Product Development Research
Objective: A Snowfish client asked for a quick analysis of the market for a potential innovative medical simulation product. One of the chief constraints on the product’s viability was the number of residents & fellows learning the surgical approach that the product would be simulating.
The management team had been told by their board members and KOLs that the product had enormous potential. Snowfish was asked to confirm the assumptions and make a recommendation as to whether the market opportunity merited investment.
Methodology: In order to quickly assess, the market Snowfish thought there were two critical elements. The first element was to gain a physician perspective at leading teaching institutions not affiliated with the company to understand the number of physicians that were experienced with the surgical approach. The second element was to see if the procedure volume mirrored the board’s assumptions.
Snowfish identified and recruited half a dozen physicians from leading teaching institutions across the United States. We also analyzed procedure volumes based on CPT codes.
Results: It quickly became apparent that there was a strong match between what we were hearing from non company affiliated physicians and the CPT codes. In fact, both data elements were in complete agreement. They both indicated that there was not a market for the medical simulation product. Based on these two strong data points, Snowfish recommended that the company should not pursue the product development.
Below are some of the results from physician surveys at leading institutions:
| Institution | A | B | C | D | E |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total Interventional Cardiologists | 16 | 5 | 7 | 16 | 13 |
| Interventional Cardiologist Trained on Procedure | 1 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 2 |
| Performing Procedure | 1 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 2 |
| Aren't Trained | 15 | 4 | 5 | 12 | 1 |
| Trained (%) | 6% | 20% | 29% | 25% | 15% |
| Performing (%) | 6% | 20% | 0% | 25% | 15% |
| Untrained (%) | 94% | 80% | 71% | 75% | 85% |