Chandrayaan-3 -what health tech can learn from its success!
The historic moment started on August 15, 2003, when Former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee announced the Chandrayaan programme.
20 years later, India is on the moon, making the dream of every Indian true. This recognizes India’s reputation as a capable player in the global space arena and reinforces its commitment to collaborative space exploration.
What was corrected in Chandrayaan-3 compared to its older counterpart?
The Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) tweaked the design and included a “failure-based design” in Chandrayaan-3, unlike the “success-based design” used in Chandrayaan-2. This new approach focuses on potential failure scenarios and how to protect against them to ensure a successful landing.
What can health tech companies that develop health tech products learn from these design/ project principles?
Failure-based design and success-based design are two contrasting approaches that can be used in health technology projects and health tech development. These approaches have different philosophies and methodologies, and they can lead to vastly different outcomes.
In this blog, I will compare failure-based design and success-based design, highlighting their differences through real-life examples and case studies and how these concepts can add value in the digital health domain.
Failure-Based Design:
Failure-based design is an approach that emphasizes learning from failures and iteratively improving products based on those lessons. This approach encourages experimentation, risk-taking, and rapid prototyping.
It acknowledges that failure is a natural part of the innovation process and seeks to minimize the negative consequences of failure while maximizing the opportunities for growth and improvement.
Case studies and Real-Life Examples:
- The first version of the iPhone faced significant criticism for its lack of features and high price point. However, Apple continued to iterate and improve the product, eventually creating one of the most successful smartphones in history. (Read more here)
- The health tech company, Medisafe, developed a medication tracking app and improved usability by iterating on the design based on user feedback, adding features such as reminders and social support. The updated app increased user engagement and improved medication adherence rates.
Success-Based Design:
Success-based design is an approach that focuses on achieving predefined success criteria and delivering products that meet customer needs. This approach prioritizes predictability, reliability, and efficiency.
It seeks to minimize risks and avoid costly mistakes by thoroughly testing and validating designs before implementation.
Case studies and Real-Life Examples:
- Amazon’s e-commerce platform was designed with a focus on customer satisfaction, using algorithms to recommend products based on purchase history and preferences. This approach led to significant increases in sales and customer loyalty. (Read more here)
- The health tech company, Medtronic, developed a new insulin pump designed to simplify diabetes management. The device was tested extensively with patients and clinicians to ensure it met their needs and expectations. As a result, the pump received regulatory approval and has become a market leader in the field. (Read more here)
Comparison
While both failure-based and success-based design approaches aim to create effective products, they differ in their philosophy and methodology.
Failure-based design embraces experimentation and iteration, accepting that failure is a natural part of the innovation process.
Success-based design prioritizes predictability and efficiency, focusing on meeting predefined success criteria.
Key Differences
When to use each approach?
Each approach has its strengths and weaknesses, and the choice between them depends on the specific project requirements and goals. The above list of use cases are only a few items of the entire healthcare software development cycle or a health tech development process.
Understanding the differences between these approaches can help organizations choose the best approach for their specific needs and goals. By embracing experimentation and iteration, failure-based design can foster innovation and disruption. On the other hand, success-based design can deliver efficient and effective solutions by prioritizing predictability and meeting predefined success criteria.
Ultimately, the choice between these approaches depends on the specific project requirements and goals. Product owners, managers, and business analysts in the health tech industry can leverage failure-based approaches and success-based designs to create innovative and effective solutions that meet customer needs.
In my opinion, below are the list of 10 steps and activities that can help better use of these approaches:
1. Understand the Customer Needs pain points, and behaviors:
User research and interviews can identify problems they face and the goals they want to achieve, and will help you prioritize the right features and functionalities that address their needs.
2. Define Success Metrics in alignment with the customers’ needs and goals:
These metrics should measure the effectiveness and efficiency of the solution. For example, if you’re developing a telemedicine platform, success metrics might include patient satisfaction, appointment completion rates, and time to resolution.
3. Embrace Failure as a learning opportunity:
Encourage co-working, experimentation, testing, and iteration. Provide resources and support for teams to conduct experiments and learn from failures. Use failure as a catalyst for improvement and growth.
4. Focus on Outcomes rather than specific features or functions:
Identify the key results that the product or service should achieve and measure progress towards those outcomes. This will help you stay aligned with customer needs and adjust the product or service accordingly.
5. Design for Iteration:
Build modular, scalable, and flexible solutions that can adapt to changing customer needs and market conditions. Use APIs, microservices, and other architectural patterns to facilitate integration and reuse of components.
6. Test Assumptions and hypotheses early and often:
Develop minimum viable products (MVPs) or prototypes to validate assumptions before investing heavily in a particular direction. Use feedback from customers and stakeholders to refine and iterate on the product or service.
7. Measure Progress using appropriate metrics and KPIs:
Track performance against success criteria and adjust the product or service accordingly. Use data to inform decision-making and drive continuous improvement.
8. Learn from Failure and use it as an opportunity for growth:
Share lessons across the organization to avoid repeating the same mistakes. Use failure as a catalyst for innovation and improvement.
9. Incorporate Feedback:
Use feedback loops to refine and improve the product or service. Create mechanisms for capturing and incorporating feedback, such as user surveys, focus groups, and usability testing.
10. Continuously Improve and evolve the product or service based on customer needs and market trends:
Stay agile and responsive to changes in the market and customer preferences. Use data and analytics to inform decision-making and drive continuous improvement.
By following these project steps, product owners, managers, and business analysts in the health tech industry can successfully integrate failure-based approaches and success-based designs into their work, leading to better outcomes for patients and providers alike.