Tag

Tagged: financialization

Sponsored
2 months, 2 weeks ago

The MedTech Empire Science Will Rebuild

HealthPad
Directory:
Medical Technology
Tags:
Africa
AI
commentary
finance
financialization
India
MedTech
Saudi Arabia
  • From Science to Finance - and Back: MedTech’s journey from invention to consolidation, and the limits of a finance-first model
  • The Seismic Shift: AI, regenerative medicine, new materials, and emerging-market demand are redefining the field
  • Leadership at a Crossroads: Balance sheets are not enough - scientific fluency is now strategic
  • The “Bilingual” Strategist: The next-generation leader must be fluent in both frontier science and capital discipline
  • Key Shifts for a New Era: A practical framework to reset governance and culture for 21st-century innovation

The MedTech Empire Science Will Rebuild

In the 1970s and 80s, MedTech was propelled by a spirit of scientific audacity. Scientists, engineers, and clinicians collaborated to turn improbable ideas into transformative devices - from the first implantable defibrillators to the dawn of surgical robotics. Breakthroughs did not emerge from corporate strategy decks, but from hospital basements, university research labs, and, in some cases, improvised garage workshops. The sector’s DNA was shaped by curiosity, technical mastery, and an unflinching focus on solving clinical problems.

By the late 1990s, a different force assumed command: finance. Private equity firms and public markets brought professional management, access to capital, and a focus on operational efficiency. Leveraged roll-up strategies consolidated hundreds of smaller innovators into multinational powerhouses. Standardised compliance frameworks improved regulatory resilience. Streamlined supply chains reduced cost and increased speed. Harmonised systems allowed these new giants to operate at a scale that was previously unthinkable.

The results were tangible: global reach, higher margins, and more predictable performance. MedTech became one of the most profitable sectors in healthcare - admired by investors and emulated by adjacent industries.
 
In this Commentary

This Commentary charts the industry's journey from its science-driven origins through the finance-dominated era and argues that the next wave of leadership must be “bilingual” - fluent in both frontier science and capital discipline. It explores the movement back to science, the market dynamics and technological forces shaping healthcare, and five key shifts needed to ensure medical technology leads - rather than follows - the future of innovation.
 
The Limits of the Finance Era

The strengths that defined the financial era in MedTech are now revealing themselves as constraints. For decades, a model optimised for scaling proven devices, consolidating markets, and reliably delivering returns to investors brought order and professionalism to what had once been a fragmented industry. Yet, the same architecture that enabled discipline and predictability has, in many instances, dulled the sector’s adaptive edge. A system designed to favour efficiency, incremental improvement, and risk management struggles when confronted with scientific and technological discontinuities.

This is not just a question of pace but of orientation. The financial era prioritised business models that could be forecast, replicated, and leveraged across geographies. Today, however, medicine and healthcare are being reshaped by forces that resist such linear replication: the convergence of digital tools with biology, the rise of personalised and regenerative therapies, the blurring of boundaries between devices, diagnostics, and drugs, and the entry of new players from technology and data science. These shifts demand exploration, experimentation, and tolerance for uncertainty - the capacities a finance-driven paradigm has deprioritised.

The playbook that worked for three decades - built on consolidation, cost control, and incrementalism - now threatens to become a liability. Efficiency can calcify into rigidity; scale can suppress originality; risk aversion can translate into missed opportunities. Where science is once again becoming the primary engine of change, the industry’s reliance on financial engineering is proving insufficient, if not counterproductive. The MedTech sector now finds itself in a paradox: the strategies that once secured its dominance may impede its ability to navigate an era where breakthroughs are less about balance sheets and more about science, technology, and vision.
Africa is the world’s next healthcare frontier - young, bold, unstoppable.
Listen to the new episode of HealthPadTalks, Africa’s Health Opportunity, to discover why healthcare is the cornerstone of the continent’s prosperity.
The Shift Back to Science

The transformation now underway in MedTech is not incremental - it is seismic. The industry is being pulled back to its scientific roots, yet the scale, speed, and context of this shift are unprecedented. Changes that once took decades are now happening in years - or even months - as breakthroughs in biology, computation, and engineering fuel one another in a self-reinforcing cycle. Governance frameworks, regulatory pathways, and commercial models struggle to keep up with the pace of change.

The definition of “medical technology” is being redrawn. Once bounded by devices and diagnostics, the field is expanding into dynamic systems that fuse digital intelligence with biological function. Artificial intelligence and machine learning are no longer add-ons at the margins - they are embedded as decision-making engines in diagnostics, surgical robotics, and even semi-autonomous therapeutic interventions. Gene and cell therapies are not only redefining treatment modalities but are forcing the invention of new classes of delivery platforms and monitoring tools.

Meanwhile, material science innovations are shifting implants and prosthetics from inert supports to living interfaces - adaptive, regenerative, and in some cases self-healing. Synthetic biology is producing programmable therapeutics and biologically integrated sensors that blur the line between drug, device, and software. Each of these technologies alone would have redefined the industry; together, converging at speed, they are dismantling the legacy categories that structured healthcare technology for half a century.

The field of medical innovation is no longer strongly associated with just products - it is becoming an industry of platforms, ecosystems, and continuous scientific reinvention. The ground is moving faster than the structures built to govern it.
 
The Changing Market Landscape

The market context is entering a phase of disruption that is as much about geography and demography as it is about technology. Emerging economies such as India, Saudi Arabia, and a growing number of African nations are no longer peripheral markets - they are increasingly the laboratories of innovation. These regions are not just expanding demand; they are redefining product requirements, emphasising affordability, portability, and digital integration as foundational rather than optional.

Just as Japan, in the aftermath of World War II, leapfrogged legacy manufacturing constraints to build globally dominant automotive and electronics industries, today’s emerging economies are poised to bypass outdated healthcare delivery models. Their advantage lies in not being encumbered by entrenched infrastructures that slow transformation in mature markets. India’s push toward digital health records and telemedicine, Saudi Arabia’s strategic investments in biotech and AI, and Africa’s rapid adoption of mobile-first health platforms all reflect a trajectory that could set new global standards.
This leapfrogging dynamic positions these regions to define what the “next generation” of healthcare delivery looks like - blending value-based care with scalable, technology-enabled solutions. Value-based models are reshaping incentives, rewarding outcomes over throughput and pushing MedTech companies to design around patient journeys rather than isolated interventions. In emerging economies, however, the alignment between patient-centred care and systemic efficiency is stronger: what is affordable and portable for resource-limited settings also happens to be more sustainable and scalable globally.

You might also like:

The MedTech Empire Wall Street Built
Adding further pressure and opportunity, the patient voice - amplified through digital networks and advocacy platforms - is now a determinant of adoption and reputation, not an afterthought. In this sense, healthcare is converging with broader consumer industries, where trust, transparency, and user experience dictate success. The next global leaders in healthcare may not emerge from traditional Western strongholds, but from those economies agile enough to leap ahead, leveraging digital-first infrastructures to reimagine care delivery at scale.
 
The Challenge for Legacy Leadership

This is an environment that rewards agility, interdisciplinarity, and vision. Yet it exposes the limits of a leadership model optimised for financial engineering. The next era of MedTech will not be won by the largest balance sheet, but by those who can harness science, technology, and patient insight with speed, fluency, and conviction.

For all the technological ferment at the sector’s edges, the centre of gravity in many boardrooms remains anchored in the finance era. The average age of C-suites is ~56 - leaders who are digital immigrants, shaped less by data and code than by balance sheets and capital markets. Their formative experience lies in M&A integration, operational cost discipline, and the choreography of quarterly expectations. These executives are skilled at optimising margins and executing acquisitions but often approach science and technology as assets to be financed rather than ecosystems to be inhabited. Yet healthcare itself is increasingly data-centric and digitally mediated, a trajectory that will only accelerate over the next decade - widening the gap between the capabilities at the industry’s core and the demands of its scientific frontier.

Financial orientation made sense in the years when growth was driven by consolidation and efficiency. But in a world where competitive advantage increasingly comes from anticipating scientific inflection points, it has become a structural vulnerability. The habits of financial leadership - rigorous capital allocation, risk minimisation, and preference for predictable returns - can inadvertently dilute the qualities that matter most: speed, curiosity, and tolerance for ambiguity.

The consequences are already visible. M&A sprees have left some companies saddled with high debt and complex remediation obligations, diverting capital and attention away from breakthrough innovation. Product portfolios skew toward incremental upgrades that can be forecast and monetised quickly, rather than R&D that might redefine a market. And while financial engineering can optimise a mature product line, it rarely creates the kind of disruptive leap that rewrites clinical practice.
  
Finance’s Lasting Value - But Changing Role

This is not about vilifying finance. The capital discipline and operational rigour it instilled remain essential to MedTech’s resilience. But the leadership archetype that powered the last three decades is not the one that will secure the future. A generation of executives fluent in the language of balance sheets yet unfamiliar with the lexicon of frontier science now face a world where mastery of both is essential. Without it, incumbents risk surrendering the future to smaller, science-led challengers - organisations able to perceive and pursue opportunities their financially minded rivals cannot.
 
The Bilingual Strategist: A New Leadership Archetype

If the finance era of MedTech was defined by leaders who mastered capital discipline, the next era will belong to those who can stand with one foot in the lab and the other in the marketplace. Leaders of the future will not be narrow specialists but bilingual strategists - fluent in the languages of science and capital, technology and regulation, patient need and shareholder value.

They will need to be scientifically fluent, able to sit in a room with geneticists, AI engineers, or materials scientists and engage meaningfully - not as distant sponsors, but as collaborators who understand the nuances and possibilities. They will be technologically engaged, tracking advances in machine learning, regenerative medicine, and bioelectronics not through second-hand briefings, but through direct dialogue with innovators and early adopters.

They will be ecosystem builders, recognising that the next big breakthroughs are unlikely to emerge from a single corporate R&D silo. Instead, they cultivate networks of start-ups, academic labs, and clinical innovators, investing “soft capital” - manufacturing expertise, regulatory guidance, access to distribution - alongside financial investment. They will be globally attuned, as comfortable discussing patient pathways in Riyadh or Mumbai as in Minneapolis or Munich, and alive to the cultural and economic nuances shaping adoption in emerging markets.

Crucially, they will understand soft power - the ability to earn trust and shape ecosystems through influence, relationships, and credibility. They move fluently among clinicians, regulators, and patient advocacy groups, recognising that success depends less on the performance of any single device and more on the trust surrounding the intelligent systems and data-driven platforms that support patients across their therapeutic journeys.

This archetype blends the curiosity of the scientist with the pragmatism of the operator, the vision of the innovator with the discipline of the investor. In an environment where the pace of change is accelerating and the boundaries of the industry are dissolving, these leaders will not just keep pace with science - they will help set its direction.
 
Transforming Leadership Culture: Five Deliberate Shifts

Transforming MedTech’s leadership culture is not about abandoning the discipline that has sustained the sector for decades. The financial rigour, operational efficiency, and consolidation strategies that built enduring enterprises remain essential. What is required now is a widening of the lens: ensuring capital works in service of scientific opportunity, patient value, and global healthcare dynamics - not the other way around.

The leaders who stewarded medical technology through its era of integration and scale are vital to its next chapter. But the sector’s centre of gravity is shifting. Innovation cycles are compressing, patient voices are growing louder, and science is intersecting with digital technology in ways that outpace financial logic. This is an evolution, not a coup - a deliberate broadening of the leadership portfolio through five strategic shifts:

1. Reframe Capital’s Role
Capital allocation will remain the industry’s backbone. But in the next era, finance must be reframed as a catalyst for science, not just its gatekeeper. That means board-level discussions weighing R&D roadmaps with the same analytical intensity as quarterly guidance and treating scientific optionality as a central part of investor communications. Leaders who can bridge financial and scientific worlds will anchor this shift.

2. Diversify Around the Decision Table
Historically, boards have been dominated by voices skilled in cost discipline, M&A, and market access. To thrive in the future, leadership tables must be rounded out with perspectives from clinical practice, patient advocacy, data science, and emerging health systems. Such additions do more than “broaden input” - they reshape the questions leadership asks and, therefore, the answers capital pursues.

3. Hybrid Innovation Models
Acquisition remains an indispensable tool. But when used alone, it cannot deliver the agility demanded by today’s innovation frontiers. Leaders must embrace hybrid models: structured partnerships with start-ups, academic labs, and hospital innovators. Financial resources should be paired with non-financial assets - regulatory expertise, global manufacturing networks, real-world data access - that create a multiplier effect. This is how incumbents maintain scale advantages while plugging into faster-moving discovery ecosystems.

4. Align Incentives with Long-Term Value
The industry’s strongest performers were built on predictable earnings growth. That remains essential, but it is no longer enough. Incentives at the top must now reward progress toward scientific breakthroughs, ecosystem scale, and patient impact. This realignment raises the bar: shifting ambition from extracting short-term multiples to creating durable value anchored in science and trust.

5. Global and Patient-Centric Intelligence
Emerging markets and patient engagement are no longer “adjacent skills” - they are determinants of competitive relevance. Tomorrow’s leaders will need fluency in how care is delivered, paid for, and demanded outside of legacy Western markets, as well as the agility to engage patients not as end-users but as partners in design, testing, and advocacy. Building these capabilities into leadership pipelines is a priority.

This is not a repudiation of MedTech’s leadership heritage. It is its extension. By layering scientific fluency, patient proximity, and global agility onto the industry’s proven financial and operational discipline, the field can define the next era of leadership - and sustain its position at the intersection of capital, science, and care.
 
Toward a Dual-Fluency Model of Governance

In practical terms, this means evolving governance into a dual-fluency model: financial acumen remains necessary, but it is matched by the capacity to interrogate a breakthrough technology, to understand the regulatory journey from concept to clinic, and to anticipate the market shifts it might trigger.

Such a shift does not threaten the incumbents who built today’s industry giants - it enhances their legacy. By embedding scientific and technological fluency at the highest levels, the sector can retain the scale, efficiency, and discipline finance delivered, while regaining the agility, curiosity, and daring that defined its birth. The reward is not only resilience in the face of disruption, but the opportunity to lead the next wave of medical innovation on the global stage.
 
Takeaways

The MedTech industry owes much to the era of financial leadership. Capital brought order to a fragmented sector, created global reach, and built the infrastructure that still underpins much of the industry’s strength. But every architecture is designed for the problems of its time - and the challenges now facing health innovation are no longer those of scale, compliance, or operational efficiency. They are challenges of scientific opportunity, technological acceleration, and shifting global health demands.

The next chapter will not be authored by leaders who simply manage existing assets. It will be shaped by those who can anticipate what lies ahead - who can read the signals from AI labs, genomic research centres, and emerging-market models of care, and convert them into products, services, and platforms that improve patient lives. This calls for leaders as fluent in the dynamics of innovation as they are in the mechanics of capital.

The shift does not demand that we discard the strengths of the finance era. On the contrary, the discipline, global networks, and operational mastery it produced will be essential assets in the science-led age now taking shape. But if MedTech does not rebalance its leadership to place science and technology on equal footing with financial imperatives, it risks being overtaken by more agile, more scientifically attuned challengers.
view in full page
3 months ago

The MedTech Empire Wall Street Built

HealthPad
Directory:
Medical Technology
Tags:
AI
commentary
financialization
MedTech
  • MedTech’s focus has shifted from patients to profits, creating tension for leaders
  • Old governance models shaped by past crises need updating for patient-first accountability
  • Industry mergers often reduce innovation, access, and frontline flexibility
  • Investment trends now drive how leaders define success and value
  • Healthcare is being reshaped, requiring leaders to balance profit, purpose, and trust


The MedTech Empire Wall Street Built


In 1975, when New York City nearly collapsed into bankruptcy, the crisis was widely seen as a failure of municipal governance. Under mayor Abraham Beame, the city had run out of money to pay for normal operating expenses, was unable to borrow more, and faced the prospect of defaulting on its obligations and declaring bankruptcy. A cautionary tale of overspending and fiscal mismanagement. But that moment marked something deeper and more enduring: a quiet revolution in power. As elected officials lost control, a new regime emerged. Financiers - bondholders, bankers, and fiscal monitors - stepped in, not just to rescue the city, but to impose a new logic of governance.

This was not just a bailout. It was a paradigm shift.

What unfolded in New York marked the genesis of a broader transformation: the entrenchment of financial discipline as a surrogate for democratic accountability. The city became a prototype for a governance model that privileged austerity over investment, efficiency over equity, and the primacy of financial metrics over public mission. Though rooted in a specific municipal crisis, this framework soon escaped the confines of city budgets. It spread first to other fiscally distressed governments - such as Cleveland and Philadelphia in the US and later crisis-hit municipalities abroad - before extending its reach into sectors once presumed insulated from financialisation, including public universities, healthcare systems, and cultural institutions.

One of the least examined, yet most consequential frontiers of this shift has been the MedTech industry.

At first glance, the connection seems tenuous. What does a municipal bond crisis have to do with catheters, diagnostics, or surgical robotics? Yet the logic that reshaped New York - centralised control, cost-cutting, consolidation, and the pursuit of scale - resurfaced, almost unchanged, in the private equity-driven transformation of MedTech beginning in the late 1990s. By then, the financial institutions and strategies forged during and after New York’s crisis had not only matured but become dominant, embedding themselves in the DNA of corporate restructuring.

Private equity firms deployed roll-up strategies: acquiring founder-led companies, standardising operations, and unlocking scale efficiencies. They brought professionalism and capital - but also imported a governance model rooted in financial return, where EBITDA trumped clinical value. Innovation became a function of exit multiples; patient outcomes became secondary to shareholder outcomes.

Over subsequent decades, this financialisation reshaped MedTech’s priorities so profoundly that today the industry often struggles to adapt to radical shifts: the accelerating rise of AI, volatile market conditions, the push toward value-based care, the growing influence of patient voices, the migration of care beyond hospitals, and the pivot from discrete devices to service platforms designed to manage entire patient journeys. What once promised discipline and efficiency has, in many respects, left the industry less agile when agility is most needed.

In this light, MedTech is not an anomaly - it is an heir. What began as an emergency intervention in New York metastasised into a blueprint for managing organisations and systems through capital markets. Wall Street did not just rescue a city; it rewrote the rules of who leads, who benefits, and how we define value in essential services. Today, the MedTech industry reflects that lineage: technologically advanced, investment-driven, and structured around financial imperatives rather than patient needs.

In this Commentary

This Commentary explores how financial logic reshaped the MedTech industry - from boardroom strategies to innovation pipelines - often prioritising efficiency and returns over care and clinical purpose. Tracing this shift to broader governance trends dating back to the 1970s, it calls for a reimagining of healthcare leadership that aligns capital with long-term value, public interest, and patient outcomes.

Finance as Operator, Not Just Capital

By the early 2000s, finance had transcended its traditional role as a provider of capital. Steeped in lessons from the 1975 New York fiscal crisis - when financiers supplanted elected officials to steer the city away from bankruptcy - finance houses and their personnel embraced a new sense of authority. What had once been an emergency intervention hardened into a governing philosophy: that markets, not politics, could impose discipline and deliver efficiency. Armed with this conviction, finance firms stepped off the sidelines and became operators - hands-on architects of strategy, structure, and scale. They fixed their gaze on fragmented, under-optimised sectors - medical devices - perceiving in them fertile ground for consolidation, control and ROI.

MedTech proved a lucrative target. Leveraged buyouts offered the machinery for rapid expansion, with private equity deploying capital to roll-up smaller players. Platform strategies (business models that facilitate interactions between two or more interdependent groups, typically consumers and producers) created vertically integrated giants with defensible moats, shielding them from competition and regulation. Behind the scenes, EBITDA engineering became an art form - recasting earnings, streamlining operations, and packaging firms for profitable exits.

Yet this transformation was not the natural evolution of a sector. It was the product of a broader ideological and financial shift - a governance model forged during a crisis. Just as Wall Street once demanded austerity and social service cuts in 1970s New York, the financial class of 2,000 brought a similar ethos to healthcare: prioritising investor returns over public good, capital efficiency over clinical efficacy.

What emerged was not a leaner, more “efficient” MedTech industry, but one increasingly governed by financial imperatives rather than medical needs. Finance did not just bankroll the future of healthcare - it remade it in its own image. The returns are undeniable. So are the costs. When medicine is run like a portfolio, the unsettling question is no longer just who profits - it is who, ultimately, is the patient?
HealthPadTalks is a podcast exploring the trends redefining healthcare’s future. Building on HealthPad’s Commentaries, we don’t just deliver answers — we question them. Through bold ideas, diverse voices, and meaningful debate, we aim to improve outcomes, cut costs, and expand access for all. Make sure to follow us! 

The Deeper Connection

Let us stress, the New York City’s fiscal crisis of 1975 was more than a budgetary emergency - it was the situation in which a new governing ideology was forged: financial discipline became a surrogate for democratic decision-making. What began as an emergency measure hardened into doctrine. Expertise in balance sheets supplanted public deliberation; market logic replaced civic negotiation.

As public institutions retreated from long-term planning and social investment, financial actors stepped in - not with visions of infrastructure renewal or state-led innovation, but with the tools of finance: leveraged buyouts, asset stripping, roll-ups, and consolidation. They did not just inject capital into existing systems - they reimagined and restructured them around the priorities of yield, efficiency, and exit strategy.

Today, MedTech stands as an embodiment of this transformation. Its consolidation is not just an economic event; it is an ideological statement. The sector has come to reflect a deep-seated belief that fragmentation equals inefficiency, and that capital - not clinicians, patients, payers, communities, or public planners - is best equipped to impose order on complexity.

This shift is not without its benefits. The scale achieved through roll-ups has facilitated more robust compliance frameworks, improved supply chain resilience, and access to capital for innovation. However, the underlying logic is shaped by financial imperatives - redefining not just how care is delivered, and resources are allocated, but also how innovation unfolds. For most MedTech companies - excluding a handful of market leaders that have scaled rapidly - this has meant a pivot toward incremental, low-risk R&D rather than bold, transformative breakthroughs. Financial optimisation, rather than clinical ambition, now dictates the tempo and strategic direction of MedTech innovation.

What emerged from a moment of civic vulnerability now operates as a default operating system - where the metrics of shareholder value outweigh those of social need, and where the language of finance speaks louder than the voices of patients or practitioners.

MedTech’s Quiet Revolution

Beneath the surface of healthcare, a quiet revolution has transformed the MedTech landscape - not through the visible drama of breakthrough inventions, but through the force of financial engineering and operational realignment. This shift has been methodical, far-reaching, and largely administrative in nature.

Standardised billing and compliance systems, once fragmented across firms and geographies, were unified to align with complex regulatory frameworks - streamlining audits and easing cross-border expansion. Supply chains, once regionally bespoke and redundantly managed, were consolidated to unlock efficiencies of scale, improve just-in-time delivery, and reduce inventory costs. Risk management evolved from episodic oversight to continuous, algorithmic forecasting - embedding financial prudence within operational workflows.

But perhaps the most significant shift was structural: hundreds of small and mid-sized firms - once vibrant hubs of specialised innovation - were subsumed into sprawling corporate structures, integrated into organisations optimised for scale rather than experimentation. In deals backed by private equity and strategic roll-ups, the MedTech ecosystem consolidated. What was once a diverse archipelago of niche inventors becoming an integrated industrial complex, optimised more for performance consistency than for disruptive creativity.

On paper, the benefits are compelling: reduced administrative overhead, harmonised operations, and stronger financial returns. Yet these gains came with trade-offs. As firms scaled and systems converged, the sector began to lose its productive volatility. Homogenisation curbed the competitive tension that once drove differentiation. Internal incentives shifted from bold exploration to steady, measurable optimisation. Instead of investing in speculative R&D to develop new device categories, many companies began to focus on incremental improvements - extending product life cycles, shaving costs, and refining existing platforms.

Take, for instance, orthopaedic implant manufacturers. Where once a wave of mid-sized players drove experimentation in materials science and implant design, today the few consolidated giants concentrate R&D on modularity, pricing flexibility, and reimbursement alignment - innovations defined more by payer priorities than patient outcomes.
This is not to say innovation disappeared. But its character changed. The tools of financial transformation - consolidation, standardisation, predictive modelling - became not just enablers but dominant logics. They reoriented the sector's purpose: from inventing the future of care to optimising the business of it. Innovation was required to justify itself not only in clinical efficacy but in EBITDA margins, payback periods, and risk-adjusted returns.

The result is not stagnation, but an ideological pivot. MedTech’s mission has not been abandoned - it has been reframed. In the new regime, progress must now speak the language of finance to be heard.

You might also like to listen to:

When the Scalpel Sleeps
What Healthcare Leaders Must Understand Now

Today’s MedTech leaders are not just competing in a crowded marketplace - they are operating within a system whose DNA was coded not by clinicians or researchers, but by financiers responding to economic shocks. This infrastructure was forged not in surgical suites or research labs, but in boardrooms and trading floors, shaped by the inflationary crises of the 1970s and the cascading financial collapse of 2008, which unleashed banking failures and government bailouts worldwide.

In the wake of the 1970s, capital markets began treating healthcare as a safe-haven - recession-proof, regulated, and predictable. Conglomerates rose, DRGs (Diagnosis-Related Groups) reframed care delivery, and managed care cemented cost-containment as a central dogma. Yet it was the post-2008 era that fully financialised healthcare. With interest rates near zero and traditional returns evaporating, private equity and institutional investors poured into healthcare. MedTech - with its high-margin devices, recurring revenue, and scalable service models - became a prime target for capital.

This legacy continues to dictate how money moves, how priorities are set, and how innovation is channelled. For healthcare leaders, understanding the financial architecture underpinning today’s MedTech landscape is not optional - it is the first step toward reclaiming strategic control and shaping the future on clinical terms, not Wall Street’s.

1. Financialisation Is Not Neutral
When private equity entered healthcare, it brought more than capital. It brought a set of assumptions and processes - associated with efficiency, scale, and value - that overrode clinical priorities. This worldview reframed the role of care, and redefined success in terms of return on investment (ROI) rather than health outcomes.

The results are visible across the sector. In diagnostics, for example, rapid roll-ups improved margins but often at the expense of local responsiveness and innovation. In medical imaging, standardisation drove throughput but narrowed the space for technology upgrades that do not promise immediate ROI.

R&D pipelines, especially in smaller firms, were pruned for predictability. Novel devices - those that might transform care but require long development cycles or have uncertain reimbursement pathways - were perceived as liabilities. Clinical discretion, meanwhile, was subordinated to protocolised care models designed to maximise throughput and minimise cost variation.

Equity and access, once considered critical to healthcare's mission, were deprioritised unless they served a market expansion strategy or compliance metric. What gets measured gets funded - and in a financialised model, what is not measured in dollars is disregarded.

2. Capital Now Shapes Strategy - and Language
Strategic planning in MedTech is now inseparable from financial market dynamics. Decisions about product development, clinical partnerships, and geographic expansion are increasingly made through the lens of valuation models, EBITDA multiples, and exit scenarios.

For example, investments in preventive technologies - such as early-stage diagnostics or remote monitoring - often struggle for sponsorship because their financial payback is diffuse, slow, or captured elsewhere in the healthcare value chain. Similarly, high-impact innovations in scarce disease areas are sidelined in favour of enhancements to flagship devices that promise faster monetisation.

This shift has not only altered what gets built, but how leaders communicate. It is no longer sufficient to articulate clinical value; one must translate that value into a credible financial thesis. The result is a shift in leadership culture: fluency in the logic of capital markets becomes a prerequisite for advocating even the most promising medical innovations.

3. Innovation Needs Structural Safeguards
Financial logic rewards speed, scalability, and predictability - qualities that rarely align with the arc of innovation. In this environment, many promising technologies are abandoned not for lack of efficacy, but because they fail to meet hurdle rates or present regulatory uncertainty.

Consider advanced prosthetics or AI-assisted surgical tools. Often, these technologies require prolonged development timelines, complex validation studies, and coordination across fragmented payer systems. Without long-duration capital or protected innovation tracks, such initiatives are deprioritised in favour of incremental improvements to existing product lines.
 
To sustain innovation, MedTech needs structural counterweights to short-termism: hybrid capital models combining public funding with private risk-taking; independent R&D consortia that operate outside quarterly earnings pressure; and governance structures that insulate certain innovation portfolios from immediate commercial scrutiny.

The Bigger Picture

These dynamics did not materialise overnight. They are the long-tail consequences of structural evolutions in how healthcare is financed, regulated, and judged. What we witness today is not the product of any single policy or market event, but of decades-long reconfiguration of incentives - driven by the logic of capital, efficiency, and risk mitigation.

Finance is not inherently antagonistic to healthcare. It can be a powerful engine of progress - mobilising resources, accelerating scale, and enabling innovation that might otherwise remain aspirational. Venture capital helped launch some of MedTech’s most transformative breakthroughs, from implantable cardiac defibrillators to robot-assisted surgery. But finance is also a force with its own gravitational pull - toward predictability, liquidity, and control.

When this force becomes the dominant lens through which healthcare decisions are made, a realignment occurs. Strategic choices begin to favour what is measurable over what is meaningful; what scales over what serves; what pays quickly over what heals slowly. Over time, the values embedded in capital markets - efficiency, return, risk management - begin to displace the values embedded in care: access, empathy, equity, and innovation for its own sake.

The effects are already visible. Investments increasingly chase procedural volume, not unmet need. Device portfolios are managed for lifecycle extension, not scientific advancement. Even the definition of innovation has narrowed, shaped less by clinical ambition than by regulatory and reimbursement calculus. For instance, so-called "innovations" often amount to iterative upgrades that secure reimbursement codes or extend exclusivity windows, rather than offering genuine clinical breakthroughs - such as high-frequency stimulation in pain management, which entered the market with marketing fanfare but limited comparative outcomes data.

Leading in this moment, then, requires more than operational fluency or technical competence. It demands systemic literacy - the ability to see beyond immediate KPIs and balance sheets to the structures that produce them. Leaders must be willing to interrogate inherited models: Why are certain metrics privileged over others? Who benefits from a capital allocation model that discounts long-term impact in favour of quarterly returns? What innovations are we not seeing - because they were never funded, never coded, never scaled?

This is not a call for naïve idealism. It is a call for moral clarity. Because the future of MedTech will not be shaped solely by the brilliance of its engineers or the ingenuity of its founders. It will be shaped by what the system allows to thrive - and what it systematically excludes.

In this context, leadership is not just about building the next device or closing the next round. It is about stewarding a sector toward a future where value is not synonymous with price, and where progress is not mistaken for profit alone. The decisive questions are no longer just how we build, or even what. They are why - and for whom. 
 
Takeaways

MedTech’s story is not just one of technological triumphs - it is the culmination of a governing logic born in fiscal crisis and perfected in capital markets. What began in 1975 as an emergency measure to “save” New York hardened into an ideology that now permeates the devices in our operating rooms, the metrics in our boardrooms, and the definition of innovation itself. Finance did not simply fund MedTech - it rewired it.

The result is an industry dazzling in its technical sophistication yet increasingly constrained by the forces that once promised to modernise it: disciplined, scaled, optimised - and ill-equipped for a world demanding agility, patient-centricity, and bold leaps in care. As AI redefines diagnostics, as care migrates outside hospital walls, as patients assert their voices and value-based models take hold, MedTech finds itself bound to an operating system built for yesterday’s problems.

This is the paradox: Wall Street gave MedTech the tools to dominate - but in doing so, it may have stripped away its capacity to adapt. The question now is no longer whether finance can build the future of healthcare. It is whether a sector architected around yield can pivot fast enough to meet the future rapidly advancing toward it.

If MedTech is to serve patients rather than portfolios, its leaders must confront the uncomfortable truth: the empire that finance built will not dismantle itself. Reimagining it will require courage - not just to innovate devices, but to challenge the financial architecture that governs them. The stakes are high: either MedTech reclaims its mission from the balance sheet, or it will be remembered not for how it transformed medicine, but for how it let medicine be transformed into a market.
view in full page
2 years, 2 months ago

Is Africa the New Asia for Western MedTechs?

HealthPad
Directory:
Medical Technology
Tags:
Africa
China
commentary
digitalization
financialization
Medtech
  • GE HealthCare, Siemens Healthineers, and Philips Healthcare entered the Chinese market in the 1980s and prospered
  • The once-booming era for Western MedTechs in China has slowed and become challenging
  • Latecomers to the Chinese MedTech market face geopolitical uncertainty, changing market dynamics, domestic competition, stringent regulations, IP risks, and healthcare reforms
  • Due to these obstacles and the Chinese’s economy slowing MedTechs are seeking international growth opportunities beyond China and Asia
  • Africa is emerging as the new frontier driven by its burgeoning population, growing middleclass, economic growth, abundant natural resources, and Beijing’s investement
  • MedTech pioneers in China, such as GE HealthCare, Siemens Healthineers, and Philips Healthcare, are early entrants in the African market
  • Prudential plc, an insurance giant, has made a vast strategic bet on Africa’s growth potential
  • Given insurers are healthcare payers, should MedTechs view Africa as the new Asia?
 
Is Africa the New Asia for Western MedTechs?


Preface

In the realm of international expansion for Western MedTech companies, Asia, particularly China, has historically been a key focus due to its vast size and rapid economic growth. However, the shifting global economic and geopolitical landscape suggests a re-evaluation. Is Africa positioned to emerge as the next hub of opportunity and growth for MedTech enterprises? China's remarkable economic ascent, initiated by reforms in 1978, accelerated it to the status of the world's second-largest economy, following the US. Western MedTechs that ventured into China's market in the 1980s prospered. Yet, those who hesitated due to concerns, including intellectual property (IP) theft, now face mounting challenges, which include geopolitical uncertainties, evolving Chinese attitudes towards Western corporations, a limited understanding of the Chinese market, and China's ambition to lead global technology by 2030. The recent deceleration in China's economic growth adds to the apprehensions of Western businesses. Moreover, China's rapid economic expansion has led to an aging population, characterized by declining birth rates, and increased life expectancy. By 2040, those aged ≥60 are projected to reach ~402m, constituting ~28% of the nation’s population. This demographic shift, with a shrinking workforce and a rising number of elderly consumers, is expected to exert downward pressure on China’s GDP growth, while straining public budgets with escalating healthcare and retirement costs. Given this evolving landscape, it becomes prudent to explore whether the once-promising prospects for Western companies in China and Asia are diminishing, prompting an examination of alternative international markets. While established MedTech players in China continue to provide essential healthcare products and services, they may benefit from contemplating strategic adjustments and, in many cases, restructuring their commercial operations to adapt to the changing dynamics of the Chinese market. Notably, some companies view Africa as a promising new frontier. Early entrants into the Asian medical device market, such as GE HealthCare, Siemens Healthineers, and Philips Healthcare, have already established footholds in Africa. Could Africa be on the verge of becoming the new frontier, reminiscent of what Asia once represented?
 
In this Commentary

This Commentary is divided into two sections. In Section 1, we briefly mention the early successes of prominent MedTech companies in the Chinese market during the 1980s. The section also notes that because geopolitical tensions between Beijing and Washington have increased, and recently China's economic growth has slowed, some Western MedTechs are seeking alternative growth regions to expand their international presence and reinvigorate their stagnant market values. Section 2 challenges popular perceptions by proposing that Africa could emerge as the new frontier for the MedTech industry. Despite Africa's enduring challenges, including political instability, corruption, poverty, and limited literacy, it seems to have potential. Albeit from a low start, Africa is projected to be the world's fastest-growing region in 2023, characterized by a youthful population, abundant natural resources crucial for renewable technologies, and an emerging middleclass. Decades ago, Beijing recognized Africa's potential, and more recently, a group of MedTechs, including early entrants to China, have established a presence in the African market. The section concludes by noting the strategic entry of a giant insurance company into the continent. Given the role insurers play in healthcare expansion and the demand for medical technology this maybe a positive omen for the MedTech industry, with Africa as its new frontier.

Part 1
MedTech pioneers in China

In the 1980s, as China underwent transformative economic reforms under President Deng Xiaoping, several Western MedTechs, including GE HealthCare, Siemens Healthineers, and Philips Healthcare, entered China, and capitalized on the nation's economic growth and modernization over the ensuing decades. GE HealthCare, equipped with medical imaging devices and healthcare solutions, forged relationships with Chinese hospitals and research institutions. Siemens Healthineers, a leader in imaging and laboratory diagnostics, followed suit in the late 1980s, emphasizing local R&D and strategic partnerships with Chinese healthcare providers. Philips Healthcare, with its diverse range of patient monitoring systems and diagnostic imaging equipment, also made its mark.

These companies showed their ability to adapt and succeed by adjusting their products to fit the needs of local customers and by encouraging new ideas through partnerships. Initially, they embraced expansion-type business models with multiply marketing and sales tiers, which emphasized rapid growth over stringent financial discipline. The plan worked well because China's medical technology sector was thriving, and experienced annual growth rates of ~10 to ~15% during the first two decades of the 21st century. However, since then, things have changed. Now, the focus is on making operations smoother and more efficient, which has meant reducing the number of marketing and sales layers between enterprises and their principal customers.
You might also like:


Learn from the Chinese, but don’t misjudge Beijing


"When you fail to reach your goals don’t adjust your goals, adjust your action"

 
Recent Western MedTech entrants, attracted by the vast Chinese market, faced heightened scrutiny and regulatory obstacles. Their limited knowledge of local markets and different administrations hindered their growth, which was compounded by concerns about safeguarding their IP. Meanwhile, Chinese MedTech firms rapidly advanced, increasing competition for Western latecomers. As of December 2022, the number of Chinese medical device companies amounted to 32,632. The once-lucrative "gold rush" in China for Western MedTechs has faded due to shifting sentiments, regulatory hurdles, and local competition. As China pursues global technological leadership by 2030, Western firms are likely to encounter mounting challenges. To sustain international expansion, they should consider exploring alternative global markets where they can leverage their expertise and resources more effectively. This suggests a turning point, highlighting the need for strategic diversification and adaptation to evolving global dynamics in the MedTech industry.
Headwinds for MedTechs expanding in China

Here we describe some of the headwinds facing Western MedTechs attempting to increase their footprints in the Chinese market.
 
Geopolitical Uncertainty
Ongoing geopolitical tensions, such the political status of Taiwan, which Beijing claims is a province of the People's Republic of China, whereas Taiwan’s current Tsai Ing-wen administration maintains it is an independent country, and South China Sea disputes, which involve conflicting island and maritime claims by China, Taiwan, Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines, and Vietnam. These and other geopolitical uncertainties pose risks, particularly for late entrants to the Chinese market. However, despite these tensions, US-China trade remains strong, but doing business in China has become increasingly challenging.
 
Changed Market Dynamics
China's healthcare landscape has evolved driven by the largest middleclass cohort in the world. Beijing has increased healthcare spending, which has intensified competition in the MedTech sector. Trade conflicts between the US and China add complexity to market dynamics. Relationships between the two countries deteriorated in January 2018, when American President Donald Trump began setting tariffs and other trade barriers on China. The objective was to force Beijing to make changes to what the US says are longstanding unfair trade practices and IP theft. A recent example of such tensions occurred in September 2023, during a visit to China by US Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo, who oversees regulating technology. The Chinese tech giant Huawei chose this time to release its new smartphone, powered by an advanced chip. This shocked American industry experts who could not understand how Huawei could have obtained such an advanced chip following efforts by the US to restrict China’s access to foreign chip technology.

Domestic Competition
Chinese MedTech companies (>32,000) have rapidly gained market share, technical sophistication, and innovation capacity. They understand local customer needs and regulations better, posing increasing competition for Western counterparts. In 2021, China’s 134 listed MedTech companies generated US$44bn in revenues, a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 36% since 2019, ~3X the market’s overall rate of growth. More than five Chinese MedTechs have obtained the US Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) breakthrough designation, with innovations like the VenusP-Valve, which has already been approved in >30 countries, and in April 2022, secured EU’s CE marking under its Medical Devices Regulation (MDR). This suggests that Western corporations will not only encounter heightened domestic competition but are likely to face increasing competition from Chinese MedTechs in the global arena.
 
Regulatory challenges
Regulatory hurdles in China pose challenges for Western MedTechs. Adherence to regulations, standards, and compliance measures, often different from Western counterparts, necessitates an in-depth understanding and adaptation. Central to China's regulatory framework is the National Medical Products Administration (NMPA), which is akin to the FDA. It prioritizes safety, efficacy, and quality in evaluating medical device registrations for market entry. While global acceptance of real-world evidence (RWE) in healthcare is rising, China is in the early stages of embracing the concept. Notably, a 2020 NMPA draft guideline hinted at the potential utilization of RWE from Boao Lecheng. Situated in Hainan, an island province in the nation’s southernmost point, Boao Lecheng has become a medical innovation hub, focusing on technology, high-quality healthcare, and medical tourism. It actively promotes advanced clinical research, housing globally recognized medical institutions like the Raffles Medical Group and Brigham and Women’s Hospital (BWH). The collaboration between Western MedTechs and initiatives like Boao Lecheng holds promise in tackling China's regulatory complexities.
 
Intellectual property (IP) risks
Protecting IP is a concern for Western MedTechs in China. Enforcing IP rights can be challenging due to factors like judicial protectionism, evidence gathering obstacles, modest damage awards, and perceived foreign bias. China follows a "first-to-file" principle for IP registration, granting ownership to the first registrant. Foreign companies also face pressure from government and state-owned enterprises to transfer technology for market access, investment opportunities, or approvals. Some are compelled to license technology at below-market rates. Despite China's efforts to enhance IP protection, concerns persist. Corporations need to balance IP protection with local engagement and government cooperation to navigate China's complex IP landscape effectively.
 
Healthcare reforms
China's healthcare system has undergone a significant transformation driven by various factors, including increasing incomes, heightened health awareness among its citizens, and a rapidly aging demographic. The government has placed substantial emphasis on healthcare, as evidenced by its ambitious goals outlined in the Healthy China 2030 plan. This plan envisions the nation's healthcare market reaching a value of ~RMB16trn (~US$2.4trn) by 2030. China's dedication to enhancing healthcare is underscored by the establishment of a comprehensive health insurance system that now provides coverage to ~96% of the population, benefiting >1.36bn individuals. According to a 2023 McKinsey Report, China's MedTech sector, which was valued at ~US$70bn in 2021, is poised to potentially double in size by 2030. Such growth would elevate China's MedTech market share to ~20% of the global market. To thrive in this burgeoning market, enterprises must be agile in adapting to changes, forge strategic partnerships, and effectively navigate the evolving healthcare landscape.

Navigating China’s Diversity
Succeeding in the Chinese market hinges on effective communication and a deep understanding of Chinese culture. China's administrative divisions include 23 provinces, five autonomous regions (Inner Mongolia, Guangxi, Tibet, Ningxia, and Xinjiang), four municipalities (Beijing, Tianjin, Shanghai, and Chongqing), and two Special Administrative Regions (Hong Kong and Macao). Furthermore, China boasts 129 dialects, with Mandarin as the standard and Chaoshan as predominant in the Guangdong region. Given this diversity, Western MedTech companies often grapple with cultural and linguistic barriers. Establishing vital connections within China's intricate administrative and business landscape can prove challenging. Therefore, crafting effective market entry and expansion strategies is imperative. Chinese consumers have preferences and expectations when it comes to medical technology. Western companies must be ready to adapt their offerings to align with these preferences, a critical factor in gaining market acceptance. Failing to do so can hinder market penetration and long-term success.
You might also like:

Can Western companies engage with and benefit from China?


Will China become a world leader in health life sciences and usurp the US?


China’s rising MedTech industry and the dilemma facing Western companies
Data Privacy and Security Concerns
Data privacy and security are concerns in China. Entrants must navigate stringent data protection regulations, which may differ significantly from Western standards. Building trust with healthcare providers and patients is essential to address these concerns. Failure to do so can lead to regulatory issues, damage brand reputation, and erode customer trust.
 
Reassessing global strategies amid China's economic slowdown

China, as the world's second-largest economy, has been a pivotal market for major Western MedTech companies. However, the current economic climate calls for a strategic re-evaluation. China's economy has recently experienced a slowdown, with repercussions felt not only in neighbouring nations but also globally. South Korea, a historical driver of global growth, faces its longest factory activity decline in nearly two decades. Other major Asian exporters are also dealing with sluggish demand, and Japan's manufacturing activity has declined, with Taiwan reporting contracting output and weakened foreign demand. In September 2023, concerns grew as China experienced deflation, raising questions about currency stability, challenges in the property sector, and high local government debt. China's decision to not stimulate its economy further exacerbated the situation, impacting key financial hubs like Hong Kong and Singapore, as well as satellite economies. This economic slowdown in China is expected to persist and likely have far-reaching global consequences. Businesses worldwide, including those in the US and Europe, heavily reliant on China for growth, should explore alternative regions for sustainable value and expansion. Western MedTech companies need to carefully assess the challenges and costs associated with further expansion in China.

An alternative strategy emerges; companies should consider complementing their Asian focus and explore the growing economies of Africa. Just as early MedTech pioneers capitalized on Asia's rapid expansion, companies today should contemplate laying the groundwork for a fresh international strategy in Africa. The continent has potential, and a proactive approach could yield sustainable growth opportunities, helping to mitigate the impact of China's economic challenges and slowdown on global ambitions.

Part 2
Africa's Ascendance
 
With a few notable exceptions, Western MedTech executives tend to overlook Africa due to its challenging socio-economic conditions, which include political instability, corruption, extreme poverty affecting ~50% of the population, limited access to necessities, and a high illiteracy rate of ~40%. Notwithstanding, China has long recognized Africa's potential, which mainly revolves around Africa's abundant natural resources, which constitute ~30% of the world's mineral reserves, including critical resources for renewable and low-carbon technologies. For instance, Zambia leads in unrefined copper exports, Guinea boasts the world's largest bauxite reserves, and South Africa contributes ~90% of the world’s platinum group metal reserves. Furthermore, Africa has the world's youngest population, with substantial projected growth.
 
Asia plays a pivotal role in Africa's trade dynamics, accounting for >42% of its exports and >45% of its imports, surpassing Europe in both cases. According to a 2023, Business Insider Report, Africa is poised to become the world's fastest-growing region, with six of the ten fastest-growing economies located on the continent, albeit starting from a relatively low economic base. In addition to its mineral wealth, the continent's path to economic success is partly based on developing an export-led manufacturing economy, akin to China's transformation in the 1980s. This, already in progress, has the potential to lift >0.5bn people out of poverty, create >100m jobs, and establish a substantial and rapidly growing middleclass that will demand improved services, including healthcare.
 
Currently, Africa's manufacturing sector contributes only ~9% to the continent's gross domestic product (GDP) and ~2% to global manufacturing output. However, the African Union has placed manufacturing at the forefront of its Agenda 2063, a strategic framework supported by all 55 African countries, aimed at achieving socio-economic transformation over the next 50 years. This commitment gains significance amid escalating trade tensions between the US and China, which have global economic implications. Africa has weathered recent shocks, including weakened external demand, global inflation, higher borrowing costs, and adverse weather events, which have hindered its post-pandemic recovery. Nonetheless, in the coming decades, the "Made in Africa" label may come to symbolize quality products, solidifying the continent's position as a prominent player in global manufacturing, akin to how "Made in China" became synonymous with quality two decades ago.
 
China’s impact on African manufacturing

China has been instrumental in the economic transformation of African nations, which partly stems from the Chinese strategy to relocate its low-level manufacturing operations to Africa. As China's domestic manufacturers have advanced technically, they have systematically shifted their basic manufacturing capabilities to African countries. This provides Africa with an opportunity to mirror China's journey from standard manufacturing to advanced production processes over several decades.
 
Chinese companies have made substantial investments in labour-intensive manufacturing facilities notably in Ethiopia. This has created jobs and fueled the growth of local manufacturing sectors. For instance, the Huajian Group, a leading Chinese footwear manufacturer, established plants in Ethiopia in 2012, employing >7,000 people and producing ~5m shoes annually. The Group’s partner in this project is the China-Africa Development Fund (CADFund), a private equity facility promoting Chinese investment in the continent. Huajian also invested in Ethiopia's Jimma industrial park, contributing US$100m to build shoe and coffee processing plants and a technical education centre.
 
As Chinese enterprises expanded in Africa, they provided training to local workforces, and transferred their manufacturing expertise. This collaborative effort is helping to develop a skilled labour pool important for sustaining manufacturing growth. Notably, Ethiopia's Eastern Industrial Zone, supported by Chinese investment, evolved into a thriving manufacturing hub, attracting both domestic and foreign investors. Additionally, Beijing's Belt and Road Initiative has led to significant infrastructure developments across Africa, including roads and ports, which further stimulate the continent's manufacturing sector. China’s investment in Africa stands out due to its tangible presence, in contrast to other nations whose involvement in the continent is characterized by distant and arms-length financial engagements. With the influx of such investments, technology transfers, and ongoing skill development, some African nations are positioned to follow China's path towards a manufacturing transformation. 
 
MedTech’s early entrants to the African market

For years, support for Africa’s healthcare tended to concentrate on education and malaria nets. In recent years however, as developed-world disorders, like cancer and heart disease, grew in Africa so medical technology companies increasingly found a market in supplying devices to private healthcare operators and investing in healthcare initiatives through partnerships with governments. US President George W. Bush recognised Africa’s strategic importance, emphasising investments for development and health initiatives, including the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), which, announced in 2003, reflected a commitment to fostering stability and wellbeing on the continent. Since then, American governments have not shown much interest in Africa. However, the MedTechs that entered the Chinese market ~4 decades ago and prospered, have established footprints in the African market by adapting their products and services to local needs, building partnerships with local healthcare providers, and addressing challenges such as infrastructure limitations and affordability. Their presence caters to Africa’s large and growing middleclass and has contributed to the improvement of healthcare standards in the region.
 
Philips Healthcare has made inroads into the African market and operates in several African countries, including South Africa, Kenya, and Nigeria. One of the advantages they offer is a wide range of medical devices and equipment tailored to different healthcare settings, from high-end hospitals to remote clinics. Their focus on technology that can operate efficiently even in areas with unreliable power grids has been instrumental in their success. GE HealthCare has a presence in countries like South Africa, Nigeria, and Egypt. Their commercial advantage is in their commitment to providing innovative medical technologies across various healthcare domains, from diagnostic imaging to healthcare IT solutions. The company collaborates with local healthcare providers and governments to build sustainable healthcare infrastructures. Siemens Healthineers is active in South Africa, Kenya, and Ghana. The company’s advantage stems from their portfolio of medical equipment, laboratory diagnostics, and digital health solutions. They often tailor their offerings to meet the specific needs and budgets of healthcare providers in Africa, contributing to improved patient care and diagnostic accuracy.
 
Unveiling MedTech opportunities: the impact of insurers

Large insurance firms wield significant influence in shaping the trajectory of the medical technology industry. They play a pivotal role in extending health insurance coverage to middle-class populations worldwide, not only bolstering healthcare systems but also driving the demand for medical technology. In essence, these insurance giants act as catalysts for the MedTech industry's growth.
 
A case in point is Prudential plc., a global insurance powerhouse with >23,000 employees and 2021 annual revenues of >US$70bn. The company holds dual listings on the London and Hong Kong Stock Exchanges and is a constituent of the FTSE 100 Index. It also maintains secondary listings on the New York Stock Exchange and the Singapore Exchange. In February 2023, shortly after Anil Wadhwani assumed the role of Prudential's new CEO, he publicly declared his intent to chart a new course and focus on Africa for growth. Wadhwani highlighted that the growth drivers in Africa today closely resemble the trends previously witnessed by the company in Asia: rapidly expanding middle-class populations with a growing appetite for insurance and enhanced services, including healthcare. He emphasized that Africa would complement Prudential's expanding Asian presence. IMF's 2023 reports indicate that countries such as South Africa, Ghana, Kenya, Ethiopia, Côte d'Ivoire, and Rwanda are prime candidates for substantial future growth. It is increasingly plausible that Africa could emerge as the next frontier for MedTech companies, thanks to the leadership of individuals like Anil Wadhwani, who steer insurance giants toward new horizons.
 
Takeaways

In recent years, Western MedTechs have witnessed a significant transformation in China's healthcare landscape, driven by changing demographics and an increased emphasis on technological self-reliance. Notably, industry giants such as GE HealthCare, Siemens Healthineers, and Philips Healthcare, which established a presence in China during the 1980s, are now extending their reach into Africa with hopes of replicating their prior successes. While some may view this expansion as unconventional due to factors like political instability, corruption, and poverty, the continent has potential. Africa's attraction for MedTechs includes some of its countries with significant economic growth potential, a burgeoning youthful population, a growing middleclass, and abundant natural resources that align with the evolving demands of a rapidly expanding global green economy. Much like the historical pattern of MedTech companies venturing into Asia, a similar trend is emerging in Africa among a select group of firms. Another critical point to consider is the emerging role of insurance companies as potential guides in this new journey. These insurers are participating in the continent’s healthcare expansion and innovation, and where they lead, MedTech companies should consider following. The growing middleclass, equipped with medical insurance, will eventually exert pressure on healthcare systems in the region to enhance access to quality care. This, in turn, will expand the market for medical devices. Despite the complexities and contradictions that Africa presents, it represents an opportunity that warrants consideration. The question of whether Africa will become the new Asia suggests the need for MedTechs to embrace a new era where innovation and progress thrive on the courage to venture beyond the familiar. By doing so, corporations can discover a promising landscape for growth and innovation, tapping into Africa’s underserved opportunities and playing a role in enhancing global healthcare.
view in full page
2 years, 6 months ago

The Financialization Dilemma of MedTechs

HealthPad
Directory:
Medical Technology
Tags:
AI
commentary
financialization
M&A
MedTech
R&D
  • MedTechs have experienced significant transformation through mergers and acquisition (M&A) to achieve steady growth, diverting resources from innovative research and development (R&D) initiatives
  • The industry’s M&A activities were fueled by a prolonged period of low interest rates and easy access to capital
  • Consequently, R&D efforts focussed on incremental improvements rather than breakthrough innovations
  • This financial-centric business model led to risk-averse bureaucracies among many MedTechs, resulting in a strategic deadlock with limited growth prospects
  • Adding to the challenges, the current era witness’s debt and asset prices surpassing productivity and economic output
  • For many MedTechs, these macro-economic conditions potentially pose funding constraints, reduced market demand, tightening regulatory challenges, cost pressures, and market volatility, further hindering their ability to overcome the deadlock
  • To address these issues and help MedTechs break free from their strategic deadlocks and create long-term value we propose seven strategic initiatives
 
The Financialization Dilemma of MedTechs
 
In the 1990s and 2000s, medical technology companies received praise for their rapid growth. However, they currently find themselves at a crucial juncture, facing challenges of low and stagnant growth rates. Additionally, an uncertain long-term outlook looms over them due to the expansion of global balance sheets surpassing GDP, as well as debt and asset prices outpacing productivity and economic output. This Commentary aims to shed light on how many MedTechs reached this strategic deadlock. It also proposes strategies that these companies can pursue to break free from this predicament, which have the potential to significantly enhance growth rates, improve balance sheet health, and foster value creation.
 
An era of low interest rates and cheap capital

The financialization of MedTechs has played a significant role in their current strategic deadlock, and the most viable solution lies in accelerating productivity. This financialization was facilitated by a prolonged period of low interest rates and easy access to inexpensive capital. Over the span of four decades, starting from the 1980s to the early 2020s, interest rates steadily declined across most industrialized nations. In the aftermath of the 2008-09 financial crisis, many countries adopted a low interest rate environment to stimulate economic recovery and restore liquidity in their banking systems. For example, the US Federal Reserve Board (Fed) lowered short-term interest rates from 4.25% in December 2007 to nearly zero by December 2008, registering the lowest rate in the Fed's history.
 
During the era of persistently low interest rates and readily available capital, MedTechs experienced a surge in merger and acquisition (M&A) activities, primarily targeting companies in near-adjacent sectors to capitalize on low-risk opportunities for incremental growth. This trend fostered a culture of consolidation, driven by the desire to access new technologies and broaden product portfolios. While M&A activities bolstered short-term profits and shareholder value, they often led to a neglect of research and development (R&D) initiatives. Acquisitions were perceived as a less risky and quicker avenues for expanding product lines, overshadowing investments in R&D. Consequently, many MedTechs adopted a risk-averse approach, channeling their R&D efforts towards incremental improvements of existing products rather than pursuing ground-breaking innovations that could significantly improve patient outcomes and disrupt the industry. Moreover, the increasingly stringent regulatory environment for medical devices, particularly in Europe, further discouraged companies from investing in R&D due to longer development timelines and escalated costs.
 
Over the years, these policies resulted in the consolidation of power and resources among a few large players, leading to the emergence of market oligopolies and the decline in industry diversity. This scenario posed challenges for smaller companies with innovative ideas, as they struggled to compete with established enterprises, thereby impeding both innovation and healthy competition. Moreover, established MedTechs benefited from the significant and rapidly growing healthcare demands in affluent Western markets, particularly North America and Europe, which account for ~65% of the global medical device market. In these markets, compensation was often tied to medical and surgical procedures rather than focussing on patient outcomes, further favouring the established industry players. While M&A can be an effective growth strategy, it is important for companies to strike a balance and prioritize innovation alongside their consolidation efforts to ensure sustainable success and drive meaningful advancements in the industry.
 
An era of surging prices and low productivity

We have now entered a distinct era that differs significantly from the previous era characterized by low interest rates, and easily accessible funds. Starting from March 2022, the Fed has implemented 10 consecutive rate hikes, bringing its benchmark rate to 5.25%. These increases, coupled with high leverage in the corporate sector, escalating geopolitical tensions and  instability in the banking world triggered by the Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) collapse in March 2023, compounds the challenges faced by MedTechs. Furthermore, global balance sheets have expanded at a much faster pace than Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Debt and asset prices have surged far more rapidly than productivity and economic output. This trend is underscored by a report published in May 2023 by the McKinsey Global Institute, which reveals that the past two decades have resulted in the creation of US$160trn in paper wealth but have been marked by sluggish growth and the rise of inequality. According to the report, every US$1 invested has generated US$1.9 in debt.
 
Strategic initiatives to adapt and thrive

When global balance sheets expand at a faster rate than GDP and debt and asset prices outpace productivity, it becomes a concerning sign for MedTechs who find themselves trapped in a strategic deadlock characterized by sluggish growth and a fading belief in long term value creation. Under these conditions, companies should expect to encounter funding limitations, decreased market demand, stricter regulatory obstacles, cost pressures, and increased market volatility. In such a testing business environment, it is important for MedTechs to adopt bold adaptive strategies and navigate wisely to ensure continuous growth and enhanced value. We suggest seven such initiatives that are likely to help MedTechs break free from their strategic cul-de-sacs. By implementing these with vigour, companies can position themselves for success in an ever-changing and demanding economic and geopolitical landscape.
1. Revamp R&D
 
In recent times, costs associated with MedTech R&D have escalated. A study published in the September 2022 edition of the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), and carried out by the US government’s Office of Science and Technology Policy, found that the development cost for a complex therapeutic medical device, from proof of concept through post approval stages, is US$522m. Significantly, the nonclinical development stage accounted for 85% of this cost, whereas the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) submission, review and approval stage comprised 0.5%.
You might also like:
 
Re-imagining healthcare
Thus, MedTechs have the potential to optimize their R&D processes, enabling them to develop more swiftly and economically ground-breaking devices that result in enhanced patient outcomes and expanded market share. To achieve this, companies may consider the following strategies to improve their R&D processes: (i) Integrating artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning, and big data techniques into their R&D endeavours and harnessing the power of these advanced technologies. (ii) Collaborating with academic institutions and start-ups to gain access to novel innovations and expertise. This collaboration can involve joint development and co-creation of innovative offerings. To tap into a diverse pool of expertise and resources, companies should consider a platform-based approach to R&D, which potentially improves the capacity to drive breakthrough advancements that improve patient care. (iii) Implementing agile methodologies to accelerate the R&D process, which involves breaking projects into smaller, more manageable segments and swiftly iterating based on stakeholder feedback. (iv) Engaging patients in the design process to ensure that newly developed offerings cater specifically to their needs, ultimately enhancing patient satisfaction.
 
2. Emphasize patient-centric care
 
Enhancing patient-centric care to improve outcomes is a crucial factor in the future of healthcare provision. There is a growing body of evidence indicating that patient choices will have an increased influence on the provision of healthcare over the next decade. With patients having more options and autonomy, MedTechs can leverage patient-centric strategies to better understand and address their needs, ultimately leading to improved market share. To achieve this, companies must prioritize effective communication, product education, and support services to build stronger relationships with patients. This requires increased utilization of electronic health records, advanced AI, data analytics capabilities, active engagement with patient communities, leveraging social media platforms, establishing patient advisory boards, and forging partnerships with payers and providers.
 
Further, embracing value-based care models is important for MedTechs. By prioritizing positive patient outcomes over quantity, companies can contribute to the development of sustainable care. As global healthcare systems transition toward value-based care, MedTech companies should align their offerings accordingly. Emphasizing solutions that enhance patient outcomes, reduce healthcare costs, and provide overall value positions, MedTechs become indispensable partners in the evolving healthcare landscape. This also may involve developing outcome-based pricing models, implementing remote monitoring solutions, and demonstrating real-world evidence of product effectiveness.
 
3. Revitalize organizational and operating models
 
Revitalizing organizational and operating models is essential for MedTechs to boost their growth rates and adapt to a rapidly evolving market. While companies experienced significant growth in the past, recent trends have shown a shift towards risk-averse bureaucracies, accepting modest annual growth rates as the "new normal". To overcome this stagnation and meet evolving customer demands, traditional MedTechs should consider embracing agile and flexible structures.
 
By flattening hierarchies and fostering cross-functional teams, organizations can facilitate faster decision-making processes. Implementing lean manufacturing and optimizing operational processes can reduce waste, enhance productivity, accelerate time to market, and lower costs. Leveraging AI-driven data analytics enables the extraction of valuable insights from vast datasets, empowering MedTechs to anticipate customer needs and market trends.
 
4. Harness the power of digital, AI and big data
 
Digital transformation has become a necessity rather than a choice. Although companies like Stryker and Siemens have championed digitalization, widespread implementation still remains a challenge. Indeed, Siemens’ suggests digitalization is “something that is often talked about but not fully implemented”. Previous Commentaries have shown how MedTechs can employ digital technologies to improve products, streamline operations, enhance customer experiences, and reduce costs. Streamlining operations and optimizing costs without compromising quality is crucial in the face of escalating economic pressures. This may involve re-evaluating supply chains, improving manufacturing processes, and adopting digital solutions.
 
In today's rapidly evolving digital age, investing in digital and analytics capabilities has become indispensable for companies as they shape their R&D, hone their processes and shift to a customer-centric stance. The seamless integration of digital and AI-driven techniques, along with data-driven decision processes, has emerged as a crucial factor in maintaining and improving competitiveness. For MedTechs, it is imperative to cultivate a culture of innovation that encourages and rewards experimentation and risk-taking. By doing so, organizations create an environment where employees are empowered to explore ideas, learn from failures, and ultimately drive meaningful innovations.  Therefore, actively seeking external partnerships with technology companies, start-ups and academic institutions is a strategic move for MedTechs to access cutting-edge technologies and expertise in digital and analytics. By embracing these capabilities as core rather than adjunct components of their strategies, fostering an innovation-centric culture, and investing in talent development and retention, corporations position themselves optimally to leverage the transformative potential of digital and analytical technologies. This, in turn enables them to thrive in an increasingly interconnected and data-driven healthcare ecosystem.
 
5. Talent acquisition and retention
 
The rapidly changing landscape of globalization, the increasing influence of AI techniques, and the demands of a new generation of consumers seeking personalized experiences have compelled MedTechs to reassess their approach to talent acquisition and retention. To keep up with the pace of change, it is crucial for these companies to attract and retain highly skilled professionals with expertise in technology, healthcare, and business. A talented workforce plays a vital role in driving innovation, ensuring efficient and safe processes, navigating complex market dynamics, and effectively executing growth strategies. To achieve this, companies should invest in the development of their employees, foster a culture of innovation, and offer competitive compensation packages to attract and retain top performers.
You might also like:
According to a study published by the Harvard Business Review in January 2020, retaining top talent has become increasingly challenging for employers. The study revealed that in 2018, 25% of employed Americans left their jobs, with approximately 33% of this turnover attributed to unsupportive management and a lack of development opportunities. MedTech companies are not exempt from this trend, and to acquire and retain talent, they must strategically revamp their value propositions to align with the evolving needs and expectations of the modern workforce.
A crucial step in this direction is fostering a purpose-driven culture that highlights the significant impact medical technology companies have on improving people's lives. By instilling a sense of purpose, employees are more likely to develop a strong connection to the company's mission, inspiring them to consistently deliver their best work. Furthermore, providing ample career development opportunities is essential in empowering employees to enhance their skills and progress in their professional journeys. This can be achieved through training programmes, mentoring initiatives, and leadership development schemes.
 
Recognizing the importance of work-life balance is also critical. MedTechs can prioritize flexible working hours, a 4-day week, remote work options, generous vacation policies, allowing employees to effectively balance their personal and professional lives. By creating a supportive environment that promotes overall well-being and job satisfaction, companies can foster employee loyalty.
 
Competitive compensation and benefit packages are essential. Additionally, a commitment to diversity and inclusion is pivotal for MedTechs aspiring to become employers of choice. By emphasizing diversity in hiring practices and cultivating an inclusive work environment where every individual feels valued and respected, corporations can attract and retain a diverse array of talent. This, in turn, creates an environment conducive to enhanced innovation, creativity, and problem-solving.
 
Despite best efforts, there may be instances where companies are unable to attract and retain individuals with the necessary capabilities. In such cases, strategic partnerships, joint ventures, licensing agreements, and co-development initiatives allow MedTechs to tap into external expertise and resources, which can be employed to enhance product portfolios and gain access to new markets.
 
6. Realize global opportunities
 
MedTechs, traditionally reliant on most of their revenues from affluent US and European markets, now have the chance to expand their horizons and explore the untapped potential of the rapidly growing markets in Asia, Middle East and Africa, and Latin America. These regions boast transitioning demographics, with aging populations and a surge in chronic diseases. Additionally, their large and expanding middle-class populations demand advanced care, prompting governments to increase their healthcare expenditures significantly. By venturing into and expanding their footprints in these markets, Western MedTechs can diversify their revenue streams and leverage the growth opportunities stemming from the escalating demand for cutting-edge medical technologies and services.
 
Expanding into emerging markets not only provides a means to mitigate risks associated with economic volatility and changing regulatory environments but also necessitates acquiring new capabilities, fostering a change in executive mindsets, and embracing flexible pricing models. By adapting to the unique demands and challenges of these markets, MedTechs can position themselves strategically to tap into the vast potential they offer. This expansion serves as a catalyst for sustained growth and allows companies to seize opportunities that would otherwise remain untapped, thus bolstering their long-term success.
 
7. Align with rising ESG standards
 
To fully leverage their capabilities and resources and meet rising standards in ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance), MedTechs might consider taking bold actions that: (i) embrace sustainable manufacturing practices to minimize their environmental impact, which entail reducing waste, water, and energy consumption, as well as transitioning to renewable energy sources. Such practices contribute to environmental conservation and mitigate a company’s carbon footprint, (ii) adopt circular economy principles, which involve designing products with a focus on reusability and recyclability. Additionally, establishing take-back programmes for end-of-life products, which ensure responsible disposal and encourage the reuse of valuable materials, thereby reducing waste and promoting sustainability, (iii) develop products that improve patient health, safety, and overall quality of life. This requires a patient-centric mindset, discussed above, that emphasizes the social impact and positive contributions MedTechs can make to society, (iv) produce offerings that are accessible and affordable to all segments of society. By addressing underserved communities and partnering with them to provide better healthcare solutions, companies can contribute to reducing healthcare disparities and promote equitable access to quality care, (v) enhance transparency and accountability, which includes setting clear targets, regularly measuring and reporting progress, and disclosing ESG performance, and (vi) engage with stakeholders, such as investors, customers, payers, employees, and patients, to better understand their expectations and concerns regarding ESG issues. Such a bold proactive approach to ESG issues contributes to a more sustainable and equitable world, strengthens a company’s reputation, and fosters its long-term success.
 
Takeaways
 
In today's rapidly evolving and technology-driven world, a successful pivot for MedTechs, which have been financialized and now find themselves in a strategic cul-de-sac, requires a simultaneous introduction of the suggested strategic initiatives, rather than a sequential approach. To regain high growth rates and create long-term value, MedTechs must:
  1. Revamp R&D efforts to develop innovative solutions and services that address evolving market needs, prioritizing cost-effectiveness, and improved patient outcomes as primary drivers of value creation.
  2. Prioritize patient-centric care by delivering solutions and services that significantly enhance outcomes, establishing a reputation for consistent value provision.
  3. Revitalize outdated organizational and operating models through increased collaboration with industry stakeholders, enabling accelerated technology development and adoption. This ensures alignment with patient needs and facilitates swift market entry.
  4. Harness the transformative power of digital technologies, AI, and big data to unlock new possibilities for innovation, efficiency, and personalized healthcare experiences.
  5. Attract, retain, and develop talent equipped with 21st-century capabilities while fostering a purpose-driven culture that fuels innovation and drives organizational success.
  6. Recognize and capitalize on the vast and rapidly expanding opportunities present in emerging markets, approaching them with a strategic mindset.
  7. Align with ascending ESG standards, demonstrating a commitment to sustainability, ethical practices, and social responsibility, which reinforces the credibility and long-term viability of MedTechs.
By embracing these strategies simultaneously, corporations position themselves to navigate policy shifts, overcome global uncertainties, and take advantage of evolving technologies, which stand them in good stead to enhance their growth rates, and significantly improve their value.
view in full page