated with offline access to traditional hospitals that provide a variety of services directly to patients. Today, internet hospitals are booming in China, driven jointly by government and market initiatives.
 
The first internet hospital was established in China’s Guangdong province in October 2014. It consisted of four clinics operated by doctors from the Second People's Hospital, an online platform operated by a medical technology company, and a network of medical consulting facilities based in rural villages, community health centres, and large pharmacy chain stores. Initially webcams were used for patients to communicate with physicians and share medical images of their conditions. A patient's vital signs were taken by on-site machines and uploaded onto the system. With all this information, physicians made a diagnosis and prescribed medications, which patients obtained from nearby pharmacies. According to the Lancet, two months after its launch, China’s first internet hospital “was dealing with ~200 patients and issuing ~120 prescriptions every day”. After six months, the number of patients had increased to >500 a day, ~60% of whom needed prescriptions. Soon afterwards, a network of consultation sites expanded to >1,000 facilities in 21 of Guangdong’s municipalities. In 2018, Beijing gave the legislative green light for internet hospitals, which prompted many Chinese digital health companies to start using internet-based AI solutions to meet the country’s medical and healthcare needs and contribute to the reduction of care gaps. By August 2021, >1,600 internet hospitals had been established in China. The public and physician acceptance of these and Beijing’s support for them suggests a new era in digital healthcare.

 
Internet + Healthcare” initiatives

Since 2018, a range of Internet + Healthcare” initiatives have consolidated and enhanced the position of digital healthcare innovations. The success and continual improvement of China’s digital health service platforms all benefit from Beijing’s policies to facilitate medical practice supported by digital tools. Laws and policies have been issued to support this digital transformation, including health data digitalization, data sharing, and interoperability across the whole of China’s healthcare ecosystem. After the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, the government increased its “Internet + Healthcare” efforts to include telemedicine in state medical insurance coverage, and to lift barriers for prescribed drugs sold online.
 
Data advantage

Compared to the US and other Western democracies, China has significant data advantages to drive its digital healthcare initiatives. Eric Topol, a cardiologist, director of the Scripps Research Translational Institute, and author of Deep Medicine: How AI can make healthcare human again, argues that “China has a massive data advantage when it comes to medical AI research”. To put this in perspective, consider that Chinese patient healthcare data are drawn from the nation’s provinces, many of which have populations of >50m. By contrast, US AI research tends to be based on patient data often drawn from one hospital. China’s big data advantage allows machine learning algorithms to be more effectively trained to perform key functions in a range of clinical settings. Another comparative advantage of China is its large workforce of AI specialist, data scientists, and IT engineers, which can work on healthcare projects at comparatively low costs. This is partly the result of China’s emphasis over the past four decades to encourage science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM subjects) in their schools and universities to fuel Beijing’s technological ambitions.

Not known for good data governance practices, but with intensions to expand internationally, China is now tightening its data protection regulations. For example, in November 2021 Beijing introduced the Personal Information Protection Law (PIPL), which is designed to prevent data hacks and other nefarious uses of sensitive personal information. Much like the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the PIPL stipulates that an individual’s explicit consent must be obtained before their medical health data are collected, and it places the burden on medical AI companies to ensure that these data are secure.
 
2: Capabilities
 
Healthy China 2030

In October 2016, President Xi Jinping announced the nation’s Healthy China 2030 (HC 2030) blueprint, which put patient-centred healthcare at the core of Beijing’s healthcare plans, recognizing its ability to influence both social and economic development. The policy sets out China’s long-term approach to healthcare and shows the nation’s commitment to participate in global health governance, which Beijing recognises as necessary as it seeks to extend its international reach. By 2030, Beijing aims to reach health equity by embracing the United Nations’ Social Development Goal 3.8, which seeks to “Achieve universal health coverage, including financial risk protection, access to quality essential healthcare services and access to safe, effective, quality and affordable essential medicines and vaccines for all”. In 2019, Beijing announced an action plan to accelerate the delivery of Healthy China 2030. This puts patients first in an endeavour to build a healthy society by leveraging AI technologies to reduce the prevalence of lifestyle induced chronic disorders and subsequent care gaps. The World Health Organization (WHO) believes the policy “has the potential to reap huge benefits for the rest of the world”.
 
AI capabilities
 
As China’s economy has matured, its real GDP growth has slowed, from ~14% in 2007 to ~7% in 2018, and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) projects that growth will fall to ~5.5% by 2024. Beijing refers to the nation’s slower growth as the “new normal” and acknowledges the need to embrace a new economic model, which relies less on fixed investment and exporting, and more on private consumption, services, and innovation to drive economic growth. Such reforms are needed for China to avoid hitting what economists refer to as the “middle-income trap”. This is something many Western economies (and corporations) face: it is when countries achieve a certain economic level but then begin to experience diminishing economic growth rates because they are unable to effectively upgrade their economies with more advanced technologies. To avoid this scenario, for the past three decades, China has been investing in AI and systematically upgrading its economy.


You might also like:

Leaning-in on digital and AI


 
Today, China has a significant supply of innovative AI talent to deliver a Healthy China by 2030. Some of the world’s largest technology companies are Chinese and all are developing different aspects of AI applications. For example, Alibaba’s cloud division concentrates on using AI in healthcare and Baidu, which has numerous AI research laboratories in the US, is focussed on a range of AI innovations, which include “deep learning”, and “big data”. More recently, Baidu added a Business Intelligence Lab, which develops data analytics for emerging data-intensive applications, and a Robotics and Autonomous Driving Lab, which specializes in computer vision.
In 2017 China's State Council launched a 3-step plan to become a world leader in AI technologies by 2030, with a domestic AI industry valued ~US$150bn. Beijing completed step 1 in 2020 by establishing a “new generation” of AI technologies and technocrats and developing national standards, policies, and ethics for its emerging industry. Step 2 is anticipated to be completed by 2025, by which time China expects to achieve “major breakthroughs” in AI applications that will help the completion of upgrading the nation’s industrial sector and thereby avoiding the middle-income trap. The final step is anticipated to take place between 2025 and 2030, which, among other things, will project China internationally as the world leader in AI technologies.
 
3: Understanding Beijing
 
Regulatory changes

A decade ago, foreign MedTechs operated in China with relative ease. Chinese regulations were lighter than they are today, and companies were supported by a multi-layered network of small scale and localised sub-distributors. This fragmented structure resulted in higher prices and tended to encourage corruption, but the relatively high margins obtained from foreign products allowed medical device corporations to compensate the multiple distribution levels and still make a profit. In return, domestic Chinese distributors managed the market and foreign MedTechs did not engage directly with hospitals and physicians.
 
Volume-based procurement

Recent regulatory changes have disrupted this modus operandi for foreign MedTechs. One change positioned to have a significant impact on MedTech profits is volume-based procurement (VBP). This is aimed at lowering the price of medical consumables by tendering the market volume of cities, provinces, or the country to manufacturers with the lowest price. Following a successful pilot with pharmaceuticals, VBP was extended to medical devices in 2019, and since then it has had a significant effect on certain products. For example, the price of cardio stents and hip and knee implants have been reduced by ~70% to ~90%. China’s message is clear: Medtechs are either ‘in’ with significantly lower prices, or ‘out’. This suggests that companies wishing to enter or grow their franchise in the Chinese market will have to adapt their business models by accelerating their pre-launch registrations and post-launch commercialization strategies for new products as margins on legacy offerings are expected to be substantially reduced. However, review processes for new offerings have become longer, more bureaucratic, and more expensive than they were five years ago. For example, if a Class 2 device without clinical studies took ~9 months to register five years ago, today expect ~2 years. VBP has forced foreign MedTechs to consolidate their multi-layered distribution channels to improve economies of scale. 
 
More recently Beijing has introduced a two-invoice policy for the medical devices industry: (i) MedTech to a distributor, and (ii) distributor to a hospital. This will push small and less competitive distributors out of the market and shorten and consolidate supply chains. The likely effect of this is for Chinese distributors to concentrate more on logistics to “deliver product”, rather than managing the market. To the extent that this is the case, a larger share of customer engagement will become the responsibility of MedTechs.
 
This will mean that foreign corporations trading in China will need to reassess their capabilities and adjust their business models. Further, MedTechs operating in China should expect VBP to increase the significance of “value”. This is because the policy is likely to enhance the purchasing power of hospital administrators and reduce that of physicians.  As a result, companies might expect procurement conversations to focus less on clinical outcomes and more on the overall value of products and their potential to minimize costs. Many readjustments companies will be obliged to make to their business models may be achieved by having someone local on the product management team rather than engaging high-margin agencies to resolve critical, but relatively simple domestic challenges.
 
A narrow window of opportunity for foreign MedTechs

Beijing’s “in China for China” policy makes it a condition that foreign companies entering the Chinese market must share their technology and intellectual property (IP) with a domestic “partner”. Beijing has been using this condition to acquire valuable scientific knowhow, which has helped the country to develop a large domestic medical device industry. According to a 2021 research report from Deloitte, a consulting firm, “China now boasts over 26,000 medical device manufacturers”. Beijing’s policies render China a substantially more challenging market to enter and to grow in than it was five years ago. China’s market opportunities for foreign corporations are not only getting tighter; they are getting shorter, and their orientation is changing away from surgeons towards patients. Further, Beijing is on a relentless drive towards self-reliance and tolerates the presence of Western companies in its domestic markets only for as long as they contribute offerings that are useful to the Chinese Communist Party. If China is successful in delivering on its healthcare and high-tech development plans, the window of opportunity for many foreign MedTechs could be only ~10 years.
 
China’s different

China and the Chinese are unlike the West and Westerners. When Deng Xiaoping’s started China’s reforms in 1978 and opened the nation to the world’s trading economies, he created a socialist market economy, in which private capitalists and entrepreneurs co-existed with public and collective enterprise. This formed the foundations for China’s phenomenal economic growth, prosperity, reduction of poverty, massive infrastructure investment, and development as a world-class technology innovator. As a result, many Western business leaders and politicians believed that China had abandoned ideology in a similar way that former communist regimes of Eastern Europe did in the early 1990s after the fall of the Soviet Union. However, such a transformation did not happen in China, which remains a one-party authoritarian state, tightly governed by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), whose constitution states that China is a “people’s democratic dictatorship”. The CCP has a mission to become the world’s leading technology economy by 2030. This is backed by substantial sovereign wealth and a supply of relevant high tech human capital and an impressive history of national achievements.
 
Scale and speed of transformation

The phenomenal politico-economic progress China has made in a relatively short time is an indication of the nation’s determination, and its ability to affect change, and contextualizes Beijing’s policies to make China a self-reliant economy in the not-too-distant future. A 2022 report jointly released by China’s Development Research Center and the World Bank highlights the nation’s transformation in just four decades, from a struggling agrarian society to a global superpower. The nation’s achievements include increased health insurance coverage to >95% of its 1.4bn population, lifting ~0.8bn people out of poverty, which accounts for ~75% of global poverty reduction in the same period, a burgeoning middle class, which by 2030, will have grown from today’s ~0.3bn to ~0.7bn. In 2010, China overtook Japan to become the world's second largest economic power after the US when measured by nominal GDP. According to the World Bank, in 1960, China's GDP was ~11% of the US, and in 2019, ~67%. Not only is China the world's second-largest economy it has a permanent seat at the United Nations Security Council, modernised armed forces, and an ambitious space programme. China’s growing international clout and economic leadership positions it well to replace the US as the greatest superpower.

Such factors provide a context for Western corporation with global pretentions wishing to engage with and learn from China. At the 13th Annual National People’s Congress in March 2022, Premier Li Keqiang called for “faster breakthroughs” in key technologies, and said the government would increase the tax rebate for small and medium-sized science and technology firms from 75% to 100% and grant tax breaks for basic research to encourage innovation. Significantly, the Congress also underscored self-reliance in China’s economic priorities amid warnings of trade headwinds and geopolitical complexities.

 
Takeaways
 
China is too big a commercial opportunity to ignore. In 2021, China accounted for >18% of the global economy, rising from ~11% in 2012, its GDP was ~US$18trn, and per capita GDP reached US$12,500, which is close to the threshold for high income economies. In recent times, the contribution of China's economic growth to the world economy has been ~30%, which makes China the largest growth engine for the global economy. However, the relationship between China and the rest of the world is changing. As China becomes more self-reliant, its exposure to the world has decreased. Add to this (i) international trade disputes, (ii) increasing geopolitical tensions between the US and China, (iii) the nation’s evolving new rules to evaluate technology flows, (iv) increase of protectionism and (v) its healthcare mission to pivot towards patients, and you have significantly changed trading conditions than a decade ago. Misjudging Beijing’s rapidly evolving commercial ecosystem could be costly for Western MedTechs.
view in full page
  • MedTechs have built proficiencies to successfully create and market physical devices predominantly for the US and Western European markets
  • To remain relevant in the rapidly changing healthcare ecosystem they will need to develop advanced digital and data capabilities and increase their penetration of Asian markets, which will present challenges for most of them
  • Will companies be forced to decide whether to remain hardware manufacturers or become software enterprises, or can they look both ways and prosper?
  • Given the rate of market changes, the next 5 years represent a window of opportunity for traditional MedTechs to pivot and transform their strategies and business models
 
Can elephants be taught to dance?
MedTech’s strategic challenges
 
MedTechs are at a crossroad of manufacturing physical devices and developing software solutions. Both aim to deliver value by enhancing patient outcomes while reducing costs. Can these two scenarios co-exist, or will industry leaders be forced to choose one or the other?
 
For decades, many companies have displayed a deep-rooted reluctance to transform their business models and adopt digitalization strategies and have used M&A activity to become bigger. This suggests that a significant proportion of MedTech leaders are likely to manage increased competition and changing healthcare ecosystems by accelerating M&A activities, which are familiar to them and require no significant change. However, such activities alone will not future-proof companies. Over the next five years, “informed” MedTechs will benefit by shifting away from their current business models that depend on developing and selling physical products predominantly to hospitals in the US and Western Europe and move toward providing patient-centric software solutions as partners in dynamic, connected international healthcare ecosystems.
 
M&A activity to enhance scale

For decades, M&A activities have helped MedTechs to acquire mature assets to tuck into their existing sales and distribution channels. More than anything, this has assisted them to increase their scale, while optimising their portfolios, reducing competition, and improving profits. Over the past decade, when Western markets became more uncertain, monetary policy tightened, technologies advanced, and global economic growth slowed, MedTechs responded by exploiting the fall in the cost of capital to increase their M&A activities with the main purpose of increasing their scale: bigger was generally perceived by industry leaders to be better.
 
Before the COVID-19 pandemic crisis, 2020 was expected to be a strong year for MedTech’s M&A. However, the disruptive impact of the coronavirus outbreak slowed the industry’s M&A performance, and between July 2019 and June 2020, M&A expenditures plunged by 60% compared to the previous 12-month period. Activity returned in Q3, 2020, and today, although high asset valuations and increasing cost of capital have impacted M&A transactions and re-focused attention on organic growth, there are signs that a M&A buyer’s market is developing, but with a difference.
 
The difference is a significant number of M&A transactions do not appear to be focussed entirely on acquiring scale. While there are still some advantages to increasing scale, there are disadvantages, which include having to integrate and service more customers, more employees, and more institutional investors, and this often contributes to strategic rigidities.

 
The demise of scale

The significance of scale was first elaborated in 1937 by Nobel economics laureate Ronald Coase in his seminal paper, The Nature of the Firm, and ~50 years later, repeated by Michael Porter in his book, Competitive Advantage. Both Coase and Porter suggested that scale gained from reducing the ratio of overhead to production would increase the power of firms in markets. In 2013, Rita McGrath challenged this thesis in, The End of Competitive Advantage, by suggesting that bigger was not necessarily better. According to McGrath, in an increasingly high-tech environment, more important than size, is whether enterprises have access to technical capabilities, which can drive top-line growth in dynamic market settings.


Recapitalized MedTech’s M&A firepower
 
According to a 2020 report on the state of the MedTech industry, published by EY, a consulting firm, between July 2019 and June 2020, MedTechs took advantage of low interest rates, and financing levels more than doubled to a record US$57.1bn compared to the previous 12 months; with >40% resulting from debt financing. Thus, as we emerge from restrictions imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic, there is a lot of liquidity in the market and larger MedTechs have significant M&A firepower. Will they use this to become bigger, or will they use their capital to make strategic investments in new technologies and to penetrate large rapidly growing Asian markets?
M&A driving a shift to digital health

In H1,2021, the MedTech sector recorded a total of 33 M&A deals, up from 25 in the whole of 2020. There is some evidence to suggest that some companies in the sector are using their renewed M&A firepower to acquire high growth digital and AI opportunities that can be integrated into their existing product offerings to provide access to new revenue streams and help companies pivot away from being solely dependent upon manufacturing physical devices. We briefly describe four such deals.
 
In January 2020, as the first COVID-19 case was reported in the US, Boston Scientific paid US$0.925bn for Preventice, a developer of mobile health solutions and remote monitoring services, which connect patients and caregivers. Its digitally enabled service has the potential to reduce healthcare costs and improve patient outcomes. In February 2020,  Medtronic, acquired, for an undisclosed sum, Digital Surgery, a London-based privately-held pioneer in surgical AI, data and analytics. The acquisition is expected to accelerate Medtronic’s plans to incorporate AI and data into its laparoscopic and robotic-assisted surgery platforms. In December 2020 Philips acquired BioTelemetry for US$2.8bn. BioTelemetry is a US-based provider of remote cardiac diagnostics and monitoring, with offerings in wearable heart monitors and AI-based data analytics and services. The deal provides Philips with the capability to expand its remote monitoring business outside of hospitals and into lower cost day-care settings and patients’ homes. One of the largest healthcare deals of 2020 was Teladoc’s US$18.5bn acquisition of Livongo, a remote patient monitoring company, founded in 2014, to build a cloud-based diabetes management programme, linking a person’s glucose monitor to personalized coaching to help control blood sugar levels. In 2019, just one year before Teladoc’s acquisition, Livongo IPO’d at a valuation of US$355m, and expanded its products and services to cover high blood pressure and behavioural health with an ultimate goal of leveraging digital medicine to address “the health of the whole person”. 
 
These four acquisitions are from market segments, which run parallel to traditional medical devices and are often perceived by some MedTech executives to be competitors destined to be controlled by giant tech companies such as Apple, Huawei, and Samsung. However, given the rate at which technology is developing, the speed at which MedTech and pharma are converging, and the renewed liquidity in the market, it might be more efficacious for MedTechs to view such specialised digital health companies as partners rather than competitors.
 
Technologies helping MedTechs to develop actionable solutions

Today, many new biomedical technologies are being developed and benefit from continuous miniaturization, enhanced battery life, cost reductions and increasing data storage capacity. One such technology is photoplethysmography (PPG), a non-invasive, uncomplicated, and inexpensive optical measurement method that employs a light source and a photodetector to calculate the volumetric variations of blood circulation. PPG is employed in smartphones and wearables that are used by billions of people worldwide. There is a large and growing global research endeavour to develop more effective and sophisticated PPG algorithms that could be attached to traditional, non-active medical devices and implants to provide accurate and reliable real time monitoring of a wide range of conditions.
 
Outside of specific health monitoring technologies, few MedTechs collect, store, and analyse data generated by their existing traditional devices and implants, and even fewer use such data to facilitate real time, monitoring of conditions. However, some companies are beginning to transform their dumb devices into intelligent ones to gain access to new revenue streams. For example Zimmer-Biomet’s smart” knee, utilizes a biosensor [an analytical device that uses natural biological materials to detect and monitor virtually any activity or substance] to generate self-reports on patient activity, recovery, and treatment failures, without the need for physician intervention and dependence upon patient compliance. 
 
According to Roger Kornberg, Professor of Structural Biology at Stanford University and Nobel Laureate for Chemistry, “the excitement of biosensors pertains to their microscopic size and the ease with which they can transmit wirelessly in real time information about responses to treatment from an implantable device within the body”. [See video below].
 
A fast-growing field of AI is tiny machine learning (TinyML), which has the capability to perform on-device, real time, sensor data analytics at extremely low power, typically in the mW [one thousandth of a watt] range and below. The technology is expected to make always-on use-cases economically viable and accelerate the transformation of dumb devices and implants into smart ones.

 
 
Changing traditional R&D models
 
In their search for innovative healthcare solutions, MedTechs might consider increasing their R&D spend and reorganizing their R&D function. MedTech’s R&D spend, as a percentage of revenues, has slowed compared to levels the industry recorded prior to the 2007 financial crash. Overall, the industry tends to allocate more of its capital to share buybacks and investor dividends than to R&D. This strategy may please shareholders in the short term, but it suggests some uncertainty among industry leaders about how to invest for growth in the longer term and could have a medium- to long-term potential downside. 
 
Further, a significant percentage of R&D spend goes on tweaking existing products rather than creating new ones. Given that the future of the industry is dependent upon innovation, it seems reasonable to suggest that, as competition increases and markets tighten, MedTechs will need to consider increasing their R&D resources and capabilities to develop innovative technologies that provide improved actionable solutions across entire patient journeys.

Unlocking value from R&D innovations might require a different culture and new operating models to the ones that tend to prevail today. Instead of lengthy R&D cycles fixed on the launch of a physical product, it could be more beneficial to focus on developing minimum-viable patient-centric solutions, which research teams can deploy early, test, learn from and enhance. Moreover, R&D strategy sessions might benefit by including a mandatory question: “In the near- to medium-term, are there any evolving technologies likely to disrupt a specific market segment important to our company?”.

 
The potential of innovative technologies to disrupt markets
 
To illustrate the significance of this question, consider traumatic brain injury (TBI), which each year affects ~69m individuals worldwide. There is no cure for the condition, and the cornerstone of its management is to monitor intracranial pressure (ICP). [Pressures >15 millimetres of mercury (mm Hg) are considered abnormal, and ICP >20 mm Hg is deemed pathological]. An ICP monitor is expected to be easy to use, accurate, reliable, reproducible, inexpensive and should not be associated with either infection or haemorrhagic complications. Currently, the gold-standard is to drill a small burr hole in the skull, insert a catheter and place it in a cavity [ventricle] in the brain, which is filled with cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). Such an invasive intraventricular catheter system is accurate and reliable, but it is also a health-resource-intensive modality, which runs a risk of haemorrhage and infection. Recent advances in PPG and other technologies have accelerated research developing non-invasive techniques to continuously measure and monitor ICP, which in the medium-term, could replace the gold standard and avoid drilling a hole in a traumatised patient’s skull.   
  
Pros and cons of the COVID-19 crisis

One beneficial outcome for MedTechs of the COVID-19 crisis has been the change in regulatory norms, which favour innovation. In the US, the FDA reduced barriers to market entry for new devices by increasing its emergency use authorization (EUA), which fast-tracks the availability of medical devices. Also, at the onset of the pandemic, the EU deferred for one year the implementation of its Medical Device Regulation (MDR), which governs the production and distribution of medical devices in Europe. In mid 2021, when governments began removing the outstanding legal restrictions imposed to reduce the impact of the third wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, some MedTechs, which had invested in remote communication strategies, chose to build on the changes they had made and invest further in digitalization AI strategies, while many others reverted to their labour-intensive supply channels. According to a June 2021 Boston Consulting Group (BCG) study, “On average, MedTech companies are still spending two to three times more on selling, general, and administrative (SG&A) expenses (as a percent of the costs of goods sold) than the typical technology or industrial company”.
 
A potential disadvantage for MedTechs of the COVID-19 pandemic is that it can lead to an excessive focus on short-term challenges and put off addressing longer-term strategic threats.
 
MedTech executives have never had it so good

Why are some companies reluctant to transform their strategies and business models?

We suggest that a deep-rooted resistance to change results from MedTechs “never having it so good” over a long period. Indeed, for several decades before the global economic crisis in 2007 and 2008, the medical device market was buoyed by limited competition, benign reimbursement policies, aging populations, and a slower pace of technological change compared to today. These factors promoted double-digit growth rates, investor confidence, and solid valuations. This fostered a sense of security among C suites and encouraged “business as usual” agendas, which tended to focus on sharpening legacy products, legacy business models, legacy forms of market access and pricing and legacy capabilities.
You might also be interested in:

Who should lead MedTech?

The 2007-8 financial crisis only inflicted a short-lived blow to the industry and most companies bounced back relatively quickly. Throughout the decade that followed, MedTechs maintained solid financial performance, steady growth, investor confidence and robust valuations. Many enterprises across the industry ended 2019 in a strong position, with some trading at 52-week highs and the industry overall growing revenues at ~6%.
In 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic threw some segments of the industry off course by a substantial reduction in elective care. However, by 2H 2021, most MedTechs had recovered, albeit their annual growth in revenues did not recapture the heights of the early years of the 21st century.
 
MedTechs became like elephants

It seems reasonable to suggest that decades of commercial success shaped the mindsets of industry leaders and resulted in MedTechs becoming like elephants. In 1990, James Belasco published, Teaching the Elephant to Dance, in which he likened organizations to elephants. The book describes how trainers shackled young elephants to a stake securely embedded in the ground so that they could not move away despite their efforts. By the time the elephants became fully grown and had the strength to pull the stakes out of the ground, they were so conditioned they did not move and remained in position even though most were no longer tethered to the stakes. The author uses this analogy to warn how companies can become stuck in obsolete working practices, which are obstacles to their future commercial success.

In 1993, IBM, the world’s largest manufacturer of mainframe computers, had become “an elephant” continuing to produce hardware appliances when the industry was embracing software solutions. IBM, which had posted a US$8bn loss, appointed Lou Gerstner, an executive from outside the computer industry, to turn the company around. Nine years later, IBM had become one of the world's most admired companies. In a book published in 2002, entitled, Who Says Elephants Can't Dance?, Gerstner described how he successfully changed IBM from a maker of hardware to a service orientated company.
 
A 5-year window of opportunity
 
A doubt as to whether many traditional MedTechs can be taught to dance was sewn in a 2021 BCG study cited above, which suggested that enterprises “do not yet have the capabilities in place to develop and implement a next-generation, omnichannel commercial model”. Ten years from now, the MedTech market is projected to be significantly different to what it is today, and what it has been for the past four decades. However, it seems reasonable to assume that because of its size and growth rate, [~US$0.5tn, growing at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of ~6% and projected to reach US$0.75tn by 2030], many industry leaders will not feel any pressing need to transform their strategies and business models in the short-term.

However, with a rapidly changing healthcare ecosystem, it seems reasonable to suggests that, to remain relevant after 2030, MedTechs will need to use the next five years as a window of opportunity to prepare solutions that enable them to focus on entire patient treatment pathways, create best-in-class distributive services, and develop digital marketing and sales capabilities that help to expand their influence beyond selling hardware. This will require targeting the “right” market segments, developing the “right” solutions, funding in the “right” R&D, creating the “right” playbooks; and recruiting, retaining, and developing the “right” people with the “right” capabilities.

 
From restricted staged events to real time distribution

Companies are rich reservoirs of clinical data and expertise, but the data tend to be kept in silos and distributed intermittently to a limited number of clinicians and providers at “staged” events. Digital technologies can unlock these assets and facilitate real time, online marketing, self-service portals, and virtual engagements; all of which can provide physicians and providers with unprecedented access to knowhow that can help improve the quality of care and reduce costs. However, shifting to such a distributed care model to drive profitability requires developing a digital, remote, marketing and sales force, which is supported by data analytics, virtual demonstrations, automated call reporting, and AI-supported coaching tools.
 
The reduction of obstacles to data rich digital distributed care strategies

While distributed computing and communications systems have significantly enhanced a wide range of commercial organizations, they have yet to take root in MedTech settings, despite data sharing being critical in modern clinical practice and medical research. A challenge for MedTechs is to engage in data sharing that reconciles individual privacy and data utility. This will entail universally agreed AI and machine learning practices. Although there are sophisticated technologies that can help with this, MedTech’s management and information systems’ personnel may not be prepared to effectively reconcile these competing interests and push for universal data standards. According to a US National Institute of Health report, “The lack of technical understanding, the lack of direct experience with these new tools, the lack of confidence in their management, the lack of a peer group of successful adopters (except for a few academic medical organizations), and uncertainties about reasonable risks and expectations all leave conservative organizational managers hesitant to make decisions”. 
 
While the mindsets of some industry leaders appear to be obstacles to change, other obstacles to transformative business models have been reduced. For instance, privacy is now less of an obstacle for data-rich strategies than it once was. Increasingly, patients show a willingness for their clinical and personal data to be used anonymously in the interest of improving healthcare. Further, regulators’ attitudes towards data are changing.  In September 2021 the FDA published its AI enabled devices that are marketed in the US, which embrace the full scale of approvals from 510(k) de Novo authorizations to Premarket (PMA) approvals. The FDA’s initiative comes at a time of continued growth in AI enhanced digital offerings that contribute to a variety of clinical spheres, and the increasing number of companies seeking to enter this space. There are ~130 algorithms approved for clinical use in the US and Europe.
 
A recent report from Frost & Sullivan, a US market research company, suggests that although in the near-term, traditional medical devices will continue to make up the bulk of the market, after 2024, they are expected to grow at only a CAGR of ~2%. By contrast, digitally enhanced medical devices, and algorithms, which facilitate managing patients remotely and non-intrusively, are expected to grow at a CAGR >14% and reach US$172bn by 2024.

 
The shift to low-cost settings

Over the next five years, as technology advances, populations age, healthcare costs escalate, patient expectations continue to rise, and markets tighten, we can expect the shift away from hospitals to outpatient settings and other lower-cost venues to accelerate. This move to a distributed care model is a headwind for traditional MedTechs, whose principal focus is provider systems rather than patients, and a tailwind for new players entering the market unencumbered by legacy supply chains, costs, and infrastructures. According to an EY 2020 study, ~70% of start-ups in the diagnostics segment have products applicable to the point-of-care setting.
 
Corporate venture funds

To help traditional MedTechs dance leaders of medium sized, well capitalized enterprises might consider copying the world’s largest MedTechs and create corporate venture capital (CVC) funds to invest in tech-savvy start-ups. While 7 of the top 10 MedTechs by sales have venture arms, many company leaders shy away from investing in early-stage, unproven technologies. However, CVC funds offer traditional corporates access to innovations and scarce science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) skills, which are necessary to capture and analyse data, deliver enhanced care, and drive biomedical R&D with the potential to improve patient outcomes and lower costs.
 
The latest giant MedTech to launch a CVC fund is Intuitive Surgical. In Q4 2020, the company started disbursing capital from its initial US$100m venture fund to start-ups developing digital tools and precision diagnostics, with an emphasis on minimally invasive care. Intuitive is the world’s largest manufacturer of robotic surgical systems for minimally invasive surgery. Since its lead offering, the da Vinci Surgical System, received FDA approval in 2000, it has been used by surgeons in all 50 US states, ~67 countries worldwide and has performed >8.5m procedures.

In the first three quarters of 2020, CVCs participated in investment rounds worth US$1.2bn, which amounted to >25% of the total venture funding the sector raised. The lion’s share went to products and solutions that address digital therapies, telehealth, and treatments for low-cost settings. Such technologies are positioned to continue receiving significant funding in 2022 and beyond. A 2021 study by Deloitte, a consulting firm, suggests that MedTech start-ups, unencumbered by legacy products and practices have capabilities, which stretch beyond traditional devices that support episodic care, and focus on distributed solutions, which address the full patient journey: from diagnosis to rehabilitation. The study also maintains that technologies employed by these enterprises are getting smarter, with ~70% of them including digital AI capabilities.
 
Further, MedTechs with CVC arms might consider allowing their digital business functions to operate within a different organizational framework, giving them greater decision-making authority and enhanced freedoms.

 
Asia Pacific MedTech markets

Before closing let us briefly draw attention to the increasing significance of the emerging Asia Pacific MedTech markets. For the past 4 decades, industry leaders were not obliged to seriously consider penetrating markets outside the US and Western Europe because ~70% of global MedTech revenues came from the US and Western Europe. However, as Western markets tighten, and become increasingly competitive, attention is moving East towards Asia.

Over two decades ago, a handful of giant MedTechs began investing in Asia, but most companies in the sector preferred not to risk navigating such unfamiliar healthcare territories. An early investor in the region was Medtronic, which, since ~2000, has achieved significant growth from a multi-faceted strategy that included exporting innovative products from the US to China, establishing R&D facilities in China to design products specifically for the needs of the Chinese market, crafting partnerships with Beijing to educate patients in under-served therapeutic areas, and acquiring domestic Chinese MedTech companies.

Because of the current political stand-off between the two countries, such a China strategy is not so feasible as it has been over the past two decades. However, it is worth bearing in mind that Asia is comprised of 48 countries with a combined population of ~5bn, which is projected to reach 8.5bn by 2030, [~60% of the world’s population], with 1 in 4 people >60. In 2020, ~2bn Asians were members of the middle class, and by 2030, this demographic is projected to grow to ~3.5bn. Moreover, health insurance coverage in the region is expanding. By contrast, the middle classes in the US and Western Europe are smaller and growing at lower rates. According to the Pew Research Center in 2018, ~52% of the 258m US adults (>18 years) was considered middle class. The dynamics of the Asian middle class is driving a large and rapidly growing Asian MedTech market, which is on the cusp of eclipsing Europe to become the world’s second largest regional market, growing at a CAGR of ~9%.

Further, the region has become an important source of technological innovation. For example, in 2020, its digital health market was valued at ~US$20bn and projected to grow at a CAGR of ~21% until 2027, when its value is expected to be ~US$80bn. Despite its complexities and unfamiliarity, Asia represents a substantial opportunity for MedTechs. However, for Western enterprises to succeed in Asian markets they will require in depth local knowhow, long term commitments, agility, innovation, and robust strategies that can prosper under fiercely competitive conditions.  

 
Takeaways

MedTechs have built capabilities to develop, launch, market and sell physical devices. With some notable exceptions, few have the capabilities necessary to drive significant growth from digitalization and data strategies. Sharpening traditional commercial procedures and practices alone is unlikely to significantly increase growth, especially when competitors and new entrants have business models that are more effective, promote better patient outcomes and provide greater value to healthcare systems.  

MedTechs could play a significant role in the transformation of healthcare, but not without risks and some significant changes to the way they operate. Over the next five years, as competitive pressures increase, industry leaders have a window of opportunity to pivot. Here are six strategic questions that might help in this regard:
  1. Should we support significant investments in digitalization, and data analytics to improve our supply chains and R&D endeavours to convert dumb devices and implants into smart ones?
  2. What are the top three actionable innovations that we can develop in the near-term to provide access to new revenue streams?
  3. What are the top three technologies likely to disrupt our product offerings in the near- to medium-term and what should we do about them?
  4. Can we remain a hardware manufacturer while developing significant software solutions that embrace entire patient journeys or must we choose between manufacturing and software?
  5. How do we create valuable solutions that enhance patient journeys from data?
  6. How are global markets changing in ways that are not reflected in our company’s discussions?
The answers to these questions will help to shape a corporation’s strategy, and inform M&A and CVC activities, “must have” capabilities, desired partnerships, R&D spend and agendas, and the type of business models to pursue. All critical for teaching elephants to dance.
view in full page

Is the digital transformation of MedTech companies a choice or a necessity?
 
Will 2019 see medical technology (MedTech) companies begin to digitally transform their strategies and business models to improve their commercial prospects?
 
We describe some of the changing market conditions that drive such transformations. We also briefly report the findings of two research papers on corporate digital transformations published in recent editions of the Harvard Business Review. These suggest that there are two “must haves” if company transformations are to be successful: leadership with the appropriate mindset and access to talented data scientists.
 
A bull market encouraging a business-as-usual mindset
 
MedTech is a large growing industrial sector (see below), which has benefitted significantly from the bull market in equities over the past decade but is one of the least equipped to prosper over the next decade in a radically changing healthcare ecosystem and a more uncertain global economy.

For the past decade equity markets have outperformed global economic growth and protected a conservative, production-orientated business-as-usual mindset in MedTech C-suites and boards of directors. This has made organizations either slow or reluctant to transform their strategies and business models, which define how they create and capture value. As we enter 2019 the protection that the MedTech industry enjoyed for years has been weakened by more uncertain markets, the tightening of monetary policy, slower global economic growth and disruptive technological change.

In this new and rapidly evolving environment MedTech markets are expected to continue growing but at a slower rate, operating margins are expected to decline as unit prices erode and companies will no longer be able to earn premium margins by business-as-usual strategies. Building a prosperous organization in a more uneven future is an important challenge facing MedTech leaders and will require a significant shift in their mindset and the talent they engage and develop.  
 

Medical technology

MedTech represents a significant sector of global healthcare, which has been relatively stable for decades. It has a market size of some US$430bn and has consistently experienced high margins and significant sales growth. For example, over the past decade the sector has grown at an annual compound growth rate of about 5%, with operating margins between 23% and 25%. The sector includes most medical devices, which prevent, diagnose and treat diseases. The most well-known include in vitro diagnostics, medical imaging equipment, dialysis machines, orthopaedic implants and pacemakers. The US and Western Europe are established centres for the sector, but trends suggest that China and India will grow in significance over the next decade. The sector is dominated by about 10 giant companies, which account for nearly 40% of the global market in sales revenues. All MedTech companies have significant R&D programs and the global spend on R&D is expected to grow from US$27bn in 2017 to US$34bn by 2022. An indication of how far developments in medical technology have come is robot-assisted surgery, which employs artificial intelligence (AI) for more precise and efficacious procedures. Robot-assisted surgery is expected to become a US$13bn global market by 2025. In the US the repeal of the medical device excise tax was not included in the recent tax reform. The industry believes the tax has a negative impact on innovation, and the rate of R&D spending by US MedTech companies is expected to fall by 0.5% over the next five years.
 
Resistance to change

For the past decade a substantial proportion of MedTech companies either have resisted or been slow to transform their strategies and business models despite increasing pressure from rapidly evolving technologies, changing reimbursement and regulatory environments and a chorus of Industry observers calling for MedTech companies to become less product-centric and more solutions orientated. This reluctance to change can be explained by a bull market in equities, which began in March 2009, outperformed economic growth, delivered some of the best risk-adjusted returns in modern market history and encouraged a conservative mindset among corporate leaders, who were reluctant to change and developed a “if it’s not broken why fix it” mindset.

Because the MedTech sector has been stable for years, established players have been able to compete successfully across the device spectrum, applying common business models and processes without much need for differentiation. MedTech’s strategy has been to market high priced sophisticated product offerings in a few wealthy regions of the world; mainly the US, Western Europe and Japan, which although representing only 13% of the world’s population account for more than 86% of the global MedTech market share (US: 42%, Europe: 33%, Japan: 11%). It seems reasonable to assume that in the future, as markets become more turbulent and uncertain, this undifferentiated strategy and business model will need to transform into ones that are far more distinctive and proprietary.

 
M&A has been MedTech’s principal response to market headwinds

MedTech’s principal adjustment to market headwinds over the past decade has been to increase its M&A activity rather than transform its strategies and business models. M&A’s increased companies scale and leverage, drove stronger financial performance, allowed companies to obtain a broader portfolio of product offerings and increased their international footprints. Some recent high-profile examples of M&A activity in the sector include Abbott’s acquisition of St. Jude’s Medical in January 2017, which led to Abbott holding some 20% of the US$40bn global cardiovascular market. Johnson & Johnson’s US$4bn buyout of Abbott Medical Optics Inc in February 2017, and the “mother of all M&A activity” was Becton Dickinson’s 2017 acquisition of C.R. Bard for US$24bn, which is expected to generate annual revenues of US$15bn.

According to a January 2018 McKinsey report between 2011 and 2016, 60% of the growth of the 30 largest MedTech companies was due to M&A’s, and between 2006 and 2016, only 20% of 54 pure-play publicly traded MedTech companies, “mostly relied on organic growth”. 
As MedTech leaders return to their desks in early 2019 after the worst December in stock market recent memory, they might begin to reflect on their past all-consuming M&A activity, which resulted in bigger but not necessarily better companies. After such a prolonged period of M&A’s, there is likely to be a period of portfolio optimization. Divestitures and spin-outs allow companies to capture additional value by improving capital efficiency, reducing operational complexity and reallocating capital to higher-growth businesses as the industry invests more in R&D to develop innovative product offerings that demonstrate value in an increasing volatile era and increasing price pressures. But divestitures are not necessarily changing strategies and business models, so MedTech’s vulnerabilities remain.
You might also like:

Who should lead MedTech?



The IoT and healthcare


 
Black December 2018 for equities
 
It is too early to say whether “Black December 2018” represents the end of the longest equity market bull-run in recent history, but it is worth noting that on Friday 21st December the Nasdaq composite index closed at 6,332.99, which was a drop of 21.9% from an all-time high of 8,109.69 on August 29th. The generally accepted definition of a bear market is a drop of at least 20% from a recent peak. World markets followed Wall Street. Japan’s Topix Index fell to its lowest level for 18 months and the pan European Stoxx 600 Index hit a two-year low. However, seasoned market observers suggest that although the average bull market tends to last for about 10 years, it does not simply die of old age, and the December 2018 market behaviour is consistent with a “maturing cycle” in which there is still room for stocks to grow. This note of optimism could encourage a continuation of a “business-as-usual” mindset in MedTech C-suites and boards of directors.
 
Anaemic economic growth forecasted

The outlook for the global economy in 2019 does not bring any comfort. In October 2018 the International Monetary Fund lowered its forecast for global economic growth for 2019, from 3.9% to 3.7%; citing rising trade protectionism and instability in emerging markets. In September 2018 the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OEDC) suggested that economic expansion may have peaked and projected global growth in 2019 to settle at 3.7%, “marginally below pre-crisis norms with downside risks intensifying.” The OECD also warned that the recovery since the 2008 recession had been slow and only possible with an exceptional degree of stimulus from central banks. And such support is ceasing.
 
Tightening of monetary policy

Global monetary policy is tightening as central banks retreat from their long-standing market support. After four years of quantitative easing (QE) the European Central Bank (ECB) has ended both its money printing program and its €2.6trn bond purchasing program. The Bank has done this just as the Eurozone growth is cooling and Europe seems to be destined for a slow relative decline, which raises concerns about the sustainability of the single currency area. Notwithstanding, some observers suggests that for the next few years capital can be reasonably safely deployed in the beer-drinking nations of northern Europe, but not in the wine-drinking countries of southern Europe; especially France and Italy, two countries at the centre of the Eurozone’s current challenges. France’s budget deficit exceeds that permitted by the EU and in the latter part of 2018 the nation’s anti-government gilets jaunes demonstrators led to President Macron promising more welfare spending than the nation can afford. This could suggest that France is on the cusp of an Italian-style debt crisis. Although these economic trends have been telegraphed for some time, after nearly a decade of a bull market and low interest rates, there seems to be some complacency in the equity markets about the risks from higher rates and elevated corporate debt. But this sentiment is expected to change in 2019.
 
Transformation is no longer a choice

This more uncertain global economic outlook, heightened US-China tensions, tighter monetary policy and a maturing global business cycle together with significantly changed and evolving healthcare ecosystems suggest that transformation of MedTech strategies and business models is no longer a choice but a necessity if they are to maintain and increase their market positions over the next decade.
 
A challenge for many MedTech companies is that they still work on dated and inappropriate systems or hierarchical processes, and too few leaders and board members fully comprehend the speed and potential impact of advanced digital technologies. Those organization with some appreciation of this are already looking to adjacent sectors for talent and knowhow that could help them evolve their strategies and business models. But such partnerships might not be as efficacious as expected. We explain why below.
 
Digital transformations

Let us turn now to consider digital transformations. Data scientists and machine learning engineers are critical to any digital transformation. One significant challenge for companies contemplating such change is talent shortage, which disproportionately affects companies not use to dealing with such talent. Data scientists are aware of their scarcity value and they tend not to work in IT silos of traditional hierarchical organizations but prefer working for giant tech companies in devolved networked teams, focusing on projects that interest them.

Companies that fail to engage talented data scientists will be at a disadvantage in any digital transformation. Mindful of such challenges some MedTech companies are beginning to partner with start-ups and smaller digitally orientated companies. But this is not necessarily an answer because talent shortage also affects start-ups. The answer lies in understanding how giant tech companies recruit talented individuals. Companies like Google and Facebook are more interested in “tech savvy” individuals and less interested in formal qualifications. They tend to catch such talent with attractive internships when they are seniors in high school and juniors at university. These companies understand digital technology and have seen enough interns that they can correlate their performance on coding tests and technical interviews with their raw ability and potential rather than relying on formal qualifications as a proxy for skill.
 
A new and more dynamic leadership mindsets

Future MedTech leaders will not only need to have a deep knowledge of disruptive digital technologies and AI systems, but will need to have the mindset of an “inclusive networked architect” with an ability to create and develop learning organizations around diverse technologies with dispersed talent. Traditional hierarchical production mindsets, which have benefitted from business-as-usual for the past decade are unlikely to be as effective in an environment which is experiencing the impact of a significant and rapid shift in technological innovation. Sensors, big data analytics, AI, real-world evidence (RWE), robotic and cognitive automation are converging with MedTech and encouraging companies to pivot from being product developers to solution providers. This requires leaders with mindsets that reward value instead of volume and are agile enough to meet increasing customer expectations, whether those customers are payers, providers or patients.

Without leaders with informed, forward-thinking mindsets, enthused about new models of organizational structures, culture and rewards that provide greater autonomy to talented teams and individuals, MedTech companies could remain at a disadvantage in competing with other technology companies for similar talent and expertise. Future MedTech leaders must understand how work is being redefined and the implications of this for talented individuals and devolved networked teams. It seems reasonable to assume that future MedTech leaders will be generalists: executives with more than one specialism with an ability to breakdown silos and bridge knowledge gaps across organizations and develop new models of organizational structure, culture, and rewards.
 
Successes and failures of digital transformations

We have focused on digital transformation of traditional companies as a means for them to prosper in radically changing market conditions. Although there has been a number of successful corporate digital transformations there has also been a significant number of failures. Understanding why some succeed and some fail is important.
 
Successful digital transformations

One notable successful digital transformation is Honeywell, a Fortune 100 diversified technology and manufacturing company, which overcame threats from market changes and disruptive digital technologies by transforming its strategies and business models. In 2016, Honeywell’s Process Solutions Division, a pioneer in automated control systems and services for the  oil, gas, chemical and mining industries, set up a new digital transformation unit to assist its customers to harness advantages from the Internet of Things (IoT) by increasing their connectivity to an ever-growing number of devices, sensors and people in order to improve the safety, reliability and efficiency of their operations.

The Unit’s primary focus is on outcomes, such as reducing costs and enabling faster and smarter business decisions. Honeywell’s IoT platform called Sentience, is considered a toolkit to collect, store and process data from connected assets, offering services to analyse these data and generate insights from them to enable data-based, value-added services. Unlike similar platforms developed by Siemens and General Electric (GE), Honeywell does not sell their platform as an app, but markets data-based services predicated on its platform, which enable its customers to optimize the performance of their connected assets and improve overall production efficiency. Other corporations that have set up similar transformation units to harness the benefits of disruptive technologies include Hitachi, Hewlett-Packard, SAP and UPS.

Failed digital transformations

Perhaps the biggest digital transformational failure is General Electric (GE). In 2011, the then CEO Jeff Immelt became an advocate for the company’s digital transformation. GE created and developed a significant portfolio of digital capabilities including a new platform for the IoTs, which collected and processed data used to enhance sales processes and supplier relationships. Immelt suggested that GE had become a “digital industrial company”. The company’s new digital technology reported outcomes of a number of indices, which over time improved and attracted a significant amount of positive press. Notwithstanding, activist investors were not so enamoured, GE’s stock price languished, Immelt was replaced and the company’s digital ambitions came to a grinding halt. Other notable corporates, which tried and failed to harness the commercial benefits from disruptive technologies include Lego, Nike, Procter & Gamble and Burberry.  

Digitally transformed companies outperform those that resist change

Notwithstanding, research findings published in the January 2017 edition of the Harvard Business Review suggest that digitally transformed companies outperform those that lag behind. Findings were derived from 344 US public companies drawn from manufacturing, consumer packaging, financial services and retail industries with median revenues of some US$3.4bn. Conclusions suggest that digitally transformed companies reported better gross margins, enhanced earnings and increased net income compared to similar companies, which lagged behind in digital change. “Digital technology changes the way an organization can create value: digital value creation stems from new, network-centric ways your business connects with partners and customers offering new business combinations,” say the authors of the study. Critically, the mindset of leaders is significantly linked to successful digital transitions. According to the study’s authors, “Our research indicates that these leaders approach the digital opportunity with a different strategic mindset and execute on the opportunity with a different operating model.”

Reasons for failing to transform

According to a paper published in the March 2018 edition of the Harvard Business Review there are four reasons why digital transformations fail.
  • Leaders’ narrow understanding of “digital”, which is not just technology but a blend of talented people, organizational culture, appropriate machines and effective business processes
  • Poor economic conditions and depressed demand for product offerings
  • Bad timing. It is important that your market sector is prepared for the changes your company is proposing
  • Paying insufficient attention to legacy business. “The allure of digital can become all-consuming, causing executives to pay too much attention to the new and not enough to the old”. 
 
Takeaways
 
Business history has shown that large and established companies, which fail to respond to disruptive technologies in a timely and appropriate fashion can fail and disappear. Notable examples include America Online, Barnes & Noble, Borders, Compaq, HMV, Kodak, Netscape, Nokia, Pan Am, Polaroid, Radio Shack, Tower Records, Toys R Us and Xerox. MedTech leaders might be mindful of Charles Darwin’s hypothesis, which he describes in his book, On the Origin of Species published in 1859. Darwin suggests that “in the struggle for survival, the fittest win out at the expense of their rivals because they succeed in adapting themselves best to their environment”. Such a statement would not be out of place in a modern boardroom. It suggests that all industrial sectors need to develop to keep abreast of innovations and evolving trends. The main difference is that Darwin’s natural selection processes take millions of years, while significant changes that effect commercial businesses can take a matter of months.
view in full page
  • China will not challenge the economic supremacy of the US in the near to medium term
  • But with a GDP of US$14trn growing at 6.9% a year China is a substantial economy and a significant trading partner of the US
  • China is replacing imported high-tech products with domestic ones and incentivizing Chinese companies to dominate high value global industries
  • China’s large and increasing supply of appropriately qualified human capital gives it a competitive edge
  • Beijing’s US$8trn-30-year Belt and Road (B&R) strategy aims to make China the centre of a new world order in which knowledge-based Chinese companies dominate high-value global markets
  • China is challenged by substantial debt and significant credit it has extended to economically weak nations
  • Notwithstanding, Western companies seeking growth outside their current wealthy markets need to develop constructive trading relationships with China
  • Lack of understanding and cultural differences are barriers to productive West-East trading relations
 
Can Western companies engage with and benefit from China?
 
Previously we described how Beijing had offered Western companies a ‘poisoned challis’: either localize your value chain and help China achieve its goals to dominate key industries globally or be progressively squeezed out of markets. Washington responded by levying punitive tariffs on products manufactured in China and marketed in the US in an attempt to force Beijing to change. China hit back, cross fire ensued, more US tariffs were levied, markets became nervous and a ‘flight for liquidity’ seems a possibility. This is when equity players become nervous about uncertainties in markets and move their investments into more liquid securities in order to increase their ability to sell their positions at a moment’s notice. To some observers the current trade conflict between the world’s two largest trading nations must seem like Stanley Kramer’s 1952 epic ‘High Noon” movie. The difference being the 2018 showdown could affect the lives of billions and threaten the global economy. The fact that the world can be brought to such a position in such a short time is partly due to a profound lack of understanding and cultural differences between Washington and Beijing and vice versa. The differences manifest themselves as: (i) competition versus harmony, (ii) short-termism versus long-termism, (iii) tactics versus strategy and (iv) nationalism versus globalism. These differences pervade organizations, institutions and mindsets in the respective regions.
 
In this Commentary

This Commentary is divided it into 3 parts.
  • Part 1: China’s penetration of emerging markets discusses the implications of China’s stated aim to become a major global high-end, knowledge-based economy and describes how, for the past three decades, the nation has been preparing for this by systematically upgrading its human capital. From a perceived position of strength Beijing suggested to Western companies seeking or increasing their franchises in China that unless they are prepared to localize their value chains, not only will they be squeezed out of the China market, but they will also encounter challenges in other large emerging markets as China’s presence and influence in these markets increase. This is significant because the world’s emerging economies are the growth frontiers of many high-tech industries. 
  • Part 2: China’s economic rise and its strategic objectives briefly describes China’s phenomenal transformation from a centrally managed economy to the world’s second largest economic power and a significant commercial partner of the US. We provide glimpses of some aspects of China’s recent history in order to convey the scale of its industrial reforms and its well-resourced, central government-backed long-term strategies to establish China as a world leader in knowledge-based high-value industries. We describe China’s planned slowdown of its economy and how Beijing is systematically upgrading its human capital. Indicative of China’s increasing trading prowess are its new technology companies. We describe three, which are likely to have a significant global impact in the next 5 years. We conclude part 2 with a description of the Pearl River Delta, China’s high tech production hub, in order to provide further insights into China’s achievements, the nature and scale of its projects to upgrade its economy and the thinking that drives China’s economic transformation. 
  • Part 3: China’s ‘Belts and Road’ (B&R) initiative. B&R is a bold neo colonialistinitiative to build a 21st century ‘Silk Road’ of infrastructure and trade-links between China and Eurasia. This is expected to stimulate trade, economic growth and domestic employment in some of the least developed regions of the world, which have suffered from post-colonial decline and are neglected by the West. Beijing expects that the B&R project will position China at the centre of a newly formed global trading network. We review some of the concerns raised by the R&D initiative including China's increasing exposure as a principal creditor to economically weak nations. This, together with China's mounting debt, presents Western companies with a dilemma: China is too big to be ignored but its structural weaknesses could be damaging.   

 

Part 1
 
 China’s penetration of emerging markets
 
 
Made in China 2025 (MIC25) incentivizes Chinese enterprises to develop their competences and capacities in order to respond to the pivotal needs of global customers to reduce costs while maintaining value by providing affordable quality product offerings.  It also encourages Chinese companies to become ‘global champions’ and help China establish itself as a dominant international force in knowledge-based technologies of the future. As a result, Chinese companies are successfully taking share of key segments in emerging markets. So, Beijing’s industrial strategies not only increase the challenges for Western companies in China, but also provide potential barriers for them to penetrate and increase their franchises in other large emerging markets such India and Brazil, which are the future growth frontiers.
 
China’s investment in human capital

Beijing’s well-resourced strategies to transition China from a manufacturing-based economy to a high-end, innovation-driven, knowledge-based economy could not be achieved without a significant supply of relevant human capital. It is instructive that for the past three decades China has been systematically upgrading its human capital, while Western nations have not been doing so at a similar pace.
 
According to the World Economic ForumChina has committed massive resources to education and training. In 2016 China was building the equivalent of one university a week and graduated 4.7m citizens, while in the US 568,000 students graduated. In 2017, there were 2,914 colleges and universities in China with over 20m students. The US had 4,140 with over 17m students enrolled. Significantly, between 2002 and 2014 the number of students graduating in science and engineering in China quadrupled. In 2013, 40% of all Chinese graduates completed a degree in science, technology, engineering or mathematics (STEM), whilst in the US only 20% of its graduates did so. In addition to China producing more STEM graduates than either the US or Europe, which are vital for high-tech knowledge-based industries of the future, the gap between the top Chinese and US and European graduates is widening. Projections suggest that by 2030 the number of 25 to 34-year-old graduates in China will increase by a further 300%, compared with an expected rise of around 30% in the US and Europe. This represents a substantial shift in the world's population of graduates, which was once dominated by the US, and gives China a potential competitive edge in high-tech growth industries of the future.
 
Further, US students struggle to afford university fees. Many American colleges and universities are struggling financially and as a consequence actively recruiting foreign students. In recent years, the number of Chinese students admitted to US universities has increased significantly. In 2017 for instance, some 350,000 Chinese students were recruited. Most graduates return to China with quality degrees. European countries have put a brake on expanding their universities by either not making public investments in them or restricting universities to raise money themselves.
 
Shanghai students are world’s best in maths, reading and science

Supporting this competitive edge is China’s world-beating performance of its 15 and 16-year-olds. According to an internationally recognised test, Shanghai school children are the best in the world at mathematics, reading and science. Every three years 0.5m students aged 15 and 16 from 72 countries representing 80% of the global economy sit a 2-hour examination to assess their comparative abilities in these three subjects. The examination, called the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), is administered and published triennially by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). When the 2009 and 2012 PISA  scores were released they created a sensation, suggesting that students in Shanghai have significantly better mathematics, reading and science capabilities than comparable students in any other country.  Although these scores have been contested, and the most recent test scores suggest Shanghai students have slipped down the rankings, in the 2012 tests Shanghai students performed so well in mathematics that the report compared their scores to the equivalent of nearly three years of schooling above most countries.
 

Human capital strategies challenged by aging populations
Human capital strategies in China, the US and Western Europe are all challenged by aging populations. According to the United Nations, China’s population is ageing more rapidly than any country in recent history. America’s 65-and-over population is projected to nearly double over the next three decades, rising from 48m to 88m by 2050. The UK’s population also is getting older with 18% aged 65-and-over and 2.4% aged 85-and-over. In 2014, 20% of Western Europeans were 65 years or older and by 2030 25% will be that age demographic.
 
Taking share of high-value MedTech markets
 
Many Western MedTech companies are late-bloomers in emerging markets. This can partly be explained by the two decades of economic growth the industry experienced from developed markets and the continued buoyancy of the US stock market.  Thus, Western MedTech companies have felt little pressure to adjust their strategies and business models and venture into territories committed to “affordable (low priced) medical devices”. Beijing seems determined to take advantage of this and Chinese companies are increasing their share of large fast growing and underserved emerging markets by: (i) increasing their innovative go-to-market strategies and (ii) making sure they “localize” their product offerings. We briefly describe these two strategies.
 
Innovative go-to-market approaches

According to OEDC data, between 2000 and 2016 China doubled its R&D investment to 2% of GDP, which is more than the EU but less than America. In 2016, the US spent 2.7% of its GDP on R&D, which is more than any country. Individual Chinese domestic companies are also increasing their investments in R&D as part of their growth strategies. For instance, over the past decade, Mindray, China’s largest MedTech company has spent more than 10% of its annual revenues - currently US$1.7bn - on R&D. The company has a large R&D team of over 1,400 located in 2 centres: 1 in Mahwah, China and another in Seattle, USA. BGI, China’s largest manufacturer of next-generation gene-sequencing equipment, devotes more than 33% of its revenues to R&D, double that of its US competitor Illumina. In aggregate, however, Chinese companies are a long way behind their Western counterparts when it comes to R&D spending.
 

Supercomputers
High-tech companies require supercomputers to assist with their R&D and innovative strategies. These are powerful and sophisticated machines with enormous processing power, which can support medical and scientific R&D. According to an internationally recognised ranking, which has been conducted biannually by leading scientists since 1993, China leads the world with its installed-base of supercomputers. China has 206 and  America has 124. In 2000 China had none. The most recent rankings show that the US has regained the top performance position from China with an IBM-system-backed supercomputer now running at the US Department of Energy’s Oak Ridge National Laboratory. 
 

Increasing number of Chinese patents
Although the US maintains a lead in scientific breakthroughs and their industrial applications, innovation is increasing in China. The number of invention patent applications received by China in 2016 was 1.3m, which was more than the combined total from the US (605,571), Japan (318,381), South Korea (208,830), and the EU (159,358). Patents from these five countries accounted for 84% of the world total in 2016. 
 

Increasing share of high-tech markets
Emboldened by enhanced processing power, increased patents, greater R&D capacity and improved capabilities, Chinese MedTech companies are increasingly represented across a broad spectrum of high-end medical technologies and have made significant inroads into emerging markets. Some manufacture Class III product offerings such as orthopaedic implants and are beginning to compete in medium-level technology markets in Brazil, India, Japan and the UK. For instance, SHINVA markets its linear accelerators globally. Sinocare is #6 in the global market for blood glucose monitoring devices. In 2008 Mindray paid US$200m to acquire the patient monitoring business of US company Datascope, making it the third-largest player by sales in the global market for such devices. Also, Mindray has increased its share of the ultrasound imaging market to 10%, behind GE and Phillips. MicroPort broke onto the world stage in early 2014 when it acquired Wright Medical’s orthopaedic implant business for US$290m. In 2015 China overtook Germany to become Japan’s second largest supplier of MRI devices, behind the US, and Biosensors International is among the largest suppliers of drug-eluting stents in France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK.
 
Localized product offerings in India
 
Mindray, which positions itself as a world-class MedTech solutions company, has established a significant presence in India where it has built local operations, tailored its line of affordable high-quality patient monitoring, ultrasound and in vitro diagnostic devices to address India’s unmet needs, hired local engineers and operators and built a local marketing and sales team, which provides a 24-7 customer service. Mindray has understood that many of the factors, which drive China’s MedTech market growth are mirrored in India and other rapidly growing emerging markets that share a similarly high disease burden, aging demographics and a desire to reduce healthcare costs.
 
Mindray was one of China’s earliest MedTech companies to list in New York in 2006. However, the company felt its shares were undervalued and privatized in 2016 in a deal, which valued the company at US$3.3bn. A funding round shortly after its delisting valued Mindray at US$8.5bn. The company employs over 8,000 and its 2017 revenues were US$1.7bn.
 
India’s MedTech market
 
The attraction of India to MedTech companies is easy to understand. India’s MedTech market is the 5th largest in the world and could rival that of Japan and Germany in size by 2022 if it continues its 17% annual growth. Although India mainly has been an out-of-pocket healthcare market this is changing. In September 2018, the Indian government launched one of the world’s largest publicly funded health insurance schemes, which will provide some 0.5bn poor people with health cover of US$7,000 per year (a sizable sum in India) for free treatment of serious ailments. India’s medical device markets, like those of China’s, will benefit from this, but also from the country’s large and growing middle class with relatively high disposable incomes in an economy growing at around 7 to 7.5% annually.
 
In 2016 India’s middle class was estimated to be 267m - 83% of the total population of the US - and projected to increase to 547m by 2025. Further, India has a large and growing incidence of lifetime chronic diseases, which expands the need for medical devices. Between 2009 and 2016, China emerged as India’s 3rd largest supplier of medical devices (behind the US and Germany) and is currently India’s leading provider of CT scanners, representing 50% of the US$69m that India spent on imports of these high-tech devices during 2016. India’s orthopaedic devices market is estimated to be around US$375m and is projected to grow at about 20% each year for the next decade to reach US$2.5bn by 2030. In contrast the global orthopaedics industry is estimated to grow at 5% annually.

China is positioned to increase its share of MedTech markets in India and other emerging countries. This suggests that unless Western companies are prepared to transform their strategies and change their business models similar to what Medtronic and GE Healthcare have done, they will not only be squeezed out of the China market but shall encounter challenges to penetrate and increase their franchises in other large emerging MedTech markets. This is significant because the world’s emerging economies are the growth frontiers of the MedTech industry.



Part 2

China’s economic rise and strategic objectives: background

 
How long can China sustain its rise?”. We broach this question in the next two parts of this Commentary. Here in Part 2, we describe some relevant aspects of China’s recent commercial history, its success in producing high tech global companies and we also provide a glimpse of its urban communities for creating and developing companies of the future.

It was not until the early 1980s, after the death of Mao Zedong in 1976, that China started to dismantle its centrally planned economy and began implementing its free market reforms and opened its economy to foreign trade and investment. Shortly afterwards China: (i) became the world’s fastest growing market-based economy with real annual GDP growth averaging 9.5% through 2017, (ii) lifted 800m citizens out of poverty and (iii) overtook Japan to become the world's second largest economy. By 2010 China had become a significant commercial partner of the US and is now America’s largest merchandise trading partner, its biggest source of imports and America’s third largest export market. Also, China holds US$1.7trn of US Treasury securities, which help fund the federal debt and keep US interest rates low. It is worth noting that China has a long history dating back more than 2,000 years BC. In more recent times, Adam Smith the father of modern capitalism, described China in The Wealth of Nations (1776) as a country which is, “one of the most fertile, best cultivated, most industrious, most prosperous and most urbanized countries in the world”.

 
Avoiding a middle-income trap
 
Over the past decade China’s economy has matured and Beijing has managed a planned slowdown of its growth rate to what it calls the “new-normal”. In 2017 China’s GDP was 6.9% and is projected to fall to 5.6% by 2022. The orchestrated slowdown is less based on fixed investment and exports and more on private consumption of China’s large and growing middle class, enhanced services and innovation. A previous Commentary described Beijing’s Made in China 2025 (MIC25) initiative and other policies, which prioritised innovation and the systematic upgrading of its domestic industries whilst decreasing its reliance on foreign technology. This is essential for China to avoid a ‘middle income trap’, which happens when nations achieve a certain level of economic growth, but then begin to experience diminishing returns because they are unable to restructure their economies to embrace new sources of growth.
 
Baidu, Alibaba and Tencent: BAT

An example of China’s ability to upgrade its economy and avoid a middle-income trap is its new technology companies, which are positioned to have significant global roles in the next five years. We briefly describe three: Baidu, Alibaba and Tencent: collectively referred to as BAT. Baidu, is a Chinese language Internet search provider incorporated in 2000, which has grown to  become the world’s 8th largest internet company by revenue. It has a market cap of US$80bn, annual revenues US$13bn and has the world’s largest Internet user population of about 800m. Alibaba, was founded in 2000 as a business-to-business (B2B) portal connecting Chinese manufacturers to overseas buyers. Today, the company is a multinational conglomerate with a market cap in excess of US$500bn and annual revenues of US$13bn. It is the world’s largest e-commerce company in terms of gross merchandise volume (GMV). For the fiscal year ended March 31, 2017, Alibaba had a GMV of US$0.43trn and 454m annual active buyers on its marketplaces. Alibaba’s long-term vision is to become a global company providing solutions to real world problems and using e-commerce to help globalization by making trade more inclusive. The company expects GMV to reach US$1trn by 2020, and to serve 2bn consumers(one-third of the world’s total population)and to support the profitable operation of 10m businesses on its platforms by 2036. Alibaba is sometimes referred to as the "Amazon of China," but the company’s founder Jack Ma suggests there are differences. "Amazon is more like an empire: everything they control themselves. Our philosophy is be an ecosystem”, says Ma. Tencentfounded in 1998, has become a multinational investment holding corporation with a market cap of US$556bn, annual revenues of US$22bn and specializes in various internet-related services, entertainment, AI and technology.  
 
The Pearl River Delta
 
Tencent has its HQs in Shenzhen, a megacity in the Pearl River Delta, which is China’s hub for high tech production. We briefly describe the delta to further show the progress China has made in transforming its economy. In the early 1980s the Pearl River Delta was primarily an agricultural area and Shenzhen was an unassuming town of about 30,000 (now 13m). The delta witnessed the most rapid urban expansion in human history to become the world’s largest urban area in both size and population by 2015, with more inhabitants than Argentina, Australia or Canada. Today the Pearl River Delta has a population of 120m and a GDP of US$1.5trn - growing at 12% per year - which is greater than that of Indonesia and equal to 9.1% of China’s output.
 
Land, sea and air infrastructure serving the delta is state of the art. For example, the delta has six airports; three of which are international air hubs. In 2016, the passenger traffic of Baiyun Airport in Guangzhou (population 15m) surpassed 60m and the volume of freight it handled was over 2m tonnes. In the same year passenger traffic at Shenzhen (population 13m) airport was in excess of 42m and the volume of freight it handled was over 1m tonnes.  This compares favourably with JFK and Newark Liberty airports. In 2017 both airports set records with more than 59m and 43m passengers respectively
.

Part of the delta’s infrastructure is the new Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macau Bridge, which spans 34 miles (55klm), crosses the waters of the Pearl River and connects Hong Kong with Macao. It is the longest sea-crossing bridge ever built and has a section that runs for seven kilometres in a submarine tunnel that passes four artificial islands. Its construction cost US$16bn, which is part of a US$30bn plan announced in 2009 to develop an infrastructure network to connect the nine cities in the delta so that collectively they would become the largest contiguous urban region in the world, which was achieved in 2015.  One of the infrastructure goals is to reduce travel time between the nine cities and Hong Kong and Macao to one hour from any which way.
 
The Pearl River Delta is the most southern of three major Chinese coastal growth areas. In the middle is the Yangtze River Delta region, which includes Shanghai with a population of 130m and a GDP of US$2trn. To the north is the Beijing-Tianjin-Bohai corridor, covering 10 cities and has a population of 100m and a GDP of US$1.3trn. These three urban clusters account for 21% of China’s population and about 40% of its GDP.



Part 3

 China’s Belt and Road initiative

 
It is not only important to understand the changes in China within the context of its recent history, MIC25 and Beijing’s restructuring of its healthcare sector, but also against the backdrop of China’s ambitious Belt and Road” (B&R) initiative. Unveiled by President Xi Jinping in September 2013, it has become the centre of Beijing’s ambitions for a new world order predicated upon a modern-day Silk Road connecting China by land and sea to Southeast Asia, Central Asia, the Middle East, Europe and Africa. It is a bold model of economic development, which Xi has called, “the project of the century”. The initiative is supported by the new Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) and the Silk Road Fund. Some estimates suggest that Beijing has already invested US$900bn in the project. Overall, it is expected to cost US$8trn and take three decades to complete. At its core are 6 economic corridors, which connect 65 countries, about 65% of the world’s population, involve some 40% of global trade and 33% of global GDP.
 
Belt and Road’s 6 economic corridors
  1. The Eurasia-Land-Bridge economic corridor is developing rail transportation between China and Europe through Kazakhstan, Russia and Belarus
  2. The China-Mongolia-Russia economic corridor aims to develop trade between China and Mongolia by modernizing transport, telecommunication and energy networks to make Mongolia a hub between China and Russia
  3. The China-Central Asia-West Asia economic corridor connects the Chinese province of Xinjiang to the Mediterranean Sea, through Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Iran and Turkey 
  4. The China-Indochina-Peninsula economic corridor aims to strengthen cooperation among states of the Greater Mekong sub-region and support trade between China and the 10 nations of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) that are already bound by a free trade agreement since 2010 to facilitate economic growth
  5. The China-Pakistan economic corridor connects Kashgar in the Chinese province of Xinjiang to the port of Gwadar in Pakistan and includes the construction of railways, highways, optical fibre networks, and the creation of an international airport in Gwadar as well as the establishment of special economic zones
  6. The Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar economic corridor links Kunming to Kolkata (Calcutta) via Mandalay and Dhaka to strengthen connections between China and various economic centres of the Gulf of Bengal in order to increase interregional trade by reducing non-tariff barriers.
China’s neo-colonial strategy
 
China’s B&R initiative is based upon an interpretation of colonialism, which is significantly different to Western  interpretations. While Western nations struggle with a sense of guilt associated with their past colonial rule and feel responsible for the abject economic failure, widespread poverty and erosion of governance in post-colonial independent states, Beijing believes that there are lessons to be learned from colonialism, which are relevant today and necessary prerequisites to stimulate trade, economic growth and domestic employment. Beijing’s B&R initiative is best understood as a neo colonial strategy to strengthen China’s slowing economy, enhance its industrial capabilities and improve its geopolitical standing by driving economic growth in some of the least developed regions of the world, which are neglected by the West.
 
The lessons of Singapore
 
China’s neo-colonialist policies are influenced by Singapore, an island city-state located in Southeast Asia off southern Malaysia. The country gained independence from Malaysia in 1965 and has become a global financial centre with a multicultural population and a multi-party parliamentary representative democracy with a President as head of state and a Prime Minister as the head of government. Although China is 14,000-times bigger than Singapore, has 1bn more citizens and its GDP is US$14trn compared to Singapore’s US$300bn; China views Singapore as an object lesson of political stability and prosperity predicated upon aspects of its colonial legacy, which Beijing believes can be replicated in under-developed regions of the world. These include basic infrastructure, improved administration, widened employment opportunities, female rights, expanded education, improved public healthcare, taxation, access to capital, independent judiciary, and national identity. Such factors China views as benefits of colonialism and necessary prerequisites for trade, economic growth and prosperity. Singapore has a colonial history, but today is a rich country with a GDP per capita of US$55,235, (higher than that of the US: US$53,128) and where Asian culture is intact and Western knowhow is harnessed for economic growth and prosperity for its citizens and is where China would like to be in the future.
 
The AIIB comparable to other development banks
 
In 2013, when Xi Jinping first proposed creating the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), Washington was against it and campaigned rigorously to persuade potential donor countries not to participate. The US expressed concerns that the AIIB would undermine the World Bank, and the Asian Development Bank (ADB), which operate in Asia and lend to China. Washington also believed that the AIIB would unfairly benefit Chinese companies and argued that China would not adhere to international banking standards of transparency and accountability. Today, the AIIB is up and running as a medium-sized regional development bank with capital of US$100bn and lending at around US$4bn. It is broadly comparable with other development banks and Washington’s concerns appear unfounded.
 
Systematically migrating low-tech manufacturing to low-cost locations
 
An important role of the AIIB is to assist the B&R initiative to open up and create new markets for Chinese goods and services, to stimulate exports and to provide low-wage locations, to which China can migrate its light manufacturing industries. Beijing no longer sees its country’s economy as competitive on the basis of low wages. China’s labour costs are rising faster than gains in productivity and cost estimates of outsourcing production to China will soon be equal to the cost of manufacturing in the US and Western Europe. China is adjusting to rising real wages in its domestic markets by systematically migrating its low-tech industries to less-common low-wage production operations in new locations in Africa such as Ethiopia.

A rationale for this strategy is provided in a 2017 paper from the Center for Global Development, which suggests that “Ethiopia could become the new China” as, “the cost of Ethiopian industrial labour is about 25% that of China today”. This suggests that migrating Chinese low-tech manufacturers might leap-frog middle and lower-middle income developing countries in favour of the poorest countries such as Ethiopia, which is included in China’s B&R initiative. African countries view B&R as a platform to promote global cooperation based on win-win strategies. Speaking at a conference in June 2018 in Addis Ababa, Tan Jian, the Chinese ambassador to Ethiopia said, "We are working closely with Ethiopia in advancing the Belt and Road Initiative. Ethiopia is a very important partner in this regard. We have been doing a lot of projects here in Ethiopia: infrastructure, policy dialogue, trade, financing and people-to-people exchanges.” At the same conference Afework Kassu, Ethiopia's Minister of Foreign Affairs, said, “the Belt and Road initiative is an advantage for African countries for infrastructure development and for economic growth”.
 
Concerns about China’s neo colonialism and debt management
 
Despite these good words, China's B&R initiative is not free of criticism mostly from Western nations and international institutions, which suggest Beijing’s motivation is a retrograde strategy that employs globalization to service its domestic economy, and many of the concerns are about China’s potential economic predominance.
 
A March 2018 Center for Global Development (CGD) paper suggests that because China’s record of international debt financing is not good, and the B&R initiative follows China’s past practices for infrastructure financing, which entail lending to sovereign borrowers, then the initiative runs the risk of creating debt distress in some borrower nations. The paper identifies 8 of the 68 B&R borrower countries as “particularly at risk of debt distress”. Pakistan is the largest country at high risk with the development of its Gwadar deep-sea port, which is part of the B&R China-Pakistan Economic Corridor. China is financing about 80% of this endeavour, which is estimated to cost US$62bn.  Other countries mentioned in the CGD paper to be at high-risk of debt distress from the R&D initiative include Djibouti, the Maldives, Laos, Mongolia, Montenegro, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan. The concern is that these at-risk nations could be left with significant debt ‘overhangs’, which could impede their ability to make essential future public investments and thereby challenge their economic growth more generally. Recently, public concerns from within China have been raised over the costs of the initiative. There is also concern that debt problems will create “an unfavourable degree of dependency” on China as a creditor. Several US Senators have expressed similar concerns and suggest that potential defaults could have a deleterious economic impact more generally. In addition to B&R loans, which have been questioned, it has been rumoured that Beijing has lent Venezuela US$60bn and also extended significant credit to Argentina. Venezuela is in economic meltdown and Argentina has applied to the IMF for a bailout
 
China’s mounting debt
 
China’s increasing exposure as a significant creditor to economically weak developing nations is compounded by its mounting debt and triggers concerns about China’s future stability. A popular Washington view, endorsed by President Trump’s chief economic adviser Larry Kudlow, is that China’s mounting debt and slowing growth mean that its “economy is going south”, and the recent imposition of tariffs on Chinese exports to the US will accelerate the nation’s demise. However, there is a view that Washington’s imposition of punitive tariffs is an over-reaction because the Chinese economy is nowhere as strong as that of the US economy. Notwithstanding, China is an important trading partner for the US and American companies should find a way to engage with China.
 
Since the 2008 financial crisis, China’s debt has been a concern in Beijing because it was a driver of the country’s economic growth. In 2016, Vice-Premier Liu He, President Xi’s top economic adviser, conscious of the potential national security risks of China’s mounting debt, took steps to de-risk the country’s financial sector. More recently, Liu has accelerated infrastructure investment and taken steps to avoid a banking crisis by ensuring that the renminbi does not fall too rapidly against the US dollar. Over the past 5 months the renminbi has weakened about 10% against the US$ and could weaken further if the currency becomes politicized. Despite Liu’s efforts to reign-in and control China’s debt, which some estimates put at about  260% of GDP, it is not altogether clear how successful these efforts will be especially if China’s debt challenges are considered in conjunction with its loose credit conditions.
 
Changing world economic order

Putting aside these concerns, it is instructive to note that a 2017 study by Price Waterhouse Coopers (PwC), suggests, ceteris paribus, that within the next decade China’s economy will be bigger than America’s and within the next three decades India’s economy will overtake that of the US. The study argues that the US will rank 3rd in the world and in 4th place could be Indonesia. The study suggests that China will have an economy of US$59trn, while India’s will be around US$44trn and America’s will total $34trn. Significantly, Japan (US$6.7trn), Germany (US$6.1trn), the UK ($5.3trn) and France (US$4.7trn), key markets for Western MedTech companies, are expected to fall respectively to 8th, 9th, 10th and 12th in the list. They are expected to be replaced by Indonesia (US$10.5trn), Brazil (US$7.5trn), Russia (US$7.1trn), and Mexico (US$6.8trn), which climb to 4th, 5th 6th and 7th positions respectively. This signals some significant economic shifts likely to take place over the next two to three decades and underlines the importance of emerging economies in the medium-term strategic plans of Western companies.
 
Takeaways
 
The world is on the cusp of some significant  economic changes and the two nations most likely to affect those changes are the US and China. Beijing’s policies and global aspirations are helping China to step into a leadership void created by Washington’s current rejection of multilateralism. However, it is still not altogether clear whether China will be able to sustain this new position, and the uncertainty this causes presents a significant strategic dilemma for Western companies seeking growth outside their current markets in the developed world. China is too big to be ignored by Western companies, but China’s conditions for engagement are onerous and its long-term stability remains in doubt.
view in full page