Tag

Tagged: Medtech

Sponsored
  • Effective MedTech leadership in the next decade requires adept navigation of companies through evolving markets, technological advancements, and simultaneous management of established legacy businesses
  • Historically, MedTech leaders have been drawn from a limited pool, potentially slowing effective adaptation to new technologies, and markets
  • This has allowed tech giants to disrupt the sector, emphasising a shift from the development of physical devices to integrated healthcare solutions
  • The 4th industrial revolution (Industry 4.0) is crucial in facilitating the transformation, breaking down traditional boundaries between medical devices, pharmaceuticals, software, and patient data
  • Executives with experience in service-based sectors adjacent to MedTech may be better equipped to lead, leveraging their tech-centric background to capitalise on digital technologies and big data strategies for successful adaptation and thriving in the evolving healthcare ecosystem
 
Is MedTech Entering a New Era of Leadership and Purpose-Driven Innovation?
 
MedTech leadership is at a crossroads, demanding a strategic overhaul to tackle unprecedented sector changes anticipated over the next decade. Navigating this evolving landscape requires reconciling traditional manufacturing expertise and cutting-edge digital capabilities. A forward-thinking CEO with digital acumen is pivotal for innovation, yet the complexities of manufacturing and stringent regulatory frameworks remain crucial. In response, it seems reasonable to suggest that a collaborative leadership approach would be optimal, pairing a visionary CEO with digital expertise alongside a seasoned COO well-versed in manufacturing and regulatory compliance. This, would not only alleviate the burden on a single leader but also combine the strengths of both domains, fostering a more resilient leadership model. By strategically aligning these skill sets, MedTech companies would be better positioned to adeptly bridge the gap between tradition and digital evolution amid the complexities of an increasingly competitive market.

Historically, MedTech leadership, drawn from a limited pool of individuals, may fall short in ensuring commercial success in the coming decade. The sector's reluctance to swiftly embrace emerging technologies has created an opening for tech giants to disrupt it, mirroring the upheavals witnessed in financial markets.
 To thrive, MedTech companies must shift from developing physical devices to strategically promoting integrated healthcare solutions and services. The 4th Industrial Revolution, (Industry 4.0) plays a pivotal role in this evolution, breaking down traditional boundaries between medical devices, pharmaceuticals, software, and patient data. It reshapes connections among the physical, biological, and digital realms within the healthcare sector, emphasising advanced data and digitalisation strategies.

In this paradigm shift, traditional MedTech executives may find themselves ill-equipped to lead effectively. Executives from adjacent service-based sectors, with a tech-centric background, seem better positioned to spearhead this transformation. Leveraging their expertise, these leaders can adeptly capitalise on digital technologies and utilise big data strategies to navigate and adapt business models. Strategic leadership from executives with a tech-centric background is essential for MedTech companies to survive and thrive in the future.
 
In this Commentary
 
This Commentary has two parts. Part 1: The MedTech Market describes opportunities and challenges within the evolving dynamic global market. Part 2: Navigating MedTech’s Evolutionary Challenges, examines the limitations of current MedTech leadership, suggesting a shift towards diverse skills, backgrounds, and perspectives. Future MedTech leaders need expertise in digital technologies, data analytics, and innovative business models, coupled with an understanding of global markets and a compelling sense of purpose to engage and inspire Generation Zs. Takeaways raise the likelihood that existing MedTech executives may be ill-equipped for upcoming industry transformations, highlighting the potential of leaders from service-based sectors with proven strategic agility and innovation.
 
Part 1
The MedTech Market

Currently, MedTech is undergoing a transformation, and shedding its traditional conservative image. The industry's growth is driven by various factors, such as the aging global population, an uptick in chronic diseases, and an increasing trust in medical devices among clinicians and consumers, which has fostered stronger collaborations between MedTech and pharmaceutical companies. Although the US and the EU continue to be significant contributors to MedTech markets, they face hurdles, including increasingly stringent regulations, shifts in reimbursement policies, and elevated costs linked to advanced medical technologies.
 
About two decades ago, foreseeing constraints, some large MedTechs like Johnson & Johnson (J&J), Abbott, and Medtronic, strategically established manufacturing and research and development (R&D) centres in emerging markets such as Brazil, China, and India. Back then, these markets were undergoing substantial growth, fuelled by burgeoning middle-class populations with an increasing demand for improved healthcare services. This situation not only presented strategic opportunities for continuous expansion but also served as a buffer against the escalating difficulties experienced by MedTechs in the more mature Western markets.
 
Despite facing challenges, the global MedTech market continues to be a promising arena for growth and innovation, extending its reach across diverse sectors and geographies. Projections indicate that its global revenues will reach ~US$610bn in 2024, with an anticipated compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of ~5.2%. This trajectory points towards a substantial market volume of ~US$748bn by 2028. The US stands as the primary revenue contributor, expected to reach ~US$216bn in 2024. Historically, MedTech business models have predominantly targeted affluent markets in the US, Western Europe, and Japan, comprising only ~13% of the world's population but holding a significant market share. This historical skew allowed MedTech leaders to focus their marketing efforts on healthcare providers in prosperous developed regions, benefitting from favourable fee for service reimbursement policies. Notwithstanding, recent years have witnessed a tightening of the wealthy Western markets.
In the coming decade, MedTech sectors in emerging regions are set to experience significant growth. For example, in 2024 China's MedTech revenues are anticipated to realise ~US$46bn, with a projected CAGR to 2028 of ~7.5%. This growth trajectory is expected to culminate in a market volume of ~US$61bn in the near term. In the face of dynamic shifts, MedTech leaders are confronted with the challenge of recalibrating their strategies to ensure sustained success amid challenging global politico-economic conditions and the use of more demanding outcome-based healthcare reimbursement models in traditional wealthy Western markets.


You might also like:

Healthcare 2040


 
Following a peak in late 2021, MedTech stocks faced a setback around mid-2022, losing a significant portion of the gains accumulated during the Covid-19 pandemic. By July 2023, growth had slowed, with MedTech valuations showing only a modest increase of ~22% compared to January 2020. During this period, trading multiples experienced a decline, dropping from a peak of ~16x in September 2021 to ~7x by mid-2023, falling below the industry's 10-year average of ~8x.
 
Although there have been some recent improvements, the 2023 EY, Pulse of the MedTech Industry Report raised concerns about challenges ahead for the sector. In the post-Covid landscape, the industry is grappling with significant hurdles, including a notable decline in public valuations and ~30% decrease in financing. These challenges manifest in various aspects, such as a downturn in special-purpose acquisition company (SPAC) deals, a substantial decrease in the total value of initial public offerings (IPOs), and a slump of ~21% in venture capital (VC) funding. Compounding these issues is a decline of ~44% in merger and acquisition (M&A) activity.
 
Traditionally, M&A has played a crucial role for MedTechs, contributing to scale, operational leverage, financial performance, product portfolio diversification, improved therapeutic solutions, and international expansion - all while maintaining core manufacturing structures and strategies. Moreover, post-Covid, revenue growth has experienced a significant dip, dropping from ~16% in 2021 to ~3.5% in 2022, and remaining flat in 2023. The anticipated future growth of ~5% may encounter challenges due to a potential scarcity of new disruptive product offerings. These challenges have implications for equity investment, which hit a seven-year low in 2023, declining by ~27% to ~US$14bn. Notably this impacts smaller, innovation-driven firms.


A positive recent trend is the rapid growth of digital health with expected global revenues set to reach ~US$194bn by 2024, with a projected CAGR of ~9% from 2024 to 2028, which would deliver a market volume of ~US$275bn by 2028. China leads in global revenue generation for digital health, reaching ~US$53bn in 2024. However, many large diversified MedTechs with legacy products in slow-growing markets have yet to capitalise on this trend.
 
MedTech stands at a critical juncture, navigating challenges that necessitate a strategic overhaul for sustained success. The decline in key financial indicators and the sluggish pace of innovation pose significant threats, obliging leaders to embrace transformative strategies and capitalise on emerging trends, particularly in digital health, to secure a resilient future.

 
Part 2
Navigating MedTech’s Evolutionary Challenges

Changes in the MedTech landscape introduce difficulties for executives striving to stay abreast of technological advances and transformative shifts, particularly in emerging economies. Compounding these obstacles is the prevalence of middle-aged men in leadership roles, perpetuating traditional management styles that may impede the necessary adaptations required for growth.

You might also like:

Redefining Leadership In The Evolving Landscape Of MedTech

Despite women constituting >50% of the MedTech workforce and significantly influencing healthcare decisions, they are underrepresented in executive positions. Addressing these disparities is not just a moral obligation but a strategic imperative to unlock the full potential by embracing diverse perspectives and talents. The historical contributions of women in healthcare underscores the urgency of closing the gender gap in MedTech leadership.
Further complicating matters is the median age of C-suite executives; ~56. This demographic nearing retirement, suggests that many company leaders embarked on their professional journeys before the pervasive influence of the Internet, email, and the rise of social media platforms, creating a technological generation gap. The sector's historical reliance on affluent markets in the US and Europe, coupled with fee-for-service healthcare policies, poses challenges in adapting to emerging markets and reimbursement policies centred on patient outcomes.
 
The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) into medical devices adds another layer of complexity, necessitating a paradigm shift. However, this transformation proves challenging for traditional leaders, given that these impactful changes unfolded during the mature phases of their careers. Notably, out of ~691 FDA-approved algorithms functioning as medical devices, ~35% received clearance in 2022 and 2023. Despite the urgent need for adaptation, persistent leadership obstacles hinder progress, particularly in understanding and aligning with the fluidity of rapidly evolving technologies in new markets.
 
MedTech leaders face challenges in understanding the dynamics of emerging markets, especially in economically vibrant regions like Brazil, India, China, and sizable African nations. These areas experience economic development and a growing middle class, leading to increased demand for advanced healthcare. The global acumen gap is further intensified by a lack of first-hand experience among these professionals in these regions, presenting a hurdle to effective guidance. Consequently, many MedTech executives seem to struggle with delivering impactful direction, given the disconnect with transformative trends in emerging markets and advancing technologies. Addressing these perspective and knowledge gaps requires more than incremental adjustments; it calls for a shift in mindset and a recalibration.
 
Significant changes in MedTech call for a departure from traditional top-down directives towards an empowering leadership style. The sector now demands a new breed of leaders - tech savvy individuals with global experience capable of understanding and connecting with the needs and aspirations of Generation Z employees. This demographic shift in the workforce requires leaders who not only comprehend evolving technologies but also align with the values and expectations of today's highly skilled, young professionals. Beyond the pursuit of shareholder value, this demographic craves purpose-driven leadership and seeks companies with a clear sense of mission and societal impact. In this context, MedTech companies face a stark choice: adapt to lead with purpose or risk being left behind.
 
Takeaways

The future leadership of MedTech companies stands at a critical juncture as it is potentially faced with unprecedented changes over the next decade. While the necessity of a forward-looking CEO with digital acumen is essential for strategic innovation, the persisting challenges of manufacturing and regulatory frameworks highlight the need for a more collaborative leadership approach. To address this, we have proposed a strategic collaboration between a visionary CEO equipped with digital expertise and a seasoned COO skilled in manufacturing and compliance. It seems reasonable to assume that this would not only ease the burden on a single individual but also harness the strengths of both, fostering a more resilient leadership approach. Further, it recognises that navigating change demands a balance between embracing digital evolution and maintaining a strong foundation in traditional manufacturing and regulatory compliance. Future MedTech leaders must be able to bridge knowledge and perspective gaps, align with emerging technologies, and connect with the aspirations of the evolving workforce. The shift towards a more empowering leadership style, coupled with an understanding of Industry 4.0 principles and the dynamics of emerging markets, is essential for sustained success in a rapidly evolving market.

The urgency for MedTech leaders to adopt a forward-thinking, adaptable, and purpose-driven approach cannot be overstressed. The industry's capacity to allure and retain talent, foster innovation, and make substantial contributions to global healthcare pivots on a commitment to purposeful leadership and the incorporation of transformative strategies. In this demanding journey, the judicious collaboration between a forward-looking CEO and a traditional COO emerges as a strategic imperative, ensuring a comprehensive and resilient leadership model that can thrive in the next decade. 
view in full page
  • 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
  • Many large diversified MedTechs are experiencing stagnate growth and aging products in slow growing markets
  • Initially, MedTech expansion leveraged disruptive technologies and underserved markets
  • As MedTechs’ evolved they shifted from innovation-led to financed-focused management taking advantage of low interest rates and cheap money
  • M&A substituted for innovation as a growth strategy
  • Today, MedTechs grapple with volatile politico-economic environments, stringent regulations, ethics, and increasing patient demands
  • The solution lies in visionary leaders driving R&D-focused growth, and more strategic M&A
  • This requires leaders able to blend finance, innovation and patient-centricity
  
Redefining Leadership in the Evolving Landscape of MedTech
Balancing Innovation, Profitability, and Patient Care
 
Preface
 
Over the past four decades the medical technology (MedTech) sector has experienced substantial transformation. Its initial rapid growth was driven by sophisticated devices, unmet clinical needs, entry barriers, and available funding. Later, expansion was primarily fueled by mergers and acquisitions (M&A), the integration of technology, market consolidation and financial undertakings. Decades of low interest rates, cheap money, and, the pursuit of top-line revenue growth, rather than profitability, led to an overemphasis on M&A, which enlarged the industry without equivalent enhancements in R&D. Over time, many large diversified MedTechs faced challenges associated with legacy products in slow-growth markets, and an overreliance on M&A. While the industry maintains ~6% compound annual growth rate (CAGR), much of this progress comes from smaller players. The industry’s maturity brings new challenges distinct from those of its early days. M&A, once effective for diversification, now struggles to sustain growth for larger companies. The industry’s financialization has shifted leaders’ focus from vision to short-term gains, creating a void in leadership. Amid current headwinds - political uncertainties, commercial pressures, stringent regulations, ethics, and patient empowerment - successful navigation requires visionary leaders committed to patient care over short-term gains. Emerging leaders must combine financial expertise with innovation. The next decade calls for a break from an overreliance on M&A-centred growth, embracing research-based, value-driven solutions and services, which enhance patient outcomes and reduce healthcare costs. This transformation demands leaders skilled in business strategy, R&D, and patient-centered approaches.
  
In this Commentary

This Commentary is comprised of four sections. Part 1 draws a distinction between leaders and managers and suggests that while both roles are necessary for a successful commercial enterprise, it is important for executives to balance the two roles. Part 2 describes the merits of M&A, the financialization of the MedTech industry, and its repercussions on leadership and innovation. Notably, financialization and M&A activities shifted executive focus away from innovation towards transactions. Part 3 explores the interplay between transactional proficiency and innovation and discusses the implications of M&A-focussed expansion on R&D and patient outcomes. Part 4 suggests a strategy for enterprises to reignite their stagnating values and slow growth rates, which entails less M&A-driven expansion and more innovation-centred growth. Achieving this involves developing leaders with a blend of financial and R&D acumen.
 
Part 1
 
Leaders and Managers

Leaders and managers play important roles in the success of commercial enterprises, each having distinctive yet interconnected functions. However, leadership and management differ, and this differentiation is important to understand their respective contributions to the medical technology industry.
 
Leadership, which has evolved over time, involves guiding, influencing, and motivating individuals and groups towards shared objectives. It includes envisioning a direction, making strategic choices, and inspiring growth within organizations. Leaders prioritize people, nurture relationships, and understand individual strengths, and motivations. This enables them to empower others to embrace change and achieve their potential. They adopt a forward-looking, longer-term strategic perspective, fostering innovation while being prepared to take calculated risks for growth. Effective leadership influences a company’s trajectory, culture, and efficacy. It fosters productivity, innovation, and a positive attitude to work. In an environment characterized by technological advancements, constant organizational change, and market shifts, leadership is crucial. Under such conditions, embracing change rather than resisting it not only brings stability but also reduces stress and prevents chaos. Leadership is essential for guiding enterprises and employees through uncertainty, fostering innovation, creative thinking, and stability. Leaders often possess a combination of leadership and managerial skills; and they know how to balance these and have the capacity to navigate dynamic environments which require adaptability, agility, and inspiring visions.
 
Conversely, management, revolves around organizing, planning, and efficiently controlling resources to attain specific goals. Managers address operational challenges, and focus on processes, structures, and day-to-day operations, ensuring tasks adhere to plans. Their strength lies in executing business plans, maintaining stability, control, and consistency in operations to ensure that organizations function smoothly. Managerial skills excel when supervising daily operations, allocating resources, and completing tasks efficaciously. Managers perform well in project-oriented environments, overseeing planning, execution, and monitoring to achieve objectives. They allocate budgets, personnel, and equipment optimally, managing risks and performance to ensure stability.
 
Part 2
 
The Rise of Financialization in MedTech

The financialization of the MedTech industry took root over several decades when interest rates were low and access to affordable capital was relatively easy. This encouraged corporate executives to lean away from developing innovative scientific devices for expansion and lean in on M&A to provide growth. One recent period during which central banks maintained low interest rates, and adopted accommodative monetary policies, is the aftermath of the global financial crisis of 2008. In response to the crisis, central banks, including the US Federal Reserve, (Fed) implemented measures to stimulate economic growth and stabilize financial markets. One of the primary tools used was reducing interest rates to near-zero. For instance, the Fed held its federal funds rate [the benchmark interest rate] at near-zero levels from December 2008 to December 2015. The purpose of this was to encourage borrowing and investment, which in turn was expected to stimulate economic activity, job creation, and consumer spending.
You might also like:

The Financialization Dilemma of MedTechs



Have diversified medical technology companies blown their competitive advantage?

Such extended periods of low interest rates encouraged MedTech executives to explore growth opportunities beyond conventional R&D investments. With significantly reduced financing expenses, and a large, underserved, fast growing sector, managers turned to M&A to bolster their resources and expansion efforts. This trend was further buoyed by investors seeking higher returns amid limited profitability in low-interest rate environments. Consequently, MedTechs gravitated toward M&A and financial activities, which promised near-term gains and broader market reach. This shift diverted executive focus away from innovation-centered expansion to transactional approaches for growth, ultimately reshaping the industry's trajectory toward financialization. M&A opportunities initially helped companies to strengthen their presence in underserved, rapidly expanding market segments. By merging with, or acquiring, near adjacent enterprises, MedTechs accessed new customer bases, technologies, and product portfolios, which allowed their executives to consolidate company resources, increase market share, and achieve economies of scale, which drove growth.
Perceived benefits of M&A

This shift towards M&A and financial optimization did not diminish the significance of scientific progress and innovation; but it did incentivize many MedTech executives to recalibrate their reliance on R&D. As the industry evolved, several factors encouraged executives to prioritize M&A and financial engineering as their principal drivers of growth. These included the increasingly stringent regulatory landscape for medical devices, which extended the time and costs associated with new product launches. Executives recognized the value of acquiring readily available innovations with existing regulatory approvals. Additionally, M&A offered the opportunity for MedTechs to streamline their operations, eliminate redundancies, cut costs, and enhance financial performance.
 
Over time, intensifying financial activities increased the industry’s global competition, and many MedTechs employed M&A to expand internationally and gain access to new markets. Simultaneously, acquisitions facilitated the diversification of product offerings, which lowered risks associated with relatively narrow product portfolios. Publicly traded corporations faced pressure from investors to deliver near-term financial results and shareholder value, which further steered executives to lean in on M&A for quick returns and access to a wider talent pool and complementary technologies.
 
Impact on leadership dynamics

The rise of M&A activities and the financialization of the MedTech industry reshaped leadership dynamics. While the sector was initially driven by innovation-focused leaders, the shift we describe has led to a gradual transition towards transaction-oriented managers taking control. Visionary figures like Willem Einthoven, a Dutch physiologist and Noble Laureate for Medicine, Thomas Fogarty, an American inventor, innovator, and cardiothoracic surgeon, Patricia Bath, an American ophthalmologist, and inventor and Robert Langer, an American engineer, scientist, and entrepreneur, are just four  among many others  who laid foundations for the industry's growth with their pioneering medical technologies. For instance, Einthoven's invention of the electrocardiogram (ECG) changed cardiology, Fogarty's embolectomy catheter, (balloon catheter), transformed vascular treatments, Bath’s Laserphaco Probe, disrupted cataract surgery, and Langer's work on biomaterials led to several breakthrough medical devices.
 
Notwithstanding, over time, M&A pursuits by companies altered resource allocation, diverting attention away from R&D towards activities like due diligence and integrations. This shift redirected budgets and talent away from innovation, affecting the creative and scientific progress of enterprises. Metrics tied to M&A outcomes gained precedence over those that encouraged internal innovative momentum. Further, the growing financial acumen of MedTech executives overshadowed R&D capabilities, emphasizing short-term gains over longer-term strategic innovative initiatives. After decades of successful M&A, changes in economic, financial, and technological landscapes prompted concerns about the industry’s sustained growth and innovation-centric leadership.
 
Consequences of M&A for innovation and R&D

Prioritizing financial transactions over R&D in a fast-paced industry can undermine innovation, sustainable growth, and competitive advantage. Companies favouring financial activities at the expense of R&D have tended to show diminished ability to create novel medical technologies, which results in fewer disruptive solutions and a weakened ability to address evolving healthcare challenges. The significance of R&D for longer-term sector growth cannot be overstated. A disproportionate focus on financial transactions leads to short-term mindsets, which tend to neglect opportunities for organic growth through innovation, and thereby disadvantaging companies by hindering their adaptation to economic trends and market dynamics.
 
Companies with robust R&D cultures attract scientific talent. Conversely, leaning away from innovation makes it difficult to attract and retain top researchers, engineers, and experts. An enterprise's reputation is tied to its innovation and scientific capabilities, while an overemphasis on financial transactions projects profit-centric motives, which can erode stakeholder trust and credibility. In the rapidly advancing technology landscape, neglecting R&D invites obsolescence. Companies not allocating sufficient resources to innovation run the risk of falling behind competitors as new breakthroughs emerge, jeopardizing their market share. Over emphasising M&A introduces dependence on external factors such as regulations, negotiations, and integration challenges, which can disrupt an enterprise’s growth predictability. While financial transactions may promise more immediate gains, they tend to divert resources away from longer-term strategies and R&D, which can compromise sustained growth and value added. This shift risks a company losing a core identity, which can undermine employee motivation and reduce stakeholder alignment. Further, prioritizing financial transactions can create discord within an organization between transaction-focused executives and innovation-aligned employees, which could impede strategy execution. Thus, leaning away from R&D for financial gains can jeopardize innovation, growth, and competitive edge, ultimately hampering a company's longer-term success.
 
Part 3
 
The Implications of M&A-Centric Growth

The implications of M&A-centric growth are multifaceted and extend beyond the immediate area of financial transactions. A trend that emerges within MedTechs as they prioritize M&A activities over R&D, is an innovation gap, which can introduce strains within leadership dynamics as resources are disproportionately allocated to financial pursuits rather than fostering technological advancements. Reallocating resources in this way can stifle the development of innovative technologies. Moreover, often the shift is accompanied by a transformation in executive skill sets, where financial acumen takes precedence over the ability to drive R&D. Consequently, there is a shift in the overall performance metrics of companies. Short-term gains resulting from transactional activities, often overshadow longer-term, research-driven achievements that are essential for innovation, growth, and competitive advantage.
The change in company culture is another potential consequence of this growing inclination toward financial activities. The once-pervasive values of creativity calculated risk-taking, and scientific exploration, which have historically fueled innovation, start to wane. This is further exemplified by a shift in talent attraction strategies. The attraction of financial expertise can eclipse the allure of nurturing disruptive innovation, thereby resulting in a dearth of fresh perspectives that could potentially drive growth and value.
You might also like:

Unleashing MedTech's Competitive Edge through Transformational Technologies
As decision-making processes prioritize short-term financial outcomes, there is a gradual sidelining of research-driven innovations that are needed for the sustained growth and relevance of MedTech companies. The ramifications of this choice are significant. Entities that opt for transactional expansion rather than innovative evolution may find themselves trailing behind competitors who continue to invest in R&D endeavours. This divergence in strategy could lead to a subsequent loss of market share and a gradual erosion of overall relevance. Innovation remains important to address the adaptive challenges that arise from evolving healthcare demands, increased patient voices, rapidly advancing technology, and increasingly stringent regulatory requirements. The transformation of MedTech companies into entities that prioritize financial outcomes run the risk of leaving them ill-equipped to effectively navigate these headwinds. A reduced focus on innovation tends to render companies vulnerable, impairing their capacity to anticipate and effectively respond to future industry and societal trends.
 
The importance of striking a balance between short-term financial goals and longer-term innovation objectives cannot be overstated. Companies that are unable to reconcile these contrasting perspectives risk compromising their ability to anticipate and adapt to the evolving healthcare landscape. In essence, the ramifications of an M&A-centric growth approach are not solely confined to fiscal aspects; they extend to the core of a company's competence to foresee, adapt to, and thrive within a rapidly evolving MedTech sector.
 
Reduced R&D resources impact on patient care and outcomes

The impact of diminished R&D resources on patient care and outcomes can be significant. At its core, a vibrant and forward-thinking MedTech industry is essential for the development and successful deployment of medical technologies, diagnostics, and treatments that increase the efficacy of healthcare and improve patient outcomes. The combination of innovation and healthcare can translate into tangible benefits for patients. For instance, personalized medicine therapies, which are outcomes of R&D, offer a transformative approach that enhances patients’ therapeutic journeys, and minimizes adverse effects.
 
Smart devices often mean swift and precise diagnoses, which pave the way for timely and effective interventions. Beyond this, innovation extends to healthcare accessibility. Remote monitoring and telehealth technologies reduce geographical barriers, bringing healthcare within reach of those in remote and underserved regions. This can reduce disparities in healthcare access, leveling the playing field for all individuals, regardless of their location, ethnicity, or socioeconomic status. Further, the shift toward minimally invasive technologies not only fosters quicker recovery times but also shortens hospital stays. The combination of improved healthcare protocols that promote better adherence and more efficient, cost-effective medical procedures helps to make quality healthcare accessible to more people.
 
Concern arises when MedTech innovation takes a back seat, which tends to perpetuate outdated medical devices that can result in suboptimal outcomes and the continuation of existing healthcare disparities. The neglect of innovative R&D endeavours delays the development of disruptive technologies, thus prolonging inequitable healthcare access and outcomes. In this context, companies that lean away from innovation could find themselves deepening divisions between different patient outcomes. The role of healthcare providers is associated with the availability of advanced technologies. Optimal care requires the integration of innovative technologies into medical practices, and the neglect of this can limit access to care, and potentially compromise patient outcomes. It is important to stress that the direction of the MedTech industry has an impact on the quality of healthcare that a society can provide. By placing innovation at the forefront of strategic priorities, companies are more likely to enhance treatments, patient experiences, and the overall efficiency of the healthcare ecosystem. Neglecting innovation, on the other hand, can result in stagnation that perpetuates inequalities, delays healthcare access, and slows the development of patient-centered care. The symmetry between financial considerations and the pursuit of innovation is important. The consequences of overlooking either aspect have effects, which can extend beyond company balance sheets into the health and wellbeing of patients who depend on the MedTech industry to provide leadership for a healthier and more equitable future.

 
Part 4
 
A Strategic Approach for MedTech Transformation

The phase of MedTech's growth driven by M&A has now matured, necessitating a fresh perspective and refined strategy. The transition from visionary leaders to financial managers has, in many medical technology companies, created a void in leadership, especially given the current headwinds faced by the industry. To improve patient outcomes and foster sustainable growth, a recalibration is required, which places innovative leadership and patient-centric care initiatives at the forefront. A synergy between financial and R&D strategies is important for success. Only by reconciling financial operations with innovation endeavours, can the potential for competitive advantage and improvements in patient care take place.
Strategic allocation of resources, particularly towards dedicated innovation efforts, drives research. Notwithstanding, the realization of this relies on company executives leaning in on the transformative potential of R&D endeavours. To counterbalance any undue focus on short-term gains, it is essential to develop and implement a balanced set of performance metrics that connect financial milestones with innovation breakthroughs. This provides the basis for a strategy, which fuses financial decision-making with the promotion of innovation-driven initiatives. Further, to help executives develop diverse and adaptable mindsets, enterprises might consider increasing collaborations with research institutions and start-ups, with the aim to gain access to talent and knowhow that complements internal capabilities.


You might also like:

Re-imagining healthcare



The impact of big data, artificial intelligence, and machine learning on the medical technology industry



 
The establishment of structured innovation frameworks, closely tethered to fiscal objectives, should help to provide a consistency of purpose. Safeguarding innovations requires robust intellectual property (IP) strategies, and regular evaluations, attuned to prevailing market trends, and assisting with the ongoing alignment of a company’s strategy with exogenous trends.  This nuanced approach hinges on executives being able to balance essential financial imperatives with innovations to create a balance, which, in turn, is expected to contribute to sustainable growth, heighten competitiveness, improved patient outcomes and reduced healthcare costs.
 
Cultivating leaders with balanced expertise

Successfully blending transactional expertise with R&D capabilities requires leaders with vision and purpose able to develop and implement strategies that harmonize with an enterprise’s goals and politico-economic trends, evolving stakeholders’ demands and changes in healthcare systems. Let us briefly suggest a roadmap to achieve this.
 
First, develop cross-functional leadership teams that unite financial and R&D experts, and are expected to help ensure that decisions become grounded in both fiscal considerations and innovative pursuits. Advocating for innovation within finance and R&D units, helps to foster alignment between financial choices and R&D priorities. Developing and implementing key performance indicators (KPIs) is crucial. These should measure both financial outcomes, and advancements in innovations. Consider incorporating into performance evaluations metrics such items as newly filed patents, and the delivery of product launches and impactful R&D projects on-time and within budget.
 
Establish a dedicated venture fund to drive and reward innovation. Facilitate collaborative workshops that bring together finance, R&D, marketing, and other functions to ideate transformative solutions and services. Such endeavours should aim to increase growth, enhance enterprise value, improve patient outcomes, and reduce the cost of care. Align financial objectives with innovation goals, linking bonuses to achievements in both financial performance and successful innovation. When contemplating M&A, give precedence to targets that enhance a company’s innovative capabilities by aligning with R&D expertise and novel product portfolios, thus amplifying innovation.
 
Create small cross-functional review groups to assess innovation projects for alignment with business goals and fiscal viability. Establish agile committees to oversee resource allocation and to ensure consistent R&D funding. Implement programmes to recognize and celebrate employees who contribute to innovative ventures to help cultivate a culture of inventiveness. Set up platforms to facilitate interdepartmental sharing of creative ideas. Actively involve financial specialists in innovation discussions. Cultivate external partnerships to infuse fresh perspectives into R&D initiatives. Foster communication channels between financial and R&D teams and encourage regular exchanges of insights and opportunities. Provide training to enhance financial experts' understanding of R&D processes and offer financial literacy training to R&D teams. By integrating transactional expertise and R&D acumen, MedTechs can more effectively balance financial growth and innovation, to help enhance competitiveness, adaptability, and industry-leading innovation.
 
Reviving visionary leadership

This Commentary started by describing differences between leaders and managers to highlight the prevalence of transactional management during a period of M&A-driven growth, which in turn diminished the demand for visionary leadership. As the industry has reached a mature phase, and facing significant headwinds, a juncture arises that calls for leaders capable of bridging the gap between financial success and technological advancement. This involves aligning financial strategies with a broader vision of innovation and patient-centric progress. In doing so, visionary leaders establish a framework that both augments a company's financial performance, and drives healthcare technology forward, ultimately enhancing patient outcomes. This strategic evolution depends on leaders embracing a forward-thinking mindset that extends beyond immediate gains and helps to steer enterprises towards sustained innovation and growth.
 
Central to this transformation is the synchronization of financial goals with a company's longer-term vision. This ensures that financial policies are conducive to fostering transformative technologies. Cultivating an innovative culture within an organization, leaders instill a spirit of expansive thinking, experimentation, and the pursuit of innovative technological solutions and services that address healthcare challenges. Acknowledging the need for strategic investments in R&D, these leaders allocate resources optimally to bolster novel solutions and services. Furthermore, they have an awareness of market trends, emerging technologies, and evolving patient needs. This equips them to anticipate shifts in both the market and technology landscapes, which enables them to strategically position their companies to take advantage of emerging opportunities. By balancing innovation and astute risk management, leaders blend calculated risk-taking with prudent financial decisions, thereby contributing to stability and improved competitiveness. With a focus on the longer-term impact of their actions, visionary leaders understand the interplay between present-day technological advances and a company's future standing.
 
In the dynamic ecosystems of contemporary medical technology, visionary leaders exhibit adaptability in navigating change, guiding companies forward by skilfully adopting new technologies and strategies. Their longer-term strategic outlook attracts top talent from both finance and technology. Inherently collaborative, these leaders forge alliances with other companies, start-ups, research institutions, and industry experts, which increase the potential for accelerating the pace of technological innovations from the bench to the bedside. Harnessing novel technologies to create distinctive solutions and services, they lead their organizations to prominence within a competitive market. Upholding ethical considerations, these leaders ensure that technological progress not only yields financial gains but also has benefits for patients and healthcare systems. Investors tend to gravitate towards enterprises with visionary leaders. The ability to articulate a compelling narrative that emphasises how innovation drives future growth and financial returns enhances their allure. Thus, visionary leaders orchestrate a successful synergy between financial acumen and technological ingenuity, encouraging an ecosystem where strategic foresight translates into substantial dividends.
 
Takeaways

The evolution of the medical technology sector over the past four decades has presented a dual-edged transformation that healthcare professionals must now grapple with. The shift from pioneering innovators to adept managers within the industry reflects the interplay between economic, technological, regulatory, and ethical factors. As these converge, healthcare companies face significant headwinds that demand leadership rather than management. The financialization of the industry, driven by prolonged periods of low interest rates and accessible capital, has had a significant influence on the industry’s ecosystem, accelerating growth while simultaneously steering priorities away from innovation towards financial pursuits. This shift opened a new era, characterized by an abundance of skilled managers but a deficit of visionary leaders. Today, the MedTech industry stands at a juncture, with the demand for strategic foresight and innovative thinking never more acute. The need to pivot towards sustained growth and enhanced enterprise value necessitates leaders who can balance the strategic imperatives of R&D and the financial acumen required for M&A. The future trajectory of the medical technology sector hinges on the ability of healthcare professionals to recalibrate leadership dynamics. By addressing the scarcity of visionary leaders, the industry can leverage its potential to overcome the headwinds it currently faces and pioneer transformative innovations that redefine the landscape. As healthcare professionals navigate the future, their collective efforts will determine whether the MedTech sector continues to evolve along its current trajectory or takes a bold new direction towards enhanced growth, innovation, and added value.
view in full page

 

  • A wind of change is blowing through MedTech markets
  • MedTech markets have matured and are experiencing slower growth and increased competition, which have fuelled endeavours to increase growth rates
  • Artificial intelligence (AI) techniques applied to data from existing devices have the potential to achieve this and improve care
  • Obstacles to developing AI solutions include rigid manufacturing mindsets and a dearth of appropriate talent
  • To remain relevant MedTech leaders will need to “think beyond physical products”, develop new business models, new types of investments and new approaches to R&D
  • Will a wind of change that is blowing through MedTech markets be perceived as a temporary breeze?
 
A prescription for an AI inspired MedTech industry
 
Thinking beyond physical products and the growing significance of AI in MedTech markets


A wind of change is blowing through MedTech markets, which has prompted some key opinion leaders to think beyond physical products and begin to use artificial intelligence (AI) techniques to develop value added services that bolt-on to their existing physical offerings to improve clinical care and economic efficiencies while providing access to new revenue streams.

Bryan Hanson, Zimmer-Biomet’s CEO, recently suggested that >70% of his company’s R&D spend is now being invested in data informatics and robotics. Not far behind is Stryker, another global orthopaedic corporation, which has implemented AI strategies to improve care and differentiate its offerings. Both are thinking beyond their physical products to create a suite of services derived from AI enhanced data collected from their existing devices. Such actions provide a template that can be copied by other enterprises. How long will it take for AI solutions to represent a significant percentage of MedTechs’ revenues?

 
In this Commentary

This Commentary: (i) describes the growing significance of AI, (ii) explains the difference between data mining, AI, and machine learning, (iii) illustrates AI technologies that have become an accepted part of our everyday lives, (iv) highlights technical drivers of AI solutions, (v) describes obstacles to the development of AI systems, (vi) indicates how such obstacles may be reduced, (vii) describes Zimmer’s and Stryker’s AI driven data initiatives, (viii) suggests that the Zimmer-Stryker AI template has broad potential, (ix) suggests that AI systems can breathe life into 'dead data', (x) provides an example of a company at the intersection of medical information and AI techniques, (xi) describes the origins of the phrase, ‘wind of change’, and defines the ‘winds’ driving change in current MedTech markets, (xii) reports that ~80% of B2B sales in the economy generally are digitally driven, (xiii) provides some reasons for MedTechs’ slow adoption of AI systems, (xiv) floats the idea that the future for producers is to partner with tech savvy start-ups and (xv) describes how US AI supremacy is being challenged.
 
AI: vast and fast growing
 
It is challenging for baby boomers and older millennials, who populate MedTechs’ C suites, to fully grasp the potential of AI. This is largely because their corporate careers were underway before the digital age started, and for three decades they have personally prospered from manufacturing physical devices without the help of AI.
 
A person who understands the potential of AI is Sundar Pichai, the CEO of Alphabet, one of the world’s largest tech companies. In a recent BBC interview Pichai suggested, "AI is the most profound technology that humanity will ever develop and work on . . .  If you think about fire or electricity or the Internet, it's like that, but even more profound". This suggests that Hanson is right to redirect Zimmer’s R&D spend towards AI-driven solutions. A February 2021 report from the International Data Corporation (IDC), a market intelligence firm, suggests that the current global AI market is growing at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of ~17% and is projected to reach ~US$554bn by 2024.
 
Data mining, AI, machine learning and neural networks

Among MedTechs’ C suites there is some confusion about data strategies and AI solutions. Many enterprises use data mining techniques on existing large datasets to search for patterns and trends that cannot be found using simple analysis. They employ the outcomes to increase revenues, cut costs, improve customer relationships, reduce risks and more. Although data mining is commonly used when working on AI projects, in of itself, it is not AI. So, let us briefly clarify.

AI is the science and engineering of developing intelligent computer programs to enable machines to provide requested information, supply analysis, or trigger events based on findings. AI creates machines that think, learn, and solve problems better and faster than humans. This is different to traditional computing, where coders provide computers with exact inputs, outputs, and logic. By contrast, AI systems can be “schooled” to carry out specific tasks without being programmed to do so. This is referred to as machine learning, which usually requires large amounts of data to train algorithms [mathematical rules to solve recurrent problems].

A critical element of machine learning’s success is neural networks, which is an AI technique modelled on the human brain that is capable of learning and improving over time. Neural networks are comprised of interconnected algorithms that share data and are trained by triaging those data: a process referred to as ‘back propagation. In healthcare, machine learning outputs range from the ability to recognise images faster and more accurately than health professionals to making in vivo diagnoses.

 
AI systems have become an accepted part of our everyday lives without us realising it
 
Most people are aware of significant AI breakthroughs such as self-driving cars and IBM’s Watson computer winning the US quiz show Jeopardy by beating two of the best players the show had produced. Lesser known, is in 2012, AlexNet, a neural network learning system, won a large-scale visual recognition contest, which previously was thought too complex for any machine. In 2016, Google’s AlphaGo, a machine learning algorithm, defeated Lee Sedol, who was widely considered the world’s greatest ever player of the ancient Chinese game Go. Most observers believed it would be >10 years before an AI programme would defeat a seasoned Go champion. Although Go’s rules are simple, the game is deceptively complex, significantly more so than chess. It has a staggering 10170 possible moves, which is more than the number of atoms known in the universe. Significantly, machine learning algorithms embedded in AlphaGo, mastered the game without any prior knowledge and without any human input. More recently Google launched AlphaGo Zero, an AI system, which can play random games against itself and learn from it. During the decade of these breakthroughs, AI systems became an accepted part of our everyday lives without us realising it. Examples include, Google searches, GPS navigation, facial recognition, recommendations for products and services, bank loans we receive, insurance premiums we are charged, and chatbots, which organizations use to provide us with information.
 
Technical drivers of AI systems

In addition to commercial drivers, AI techniques are driven by easy availability of data, an explosion in computing power and the increased use of clusters of graphic processing units (GPUs) to train machine-learning systems. These clusters, which are widely available as cloud services over the Internet, facilitate the training of more powerful machine-learning models. An example is Google's Tensor Processing Unit (TPU), which has the capability to carry out more than one hundred thousand trillion floating-point operations per second (100 petaflops). This has the potential to accelerate the rate at which machine-learning models can be trained. Further, the cloud has made data storage and recovery easier, which has motivated government agencies and healthcare institutions to build vast unstructured data sets that they make accessible to researchers throughout the world to stimulate innovation.
 
Obstacles to the development of AI systems
 
So far, we have emphasised the benefits of AI, but there are concerns that machine intelligence will accelerate at an incomprehensible rate, surpass human intelligence, and transform our reality. This is referred to as “singularity”, which has generated concerns from key opinion leaders. Nearly a decade ago, Stephen Hawking, a pre-eminent British scientist, warned in a BBC interview, that singularitycould spell the end of the human race”. More recently, Hawking’s view has been echoed by Elon Musk, founder, and CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, who suggests that AI is, “more dangerous than nuclear warheads and poses a fundamental risk to the existence of human civilization". Musk has called for stronger regulatory oversight of AI, and more responsible research into mitigating its downsides. In 2015, he set up OpenAI, a non-profit research organization, with a mission to promote and develop AI systems that benefit society. 

 

In the June 2018 edition of the Atlantic Review, Henry Kissinger, who served as national security adviser and secretary of state for two US Presidents, described the potential harms from AI by addressing the question: “What would be the impact on history of self-learning machines that acquired knowledge by processes particular to themselves, and applied that knowledge to ends for which there may be no category of human understanding?”. Singularity might be more imminent than once thought. In a book published in 2015, futurist Ray Kurzweil predicted that singularity would occur in ~2045, but a paper published in the June 2020 edition of the International Journal of Astrobiology suggests that it is more likely to occur within the next decade.

You might also like:

Robotic surgical spine systems, China, and machine learning

Overcoming obstacles to AI
 
In clinical settings there are growing concerns that complex algorithms can blur the reasoning behind specific machine interpretations and consequent actions of robotic surgical systems. As AI and machine learning develop so surgical robots are expected to become more autonomous and have the capability to make instantaneous diagnoses and pursue immediate therapies, which surgeons using the systems do not fully understand. The failure of humans to understand the workings of an AI system is referred to as an “interpretability challenge”, or more commonly, the black-box” problem, which could impact future clinical regulations.
 
Combatting the possible dangers of AI systems not being understood by humans is a relatively new and growing research area, referred to as Explainable AI” (XAI). XAI attempts to use AI techniques to develop solutions that can describe the intent, reasoning, and decision-making processes of complex AI systems in a manner that humans can understand. This could provide Stryker and Zimmer, and other manufacturers, a solution to potential future regulatory obstacles associated with advances in their robotic surgical systems
.
Zimmer’s and Stryker’s initiatives

In August 2021, the FDA granted De Novo marketing authorization [applicable for a new and novel device whose type has not previously been classified] for a “smart knee”, which Zimmer had developed in partnership with Canary Medical, a data analytics company. The device, called Persona IQ®, is the world's first and only smart knee cleared by the FDA for total knee replacement surgery. It combines Zimmer’s proven and trusted knee implant, Persona® The Personalized Knee®, with Canary’s proprietary sensor technology, which provides real-time feedback on how surgical implants and devices are working by generating self-reports on patient activity, recovery, and treatment failures, without the need for physician intervention and dependence upon patient compliance. The partnership is also expected to leverage Canary’s machine learning capabilities to identify further patterns in data from implants that could help clinicians catch problems, such as infections or loosening of the implants before they worsen. Persona IQ® will work together with Zimmer’s remote care management platform, mymobility® with Apple Watch®, as well as with other components of the  ZBEdge™ connected intelligence suite of currently available, and soon to be launched, digital and robotic technologies engineered to deliver transformative data-powered clinical insights, shared seamlessly across the patient journey, to improve patient outcomes. 

In January 2021, Stryker acquired OrthoSensor, a privately held technology company that makes intraoperative sensors for use in total joint replacements. Stryker expects these sensors to empower surgeons with AI-driven solutions and enhance its surgical robotic systems by eventually providing them with the capability to predict surgical outcomes. Additionally, OrthoSensor’s remote patient monitoring wearables, combined with a cloud-based data platform, are expected to significantly improve Stryker’s data analytics capabilities. According to a Stryker press release issued at the time of the acquisition, “OrthoSensor quantifies orthopaedics through intelligent devices and data services that allow surgeons and hospitals to deliver evidence-based treatments for all healthcare stakeholders. The company’s advancements in sensor technology, coupled with expanded data analytics and increasing computational power, will strengthen the foundation of Stryker’s digital ecosystem”.
 
The Zimmer-Stryker AI template has potential across MedTech

Despite Zimmer’s and Stryker’s AI-driven data initiatives to improve their respective competitive advantages and gain access to new revenue streams, few MedTechs collect, and store the data produced by their existing devices, and even fewer use such data to provide novel AI solutions. The Zimmer-Stryker template for achieving this is not limited to orthopaedics. For example, consider neuro critical care and traumatic brain injuries (TBI), which are a “silent epidemic”. Each year, globally ~69m individuals sustain TBIs. In the US, every 15 seconds, someone suffers a TBI. In England, ~1.4m people present at A&E departments each year following a head injury.

Despite extensive research, successful drug therapies for TBI have proven to be elusive. The gold standard management of the condition is to monitor intracranial pressure (ICP) and attempt to avoid elevated levels, which can cause further insults to an already damaged brain. Currently, there are no FDA approved means to identify advance warnings of changes in ICP. However, it might be possible to create an early warning of ICP crises by applying machine learning algorithms to standard physiological data produced by existing medical devices commonly used to monitor patients with TBI. This would not only provide time for interventions to prevent further trauma to critically ill patients but would also give producers access to new revenue streams.



You might also like:

MedTech must digitize to remain relevant


Breathing life into dead data

There are potentially limitless opportunities to improve care by breathing life into 'dead data'. This can be achieved simply by applying AI solutions to underutilized data from existing medical devices. The global MedTech industry is comprised of ~6,000 companies (mostly small to medium size). The overwhelming majority of these manufacture devices that produce, or could produce, patient data. These companies serve ~14 surgical specialisms each of which treat numerous conditions. For each condition there are millions of patients at any one time. For each patient, multiple devices used in therapies display real time data. Most producers are awash with dead data because they do not collect, store, and analyse these data to improve the quality of care. AI systems can change this.
A MedTech start-up at the intersection of medical information and AI techniques

A start-up, which understands the clinical and economic potential from the intersection of medical data and AI solutions is Komodo Health, which was founded in 2014. According to Web Sun, the company’s co-founder, and president, “We had a vision that integrating robust data with software solutions was the way forward for healthcare at a time when no one was doing this”. Komodo has created an AI platform, which it refers to as a "healthcare map", comprised of large-scale anonymous health outcome data from hundreds of sources.

In January 2020, Komodo announced a deal to import Blue Health Intelligence’s patient data onto its platform. Blue Health provides US healthcare claims data and actionable analytics to payers, employers, brokers, and healthcare services. The combined database charts >325m individual patient care journeys through tests and therapies at hospitals and clinics. In March 2021, Komodo raised US$220m to extend its platform to offer real-time assessments of patients’ healthcare journeys to detect disparities in the quality of care and outcomes, and to provide a basis for interventions aimed at improving outcomes and lowering costs.

The ability to introduce clinical insights into enterprise workflows potentially helps producers and providers close gaps in care journeys and address unmet patient needs. Not only are Komodo’s services designed to deliver timely interventions and alerts to improve care, but the company also records and reports the performance of specific medical products on patient cohorts. These data provide a basis to develop and market further innovative healthcare services, and novel therapeutics, which are expected to boost Komodo’s revenues.

 
A wind of change

We borrowed the ‘wind of change’ phrase used in our introduction from a famous speech made by British Prime Minister Harold Macmillan to the Parliament of South Africa on 3 February 1960 in Cape Town. Macmillan was referring to a system of institutionalised racial segregation, called Apartheid, which enforced racial discrimination against non-Whites, mainly predicated on skin colour and facial features. Despite the UK Prime Minister’s belief that in 1960, the days of White supremacy in South Africa were numbered, it took >30 years before Apartheid was ended and Nelson Mandela was inaugurated as the first Black President of South Africa on 10 May 1994. Mandela was an anti-apartheid activist and lawyer, who had spent 27 years as a political prisoner under the Apartheid regime.

A wind of change is now blowing through MedTech markets. In less than a decade, healthcare will be faced with significantly more patients, more data, more technology, more costs, more competition, and less money for producers and providers. Over the past five years, US providers’ profit margins have fallen, in Europe the gap between public health expenditure and government budgets has increased, and throughout the world healthcare systems are under budget pressure and actively managing their costs. With such strong headwinds, a sustainable future for MedTechs might be to reduce their emphasis on manufactured products distributed through labour intensive sales channels and increase their AI service offerings using data from their existing devices. Over the past five years AI solutions have become more prolific, easier to deploy, and increasingly sophisticated at doing what health professionals do, but more efficiently, more quickly and at a lower cost.  

 
~80% of B2B sales are digital

In addition to AI solutions being used to improve clinical outcomes, they can be employed to enhance business efficiencies. A previous Commentary described how AI systems can help to transform traditional labour intensive MedTech supply chains and personalise sales. A recent study undertaken by Gartner, a global research and advisory firm, suggests that, “Over the next five years, an exponential rise in digital interactions between buyers and suppliers will break traditional sales models, and by 2025, ~80% of B2B sales will occur in digital channels”. Giant tech companies are taking advantage of this to enter healthcare markets, MedTechs have been slow to implement such changes despite the boost in online engagements provided by the COVID-19 pandemic.
Reasons for slow adoption of AI systems

So, why are MedTechs slow to implement AI solutions to enhance clinical outcomes and improve economic efficiencies? Over ~3 decades they have achieved double-digit revenue growth from manufacturing physical devices and marketing them through labour intensive channels in a few wealthy regions of the world with relatively benign reimbursement policies. During this period of rapid growth and commercial success, MedTechs have not been required to confront data issues, bridge the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) skills gap, and commit to new structures, new processes, new behaviours, and new aptitudes.
This suggests that despite a wind of change, now blowing through MedTech markets and challenging traditional business models and strategies, it could be perceived as a 'temporary breeze' and nothing will change. However, a step change in the direction of more AI solutions might occur when digital natives [people who have grown up in a digital age] replace digital immigrants [people whose careers were well underway before the onset of the digital age] in MedTechs’ C suites. According to a Gartner executive, “As baby boomers retire and millennials mature into key decision-making positions, a digital-first buying posture will become the norm. . . . . . Sales reps will need to embrace new tools and channels, as well as a new manner of engaging customers, matching their sales activity to their customers’ buying practices and information collecting needs”. A 2019 research report from the Boston Consulting Group (BCG), suggests that companies, which use AI systems to personalise sales can expect productivity gains of ~10%, and incremental revenue growth of ~10%.
 
Partnering with tech savvy start ups

Currently, many MedTechs neither have the mindsets nor the in-house STEM capabilities to create AI enhanced services. So, what might be a way forward? STEM skills, although scarce, tend to reside in people <30. Although there are ~68m of these people in the US, people with STEM skills tend to prefer to work either for giant tech companies or tech start-ups devoted to leveraging the potential of AI. Giant tech companies and start-ups are outside the comfort zones of most MedTechs. However, in the future, they may be obliged to partner with tech savvy start-ups engaged in developing AI driven solutions. Such collaboration will be challenging because it requires MedTechs to change their business models, create new ways of making strategic investments, and develop novel approaches to R&D that encompass a broader spectrum of partners.

Most of MedTechs’ R&D investment is consumed by incremental innovations to their current suite of devices. This tends to reinforce existing revenues rather than develop disruptive technologies aimed at capturing new revenue streams. Such strategies are efficacious in stable, fast growing economic environments, but lose their edge in slower markets. It seems reasonable to assume that, as market conditions tighten, MedTechs will need to consider shifting their R&D strategies towards the development of more disruptive technologies. We see this already in Stryker’s R&D investment in robotic surgical systems and Zimmer’s proposed R&D spend on AI, data informatics and robotics.

You might also like: 

China’s rising MedTech industry and the dilemma facing Western companies


and

Can Western companies engage with and benefit from China?
US supremacy challenged  

US tech giants are investing heavily in AI R&D and driving the adoption of advanced technologies in healthcare. Although these companies have made, and will continue to make, a significant contribution to the field, it would be a mistake to think that they have AI healthcare markets sewn up.
 
Three Chinese tech giants, collectively referred to as ‘BAT’, are also investing heavily in AI systems. All three offer services well beyond their core products and have far-reaching global ambitions. BAT is comprised of Baidu, China’s largest search provider, Alibaba the nation’s biggest eCommerce platform and Tencent, which runs WeChat that has access to >1bn users on its platform. For the past five years BAT has been expanding into other Asian countries, recruiting US talent, investing in US AI start-ups, and forming global partnerships to advance their AI ambitions.
In addition to these private endeavours, China has made AI a national project. Since 2017, Beijing has been pursuing a three-step New Generation AI Development Plan, which aims to turn AI into a core national industry. To this end, China is vigorously carrying out research on brain science, brain computing, quantum information and quantum computing, intelligent manufacturing, robotics, and big data. Already, China has become a world leader in AI publications and patents. The nation’s global share of AI research papers increased from 1,086 (4.26%) in 1997 to 37,343 (27.68%) in 2017, surpassing any other country, including the US. Most AI patents are registered by companies in the US and Japan. However, when it comes to AI patents registered by research institutes, China is the undisputed leader. According to a 2021 report on China's AI development,  ~390,000 AI patent applications were filed in China over the past decade, accounting for ~75% of the world total. Beijing’s competitive advantage in big data and AI strategies is driven by a combination of its weak privacy laws, a national plan, huge government investments, concerted data-gathering, and big data analytics by the BAT tech giants and others. Currently, China’s AI market is valued at ~US$22bn, and by 2030, the nation is expected to become a leader in AI-empowered healthcare businesses and the world’s leading AI power.

Beijing’s policies have given rise to hundreds of AI driven start-ups aimed at gaining access to new revenue streams in China’s rapidly growing healthcare market. Western MedTechs might consider accepting Beijing’s  Made in China 2025 policy, partner with these  tech savvy start-ups and jointly benefit from the nation’s current 5-year economic plan aimed at a “healthier China”.

 
Takeaways
 
We have presented an AI-driven prescription for MedTechs to enhance the quality of care while providing access to new revenue streams. We suggest that this can be achieved by bolting on AI solutions to existing devices, and over time through partnerships with tech savvy start-ups. But ~30 years of double-digit growth derived from manufacturing physical products and distributing them through labour intensive sales channels might have cemented mindsets among C suite incumbents that find it challenging to think beyond physical product offerings. This could suggest that the wind of change, now blowing through MedTech markets, will be perceived as a temporary breeze that does not require thinking beyond physical products, and AI solutions will be a long time coming.
view in full page
  • The MedTech industry is undergoing an era of unprecedented change
  • Pressure on revenues and margins have forced leaders to cling tightly to business as usual
  • In the next decade business as usual will come with significant commercial risks
  • For commercial success future MedTech leaders will need to be different to past leaders
 
Who should lead MedTech?
 
Questions about who should lead medical device (MedTech) companies in the future and what strategies and business models they should pursue are critical. Over the next decade MedTech faces an era of unprecedented change, when it will be necessary to develop new strategies, new business models, new markets, new capabilities and new technologies, while keeping the legacy business running. Future MedTech leaders will be tasked with bridging the gap between traditional manufacturing and sophisticated, digitally driven services while managing unprecedented change and significant competition. For the past 20 years MedTech leaders have been drawn from a relatively narrow set of people with a relatively narrow set of skills. Although this has served the industry well, it might not be the most appropriate policy to ensure commercial success over the next decade.
 
In this Commentary

In this Commentary we: (i) describe the traditional MedTech market, indicate the structure parameters of the industry and note that there is a rapidly evolving parallel digital healthcare technology market: one that is growing more than twice as fast and soon will be comparable in size to the traditional manufacturing-based market, (ii) suggest that MedTech leaders tend to be men in their 50s with limited understanding of this parallel digital healthcare universe, which is positioned to play a significant role in  shaping MedTech companies of the future, (iii) suggest that because MedTech leaders have performed relatively well over the past two decades, they have tended to become prisoners of their own traditions and felt little or no need to evolve their strategies and business models, (iv) contend that MedTech leaders’ principal response to market changes to-date has been increased M&A activity, which has made companies bigger but not better, (v) suggest that the industry is undergoing a significant market shift from manufacturing to solutions and services driven by the 4th industrial revolution, which is characterized by a fusion of technologies, and (vi) conclude that future MedTech leaders will require a deep knowledge and understanding of the 4th industrial revolution if they are to successfully transform traditional strategies and business models in order to deliver superior healthcare solutions at lower prices.
 
MedTech market and the structure of the industry

MedTech is a conservative manufacturing industry, which produces and markets a diverse group of product offerings predominantly in a few developed wealthy markets. Over the next decade the MedTech market is expected to change significantly. For the past two decades the industry has fallen into three broad segments: (i) diagnostic products, which include imaging devices, with a global market of some US$100bn, (ii) medical aids including consumer durables, such as hearing aids and bandages with a worldwide market of about US$150bn, and (iii) surgical products that include equipment and instruments used in the operating room, which has a global market of some US$140bn.
 
A 2017
EvaluateMedTech report suggests the global MedTech market is projected to eclipse US$500bn in sales by 2021, over 33% of which is expected to be derived from the US. The worldwide market is projected to continue growing at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 5%. Ranked by 2017 revenues, seven of the world’s largest MedTech companies are American and a significant proportion of the world’s MedTech companies trade on Nasdaq. This includes 13 large companies with a market cap in excess of US$10bn, some of which are divisions of even larger corporations such as Johnson & Johnson Medical Devices and Diagnostics, with estimated global sales of US$38bn for 2018; this equates to approximately 7.6% of the worldwide MedTech market. Medtronic, which is the world's largest stand-alone MedTech company, has a market cap of US$117bn and in 2017 recorded revenues of US$29.7bn; 26% of which was generated in the US. Nasdaq has about 24 mid-cap MedTech companies ranging in value from US$2bn to US$10bn. The majority of these are American and tend to be regionally based with relatively small markets outside the US, Europe and Japan. There are some 27 small-cap companies with market caps between US$300m and US$2bn, 46 micro-cap companies ranging from US$50m to US$300m and finally some 28 nano-cap MedTech companies with market caps less than US$50m.
 
In recent years, a digital healthcare technology industry, where medical devices meet innovative software, has grown substantially, but mostly in parallel to the traditional manufacturing-based MedTech industry. According to
Transparency Market Research, in 2016 this industry, which is based on healthcare information systems and wearable devices, had annual sales of US$180bn, and is projected to grow at a CAGR of 13.4% between 2017 and 2025, reaching US$537bn in annual sales by the end of 2025.

 
MedTech executive leadership
 
There is a relative dearth of data specifically on MedTech leaders and the demographics of MedTech C-suites (senior executives which tend to start with the letter C). Notwithstanding, there are data on Fortune 500 and S&P 500 company leaders from regular surveys undertaken by executive search firms Korn Ferry, and Spencer Stuart. Some of the larger MedTech companies, such as Abbot Laboratories, Baxter International, Stryker and Boston Scientific, are listed in the Fortune 500 and S&P 500. If we assume a significant similarity between the demographics of Fortune 500, S&P 500 and MedTech company executives, then MedTech leaders will tend to be white males in their 50s, predominantly drawn from similar sector company C-suites and will have an average tenure of about eight years.
  
Middle-aged men
 
Over the past 20 years MedTech leaders have benefitted from the industry’s commercial success, albeit in recent years at a slower pace than before 2007. Most leaders are constrained by quarterly earnings targets, shareholder expectations, regulations and the high risk and cost associated with changing manufacturing systems. MedTech CEOs received their formative education before the widescale uptake of the Internet and email. Many had just started their careers in large corporations when giant technology companies such as Amazon (launched 1994) and Google (1998) in the US and their Chinese equivalents - Alibaba (1999) and Baidu (2000) - were start-ups, and the Chinese and Indian economies were still somewhat underdeveloped and inchoate. Consequently, most MedTech leaders were entering middle-age when US social media giants such as Facebook (2004), YouTube (2005), WhatsApp (2009) and Instagram (2010) and their Chinese counterparts such as WeChat (2011), RenRen (2005), Weibo (2009) and Youku (2005), were just taking off.
 
This might partly explain why some MedTech leaders appear to be challenged by the rapidly evolving new digital technologies and the industry’s shift from manufacturing to solutions and services. Such is the pace of change, it will require a shift of mindset among incumbent MedTech leaders if they are to fully grasp this new and significant opportunity set.
 
Similarly, with emerging markets. Most CEOs have knowledge of the wealthy MedTech markets, in particular the US and Europe. Few, however, have in-depth knowledge or first-hand experience of the large and fast-growing emerging economies such as Brazil, Russia, India and China (BRIC). The BRIC countries are at a similar stage of their economic development, and have a combined population of more than 3bn, which equates to about 40% of the global population. BRIC countries are differentiated from other promising emerging markets by their demographic and economic potential to rank among the world’s largest and most influential economies in the 21st century, and by having a reasonable chance of realizing this potential.
 
A future HealthPad Commentary will examine the opportunities for Western MedTech companies seeking or expanding their franchise in China and will suggest that they might not find it as easy as it would have been 5 years ago. Opportunities in China for global MedTech players are becoming tougher as the Chinese economy slows and restructures; Beijing’s healthcare reforms kick-in and local MedTech producers, buoyed by legislation, revenue growth and increased capacity, become commercially stronger, more technically sophisticated and take a bigger share of both the Chinese domestic and international emerging MedTech markets.
 
Underrepresentation of women
 
Not a single woman serves as CEO of a large MedTech company. Only 22% of their board members are women, which is about the same proportion as the Fortune 500 overall (20%), and about 22% of MedTech C-suites are women. In 2017, nearly 50% of the US labour force were women and 40% of these worked in management, professional and related occupations.  Although women are underrepresented in MedTech leadership positions they are key stakeholders in healthcare. About 35% of active US physicians are women. According to the Association of American Medical Colleges, (AAMC), 46% of all physicians in training and almost 50% of all medical students in the US are women.  60% of pharmacists in America are women.

It should not be forgotten that women have played significant roles in medicine and healthcare. For example, Marie Curie, the only person to win a Nobel Prize in two different sciences, pioneered research on radioactivity. Curie made a significant contribution to the fight against cancer and is credited with having created mobile radiography units to provide X-ray services to field-hospitals during World War I. Sussman Yalow, was awarded the Nobel prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1977 for the development of the radioimmunoassay technique, and Gertrude Elion won a Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1988 for her work in helping to develop drugs to treat leukaemia and AIDS. More recently, Jennifer Doudna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier, were credited with the discovery of the ground-breaking CRISPR-Cas9 gene-editing technology, which effectively changes genes within organisms and is positioned to radically change healthcare and MedTech in the 21st century.

In addition to under-representation, which suggests that the pipeline of women candidates for top jobs in MedTech is weak, there is some evidence to suggest that the MedTech industry does not have a positive attitude towards women. Findings of a 2015 survey conducted by AvaMed, the industry’s principal trade association, suggest that women in the industry feel discriminated against. Some 42% of women respondents of the survey said they, “felt held back from senior leadership positions” and 37% felt “overtly discriminated against”. "The world cannot afford the loss of the talents of half its people if we are to solve the many problems which beset us,” said Yalow in her 1977 Nobel Prize acceptance speech.
 
MedTech’s business model
 
Over the past two decades MedTech leaders have drawn comfort from the fact that the global MedTech market is highly centralized. The US, Western Europe and Japan, which represent only about 13% of the world’s population, account for more than 86% of the global MedTech market share (US: 42%, Europe: 33%, Japan: 11%). Conversely, the BRIC countries, which represent about 40% of the world’s population, currently only account for about 5% of the global MedTech market. This has enabled MedTech leaders to market their product offerings to healthcare providers principally in a few wealthy developed regions of the world via well-compensated sales representatives with deep product knowledge and expertise. The industry’s predominant business model has been to raise prices on existing products and market new offerings at higher prices than the products they are meant to replace. This worked very well before 2007 during a period of sustained global economic growth, predominantly fees-for-service healthcare systems and relatively benign reimbursement policies; all of which contributed to high margins and significant sales growth.
 
Market changes not perceived as acute enough to trigger transformation
 
Since the 2008 recession the MedTech market has changed. The global economy has weakened, debt (sovereign, corporate and personal) has escalated, populations have continued to grow, and the prevalence of chronic lifetime diseases and multi-morbidities have increased. Over that period, healthcare systems have become fiscally squeezed, costs have become pivotal and impacted all stakeholders. This has led to: (i) a shift in healthcare systems from fees-for-service to fees-for-value (ii) increased consolidation, convergence, and connectivity of stakeholders and a consequent change in purchasing decisions from individual (fragmented) hospitals and clinicians to centralized procurement bodies, which can leverage economies of scale and negotiate for larger purchases at volume discounts, (iii) the decline of MedTech R&D productivity, and (iv) increased competition from new market entrants, often from different industries. MedTech’s gross margins have been squeezed and annual growth rates have slowed to a CAGR of between 4 and 5%. Notwithstanding, MedTech leaders, buoyed by continued but slower revenue growth, and doubtless comforted by a prolonged surge in US equity markets, have not perceived these market changes as being with sufficient acuity to transform their strategies or business models.  Their principal response has been to increase M&A. 
 
M&A main strategic response to market changes
 
Over the past decade M&A has provided MedTech leaders with a means to: (i) increase scale and leverage, (ii) drive stronger financial performance, (iii) obtain a broader portfolio of product offerings, (iv) enhance therapeutic solutions and (v) increase international expansion; without changing their companies’ fundamental manufacturing structures and strategies. According to a January 2018 McKinsey report, between 2011 and 2016, 60% of the growth of the 30 largest MedTech companies was due to M&A. The report also suggests that between 2006 and 2016, only 20% of 54 pure-play publicly traded MedTech companies, “mostly relied on organic growth”.  M&A activity has resulted in bigger MedTech companies but not necessarily better ones. This is because M&A and collaborative relationships have not encouraged healthcare providers to change their strategies and business models and develop powerful data-sharing networks, which help drive integration across the continuum of healthcare.
 
Need for portfolio transformation
 
Encouragingly, the 2018 McKinsey report also suggests that some MedTech companies are beginning to use M&A to acquire “non-traditional” assets, such as software and service companies, to assist them in transforming their portfolios. Notwithstanding, portfolio change in a rapidly evolving and increasingly competitive healthcare ecosystem requires a sound strategic understanding of the potential role that the 4th industrial revolution can provide for MedTech. Given our discussion so far, it seems reasonable to assume that many current MedTech leaders and C-suite executives might not have fully grasped the commercial implications of this revolution for their industry. Portfolio change in the MedTech industry is arguably more likely to be led by executives from, or with an intimate knowledge of, adjacent, service-based companies; those who have successfully employed sophisticated digital technologies and big data strategies to transform their business models and who are now looking to do something similar in MedTech and healthcare markets.
 
The relative slowness of the MedTech industry to transform its strategies and business models is perceived as an opportunity by giant technology corporations. They sense the disruptive potential, just as they do in financial markets due to Wall Street’s inertia to digital change.  For example, in early 2018, Amazon, Apple, Google, and Uber announced their intentions to enter and disrupt the healthcare market by leveraging digital technologies to provide quality healthcare solutions and services at lower costs.
 
Rather than marketing products, MedTech companies are now increasingly being tasked with marketing solutions that can deliver better care at lower prices. The 4th Industrial Revolution is a primary enabler for achieving this. However, given the demographics and the conservatism of the MedTech industry, it seems reasonable to suggest that companies in the sector, which do not adapt, run the risk of becoming simple commodity producers stuck in the middle of a new and rapidly evolving value chain.

 
The 4th Industrial Revolution

The 1st industrial revolution used water and steam to mechanize production, the 2nd used electric energy to create mass production, the 3rd used electronics and information technology to automate production. The 4th industrial revolution, also known as ‘industry 4.0’, is characterized by a fusion of technologies, which is blurring the boundaries between medical devices, drugs, software and patient data and redefining relationships between the physical, biological and digital worlds. These exogenous shifts are likely to demand different strategies, different business models and different leaders for the MedTech industry.
 
Industry 4.0 provides MedTech with an opportunity for portfolio transformation by developing sophisticated data and digitization strategies to enhance company operational and financial performance. Industry 4.0 is driven by greater connectivity via the Internet and computing devices embedded in physical objects and advanced digital technologies, which enable them to send and receive data to help integrate producers, suppliers, business partners and customers; at the same time providing opportunities for MedTech companies to become smarter, more efficient and fully-networked organizations.
 
Key for superior shareholder returns
 
To date, MedTech leaders have been relatively slow to integrate new and evolving digital technologies into their core business operations, although there are encouraging signs that some companies are beginning to do so. Findings of a 2017 report by the Boston Consulting Group, (BCG) suggest MedTech companies are, “masking unsustainably high costs and underdeveloped commercial skills” and relying, “on an outdated commercial model”.  The BCG findings are based on a survey of some 6,000 MedTech employees in commercial functions, more than 100 interviews with MedTech leaders and benchmarking financial and organizational data across 100 MedTech businesses (including nine of the 10 largest companies) worldwide. According to BCG, although the industry overall has made little progress to change its business model and upgrade its skill levels, the companies, which have done so, are winning in the market and generating superior shareholder returns.

MedTech leaders should not mistakenly think that because their companies hold plenty of enterprise data they are implementing industry 4.0 strategies. Often, enterprise data do not provide any competitive advantage whatsoever but are simply a legacy cost of doing business. New sources of data, and the ability to use data’s power, are essential to enhance a company’s competitive advantage. A next-generation enterprise resource planning (ERP) platform, launched by SAP in 2017, is already being used by service companies to provide them with a digital core, which helps to create real-time matrixed data produced by social media, third party information, genetics, the Internet of Things, points of sale, etc.

 
Shift from selling products to selling solutions

To remain competitive in the next decade MedTech leaders will need to employ artificial intelligence (Al), augmented reality, robotics, advanced sensors, the Internet of Things (IoT), blockchain, nanotechnology, 3D printing, petabytes of data, enhanced processing power and storage capacity to help them transform their strategies and business models and enable their companies to evolve from being product-centric to customer-centric, with an emphasis on digitization and the capture and communication of data. Industry 4.0 and the convergence of the physical, biological and digital worlds will fundamentally change MedTech strategies and business models, as decision-making powers continue to shift from manufacturers to other healthcare stakeholders. Critical to this transformation will be those MedTech leaders who are well positioned to ensure that companies remain competitive in their core markets while establishing new markets underpinned by 4.0 technologies.
 
"Out-of-touch leaders" the main cause of company failure

A book published in 2016 entitled Lead and Disrupt suggests that company transformations fail because of out-of-touch leaders rather than competition. According to Michael Tushman, co-author of Lead and Disrupt, “The things that help organizations execute their current strategy - the cultures they build, the structures they forge, the processes that work so well to get today’s strategy executed - actually collude to hold the organization hostage to that soon-to-be-obsolete strategy. The more firms engage in getting today’s work done, it actually reduces the probability of making shifts in innovation and strategy. That is what is so strikingly paradoxical to leaders: The very recipes that work so well for today often get in the way of the future. It’s a challenge to incrementally improve what you’re doing as you’re trying to complement it with something different. The dual strategies are inconsistent.”
 
Takeaways

Over the past two decades MedTech companies have helped to shape healthcare systems in wealthy advanced industrial societies and have been rewarded with commercial success. But just as the fund investment axiom tells us, past performance is no guarantee of future success.

Crucial to the future success of MedTech companies will be their leaders. We have suggested that employing recruiting criteria, which have worked in the past might not guarantee future success. The next 10 years will be an era of unprecedented technological change for MedTech companies when the boundaries between medical devices, drugs, software and patient data become blurred.

Business as usual, which has served the industry well in the past, is unlikely to bring continued commercial success in this new healthcare ecosystem. In recent years, investment in digital healthcare has soared and the momentum towards a digital future has gathered pace. Future successful MedTech leaders will be those who combine a deep understanding of the 4th industrial revolution to leverage sophisticated digital technologies and data to assist them in creating and delivering enhanced healthcare solutions at lower costs, with an ability to keep the legacy manufacturing business running.  

MedTech companies face a stark choice: either appoint leaders similar to those of the past and become challenged or appoint leaders able to integrate new and evolving technologies into the core of the business to create and market cost effective quality healthcare solutions and remain profitable. MedTech leaders might consider adopting the motto: tempora mutantur et nos mutamur in illis.
view in full page