Posted by Plish on December 30, 2013
I recently finished reading, Communicating The New: Methods to Shape and Accelerate Innovation by IIT Institute of Design Professor, Kim Erwin.
The premise of the book is simple but it’s a point that gets missed. If someone is trying to communicating a new idea, the typical way is to use concepts, techniques and metaphors that are familiar. I’ve seen it in many industries. In music we hear people say, “The music is a cross between Joan Jett and Enya.” While the statement is provocative, it falls short because people are forming an idea of what the “Joan/Enya” amalgam sounds and looks like, a perception that is likely inaccurate in some, if not many, ways. In business I’ve seen products described as “XYZ product but it does it in a different way and better.” Again, this type of comparison rings hollow and doesn’t do justice to what may truly be a ground breaking concept.
So what to do?
As the book points out: If you want to communicate The New, it should be done in ways that get the message across and at the same time pave the way for bringing the idea to fruition. It’s not just about transmitting information, it’s about bringing information alive and making it engaging on myriads of levels. Hence the subtitle of the book: “Methods to Shape and Accelerate Innovation.”
While the book is about communication, it’s about much more than that, it’s about creating and cocreating – bringing things to actualization. This book is about innovation tactics; it’s about dream-storming. We all have heard and seen great ideas that don’t get a chance to spread their wings because the idea was ineffectively communicated. This book shares tools to give an idea wings. In addition, it provides tools that will excite and empower stakeholders/team members so that they engage with, and develop, fledgling ideas. The more these people are engaged, the more they feel confident and enthusiastic about pushing an idea out of the nest expecting it to fly!
The book is easy to read and is aesthetically pleasing as well. There are multiple case studies and insights from innovators – it adds breadth to the content. One minor complaint I have is that there are some great graphics that span adjacent pages. As a result, some of the content in the graphics is hard to see because it disappears in the seam between the pages. Granted, the content of these ‘page spanning graphics’ are from case studies and they aren’t really pertinent to the content of the chapters, but the graphics were interesting and it drove me nuts to not be able to see the entire graphic. If I can read part of a graphic, I want to be able to read all of it. Just a personal pet peeve. The remainder of the graphics are well done and helpful, illuminating the text.
The resource section of this book, what people would normally consider the end notes of a book, are outstanding and provide links and directions to sources for further research. This chapter is a gem and should be read.
A final point is that a book about communicating The New, should perhaps be more than a book. The webpage is a step in the right direction, but somewhere in the back of my mind, this book is screaming for new ways of being shared. I am also looking forward to more case studies of people who are successfully (and unsuccessfully!) communicating The New. This book is just getting the conversation started!
Erwin’s book is a welcome addition to the libraries of innovators and entre/intrapraneurs alike. I highly recommend “Communicating the New” for anyone who has ideas and knows it’ll take more than an army of one to make them reality.
Posted in culture of innovation, Design, design thinking, Entrepreneurship 2.0, innovation, Tactics | Tagged: book review, Communicating the New, communication, corporate culture, culture of innovation, Design, Entrepreneurship, IIT Institute of Design, innovation, innovation tactics, Kim Erwin | Leave a Comment »
Posted by Plish on December 21, 2013
On September 25th of this year, after approximately 2 years of soliciting comments from Industry, the FDA released a guidance document entitled “Mobile Medical Applications.” The document defines under what circumstances smartphone apps, and the like, are considered medical devices. The reason that this is important is because if you or I create an app that performs some medical function, (e.g. it turns a phone into an electrocardiogram that records and sends irregular heartbeats to the doc,) it becomes a medical device and as such, regulations require that you register yourself with the FDA as a medical device manufacturer and become compliant to the regulations. You may even have to submit a pre-market notification to the FDA for the app you choose to commercialize. Ignore these regulations and you could be fined and even thrown in jail.
By issuing this document, the FDA acknowledged that it’s in the 21st century and that medicine is becoming more and more mobile. It’s also acknowledged that the mobile medical industry is only in its infancy, so rather than anticipate what types of apps should be classified as medical devices, it created a framework for determining when an app is a medical device. (The ECG app I mentioned is but one example.) All in all, whereas most new regulations often can stifle innovation, this document isn’t like that. It actually can further innovation.
This is because one particular group of developers (who also happen to be the app users) are in a privileged place – they are not considered medical device manufacturers and hence not required to register with the FDA. Who are these folks?
Licensed medical practitioners (physicians, dentists, optometrists, etc.).
These professionals are able to innovate in a way that other app developers are not…with one caveat. These doctors can only use their apps in the context of their own practices (or keep them within their group.) If a doctor chooses to commercialize the app, she then becomes a medical device manufacturer and all the regulations kick in.
Still, even with this caveat, physicians are in a very good place, entrepreneurially speaking.
Think about it.
By exempting physicians who create and use mobile medical apps, physicians can:
- Receive real-time feedback on the suitability of the app for its purpose and modify/optimize it as needed.
- As a result of number 1, they can ascertain what the potential market for the app may be.
- Buzz can be created about the app (both amongst patients and doctors) and results can be published if desired.
The above benefits are things that are very hard to come by in the medical device world (for that matter, they’re often difficult to obtain for non-medical products and services!) In addition, they enable physician entrepreneurs to see if a business case can be built around the app. If it can, time and money can be spent on registering with the FDA and becoming regulatorily compliant – in short, a medical device company can be started and the product commercialized. (It’s important to note here that not all mobile medical apps are the same, even if they are regulated. Some are under more stringent regulations than others and require different types of manufacturing systems.)
Again, this is an enviable position for physicians to be in. Not too many entrepreneurs in regulated industries are allowed to do what physician entrepreneurs are able to do. It will be interesting to see how many physicians answer the call to create apps that help others, and then build businesses from those apps.
If you’re a physician entrepreneur, or a non-physician entrepreneur, with a mobile medical app, I’d love to hear your story. If you’re confused by the regulations, I’m here to help.
Posted in culture of innovation, Design, Entrepreneurship 2.0, Healthcare, innovation, Medical Devices, Quality Systems, Start-Ups | Tagged: app developer, apps, Design, FDA, healthcare, innovation, medicine, mobile healthcare, mobile medical apps, physician entrepreneur, regulations, wellness | 4 Comments »