Joseph Kitonga

6 lies Health Tech startups tell themselves 👇 𝟭. “𝟭𝟮+ 𝗺𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗵 𝘀𝗮𝗹𝗲𝘀 𝗰𝘆𝗰𝗹𝗲𝘀 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗵𝗼𝘀𝗽𝗶𝘁𝗮𝗹𝘀 𝗶𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗻𝗼𝗿𝗺” The sales cycle time is directly correlated to how desperate the hospital is for your solution. I’ve seen deals close in less than 60 days when our solution was a priority. And I’ve seen it take 24 months when it wasn’t. 𝟮. “𝗜𝗳 𝘄𝗲 𝗷𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝗴𝗲𝘁 𝗕𝗿𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗡𝗮𝗺𝗲 𝗫 𝗮𝘀 𝗮 𝗰𝘂𝘀𝘁𝗼𝗺𝗲𝗿, 𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘆𝗼𝗻𝗲 𝗲𝗹𝘀𝗲 𝘄𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝗳𝗼𝗹𝗹𝗼𝘄 𝘀𝘂𝗶𝘁” Health systems like being de-risked by knowing they aren’t the first. And having a huge brand as a customer might be the reason you get a first meeting with a health system (and even that might not happen). But some famous logo using your product is not WHY another health system will buy. There’s a graveyard of Health Tech companies who chased the brand name logos, got them… and then poof. 𝟯. “𝗢𝘂𝗿 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗱𝘂𝗰𝘁 𝗶𝘀 𝘁𝘄𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝗮𝘀 𝗴𝗼𝗼𝗱 𝗮𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗶𝗻𝗰𝘂𝗺𝗯𝗲𝗻𝘁’𝘀 - 𝘀𝗼 𝘄𝗲’𝗹𝗹 𝘄𝗶𝗻.” Sorry to burst your bubble, but your product can be 5 times better than the incumbent’s… and you will still lose. Your product has to be 10 times better than the incumbent’s on a dimension that actually matters to customers for you to beat them. Yup the bar is that high… because the incumbent already has already earned the health system’s trust. 𝟰. “𝗜𝗳 𝘄𝗲 𝗷𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝗽𝘂𝗯𝗹𝗶𝘀𝗵 𝗮 𝘀𝘁𝘂𝗱𝘆 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗮𝗺𝗮𝘇𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘂𝗹𝘁𝘀, 𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘆𝗼𝗻𝗲 𝘄𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝗯𝘂𝘆 𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝘀𝗼𝗹𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻” Clinician entrepreneurs are the most guilty of this. Especially academic ones. A good study might get you a meeting and help overcome objections… but on its own won’t lead to wide scale adoption. And in my experience, most health system executives (even the clinical ones) don’t care that much about the studies you produce. Reality hits you hard when you see health systems buying tech that has next to no evidence. 𝟱. “𝗡𝗼 𝗵𝗼𝘀𝗽𝗶𝘁𝗮𝗹 𝗶𝘀 𝘂𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗮 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗱𝘂𝗰𝘁 𝗹𝗶𝗸𝗲 𝗼𝘂𝗿𝘀... 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗺𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝗺𝗲𝗮𝗻 𝘄𝗲’𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗳𝗶𝗿𝘀𝘁 𝗼𝗻𝗲𝘀 𝘁𝗼 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗸 𝗼𝗳 𝗶𝘁.” Health Tech is 0.1% idea and 99.9% execution. Whatever Health Tech idea you have, a number of companies have most likely tried to build and sell it before. It’s just that getting adoption in healthcare is very, very hard. 𝟲. “𝗜𝗳 𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗱𝘂𝗰𝘁 𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗿𝗼𝘃𝗲𝘀 𝗰𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗹 𝗼𝘂𝘁𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗲𝘀, 𝗶𝘁 𝘄𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝗯𝗲 𝗮 𝗻𝗼-𝗯𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗻𝗲𝗿 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗵𝗼𝘀𝗽𝗶𝘁𝗮𝗹𝘀 𝘁𝗼 𝗯𝘂𝘆 𝗶𝘁.” The inconvenient truth is that hospitals are more incentivized to invest in solutions that increase revenue, improve patient acquisition and reduce staff turnover. It’s not that quality, safety and patient experience don’t matter at all… but on a rankings list of priorities, they are typically lower. Not quite the no-brainer afterall. *** What would you add? #digitalhealth #healthcareinnovation

323

49 Comments

Solve for information asymmetries! Architecture & Civil Engineering - Layout interpretation ~other industries: Healthcare - <Prescription> interpretation Financial Products - <Subject to market risks documentation> interpretation Loans - <Fine print> interpretation There’s going to be a slew of startups commercialising this year with a value prop of simplification using AI

5

We're trying a new thing: Company spotlights to help people better understand what various health IT vendors actually do 🔦 We’ll be cutting through the marketing speak to give short, to-the-point descriptions of a company’s product and/or service + some context on how they see their differentiators. Tag any companies in the comments you'd like to see us cover (and follow Elion if you want to stay in the loop!)

35

13 Comments

Health Tech founders often come to me frustrated that they just can’t get hospitals to buy their product. Even though the founder feels that they are solving such an obvious problem for the healthcare system. In my experience, here are the 3 main reasons why hospitals won’t buy your product… and I’ll use shoes as an analogy. 𝟭. 𝗧𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝗱𝗼𝗻’𝘁 𝗯𝗲𝗹𝗶𝗲𝘃𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝗵𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝗮 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗯𝗹𝗲𝗺 Suppose you looked at my shoes. They’re really worn out. Ripped. Sure it’s annoying when water gets through or my exposed toe gets scratched. But I don’t really care about my feet that much… so my threshold for buying better shoes is really high. Similarly, say you have a solution for recording a patient encounter and summarizing the visit for the patient. While it can be a bit frustrating when verbal instructions my clinicians provided are forgotten and patients need to call us back, it’s not frustrating enough for me to install an entire solution for it. It’s not a true problem for me. You call it a problem… I call it an annoyance. And I don’t spend money to fix annoyances. This is where most Health Tech companies get stuck… most potential customers view you as a Vitamin instead of a Painkiller. You either need to solve a different problem or find an adjacent customer type for who you actually solve a problem for. 𝟮. 𝗧𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝗮𝗴𝗿𝗲𝗲 𝗶𝘁’𝘀 𝗮 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗯𝗹𝗲𝗺... 𝗯𝘂𝘁 𝗶𝘁’𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗮 𝗽𝗿𝗶𝗼𝗿𝗶𝘁𝘆 Suppose my shoes are so worn out, that I’ve decided it’s a problem I need to solve. I’m convinced I need to buy a new pair of shoes soon. But… it’s more important that I save up for getting my car fixed. That’s a bigger priority for me right now. Similarly, say you have a remote patient monitoring solution to cut readmissions. Sure, my hospital's readmission rate might be bad. I agree with you - it’s a problem that really has to be fixed sometime soon. But that’s a next year priority… because my hospital CEO told me to focus on reducing length of stay this year. So yes, I agree it’s a problem… but it’s not a priority to fix right now. Maybe next year. 𝟯. 𝗜𝘁’𝘀 𝗮 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗯𝗹𝗲𝗺 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗮 𝗽𝗿𝗶𝗼𝗿𝗶𝘁𝘆... 𝗯𝘂𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝗵𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝘀𝗼𝗺𝗲𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘀𝗶𝗺𝗶𝗹𝗮𝗿 𝘁𝗼 𝘁𝗿𝘆 𝗳𝗶𝗿𝘀𝘁 Oh look at that, I’ve got some slippers in my closet. I’ll just wear those. Sure I probably shouldn’t use those to run or play tennis or go out in the rain… but, maybe I can? I mean it’s “free” since it’s already in my closet. Similarly, say you have a patient portal that has more advanced features than what my hospital’s EHR vendor offers. I genuinely believe yours is better. But… I just spent hundreds of millions of dollars on this EHR and patient portal. I know it’s not the same… but maybe it’ll be good enough? Only one way to find out… and yes, that may take months to years to validate. So… let’s stay in touch, but give me some time to try this other option out first. ***** What would you add to the list?

177

42 Comments

I am torn by this as well. When I see a new platform shift, I see the opportunity for a shift that benefits the end user. The ultimate end user in healthcare is the patient. In the current model, the structure is to chase revenue by driving it up or maximizing profit. The AI platform shift, targeting low-hanging fruit like administrative efficiencies, follows this path. It's reminiscent of the famous quote: "We wanted flying cars, but we got 140 characters." The same thing is happening all over again, without truly challenging the status quo. Maybe AI can help people get less sick, prevent disease, and navigate spending less money in the first place. But in the current model, it's difficult to get penetration. Ultimately, everyone needs short-term metrics and traction to raise another round of funds. I am not criticizing those who play this game. I respect them for playing it well. However, they shouldn't position themselves as lowering costs for patients by decreasing administrative costs. The trickle-down effect simply doesn’t work.

4

🎬 Matt Damon and 🏈 Colin Kaepernick have invested in it, and so has 💰Andreessen Horowitz... Function Health's executive team has "engineered a first-of-its-kind approach that focuses on prevention and empowerment"—very much in line with what we aimed to achieve with Carebook when we started it over six years ago. Could they be the ones to fulfill their lead investors' prophecy (link at the bottom) and Dr. Eric Topol, MD's premonitions in his books "The Patient Will See You Now" and "Deep Medicine"? They have just secured a $50 million grant. Let's hope this is not another Theranos and that we are truly witnessing the rise of the next generation of direct-to-consumer health companies. These companies will be key players in the "transition from reactive to proactive" health care that the system—and we—desperately need. What do you think? Links: 📝 Investment round press release: https://lnkd.in/eUG87qkf 🔗 Andreessen Horowitz's prophecy: https://lnkd.in/eZATCf4f

4

🔥Tune In to the Latest Fireside Chat with a VC in Healthech🔥 What percentage of VCs are former founders? 30% maybe more? I'd think a fair amount, yet how *exactly* does that transition happen and what perspectives change *radically* afterwards? Sigvards Krongorns shared exactly that - his journey from PwC consultant to Healtech founder, to a VC shaping the future of Healthtech startups. What we talked about: ✨ Sigvards' transition from a PwC consultant to founder to a VC ✨ What steps are necessary to bring innovative medical devices from concept to market ✨ How being a founder can prepare you for a role in venture capital ✨ What strategies help navigate the regulatory landscape in healthtech startups ✨ The right way to engage with VCs for startup funding ✨ What future trends in venture capital and Healthtech look like #HealthTech #VentureCapital #Innovation #StartupJourney #HealthcareInnovation #Entrepreneurship #FiresideChat #VentureCapitalInsights Full conversation can be found here:

32

5 Comments