CUSTOMER ORIENTATION: KEY TO DELIVERING USEFUL ASSISTIVE DEVICES
Arun K. Jain1, Douglas J.Usiak2, and Joseph P. Lane1 RERC on Technology Evaluation and Transfer, Center for Assistive Technology 1 University at Buffalo, 2 Independent Living Center of Western New York, Inc.
ABSTRACT
We present the RERC-TET's protocols for a customer-oriented approach to designing and marketing new assistive devices. Our methodology places the customers at the apex of product related decisions. The technical and marketing teams work to interpret the customers' requirements, and find the most cost efficient solutions to their needs. We describe our results with these protocols.
INTRODUCTION
People with functional limitations may benefit from using assistive devices. Unfortunately, the experience of the users of such equipment has not been satisfactory.[1,2] Batavia and Hammer describe it as a pattern of "adoption and abandonment."[3] The person with a disability receives an assistive device through a clinical selection process. Once in use, the individual discovers that the device fails to meet his/her needs. Frustrated, the individual abandons the device and chooses another to fill the gap. Unfortunately, this cycle may repeat several times before an adequate solution is found (if ever).
These cycles present multiple problems for sellers, buyers and users. The consumer's quality of life is not optimized. Second, third-party payers lose revenue through the consumer's abandonment cycles, and pass those losses on through higher premiums, higher taxes and more restrictive approval policies. Finally, manufacturers of assistive devices lose business or constrain their growth by manufacturing devices which do not fully meet customer needs. As a result, they lack the economies of scale needed to operate at a reasonable profit margin, nor are they able to offer lower prices to consumers.
These marketplace problems and their associated economic waste can be minimized by adopting a customer orientation to the marketing of assistive devices. Towards this end, the RERC on Technology Evaluation and Transfer, developed protocols for a methodology to improve the quality of new assistive devices introduced to the market. These protocols help us screen, select, develop and offer commercialization, inventions submitted to the program. Invention evaluation is supported by funding from the National Institute on Disability and Rehabiliation Research.
METHODOLOGY
Our customer-oriented approach to the marketing of assistive devices requires that the entire focus of the marketing effort be to solve customers' problems. We work with the inventors and manufacturers to identify their customers, choose from among them those they wish to serve, find their needs, establish technical specifications in order to meet customer requirements within the price constraints imposed by the customers, differ-entiate their offerings from those of the competition and communicate these differences to the market place. In the following we briefly elaborate on each phase of this customer oriented philosophy.
Define Customers - Our program is based on the belief that active participation of the customers in the product design proceis key to delivering useful new products. We define the customer as the "end user" (person with a disability), "secondary users" (family members or care providers), and the "prescribers" (if professional selection is required). Depending on the product, all three groups may be viewed as the customer. The end user must ultimately bear the consequences of a poorly designed assistive device and hence must be heard to ensure that the product will be used. The family member or care provider, where appropriate, may have functional requirements which, unless met, may make the assistive device useless. The "professional" provides input based upon his/her understanding of how the device addresses the functional impairments or medical necessity needed to justify purchase or reimbursement.
Customer Requirements - We involve customers in our process to clearly establish the requirements which must be met if the device is to gain acceptance in the market place. We accomplish this by conducting focus group interviews in which the three customer groups: "end users", "secondary users" and "prescribers" actively participate. We identify and select focus group participants based on function -- that is the function provided by the device as compared to the functional limitations of the participants. By focusing on function, we avoid the mismatches possible by disability type, primary versus secondary disability, medical diagnosis, age group or gender bias.
The customers discuss the specific function under consideration, describe the benefits sought from an assistive device for that function, and define and prioritize their criteria assessing these benefits. The customers then describe the extent to which the various devices currently available in the market do or don't meet their requirements. This enables us to identify the critical deficiencies in the assistive devices being sold in the market. By developing a device that addresses these deficiencies, we work to ensure customer satisfaction and eventual success in the market place.
Batavia and Hammer identified seventeen general functional criteria (e.g., durability, reliability, repairability, etc.) for evaluating assistive devices. Our work has since refined those seventeen into eleven criteria.[4] We now know that the definitions of these criteria change, depending on the specific type of assistive device being evaluated. The manufacturer's task is to deliver on these consumer criteria, so we must verify with customers that these criteria have been met. We are developing the information necessary to tell the manufacturers what "portability, reliability and durability" mean to wheelchair users versus voice-output users, so they can incorporate design features that ensure customer satisfaction on those criteria.
Next, an alpha version of the proposed assistive device is demonstrated to the participants in the focus group and they are asked to evaluate it on the criterion previously established by the group. This helps us to determine extent to which the alpha version could meet customer requirements. Suggestions are sought from the focus group participants to make the device better suited for meeting their requirements, typically resulting in a consumer-driven description of a beta version.
Customer Based Price - The success of an assistive device in attracting a significant proportion of the target market will ultimately depend upon the price. Affordability remains a key criteria for the customer base. A typical approach for estimating price is to add up the cost of components and apply a mark-up to cover administrative cost and profit margin. A factor is applied to this "ex-factory" cost to cover for wholesaler and retailer markups in order to determine the price to be charged from the end user. However, this method excludes the customers from the pricing decisions. We believe that the product's worth to the customer -- the amount which they are willing to pay for the benefits provided by the assistive device -- should be the guidepost for any pricing strategy.
In a customer based pricing strategy, focus group participants state the price they would be willing to pay for the prototype, assuming the suggested changes have been incorporated in the device. We then deduct the desired profit margin and other overheads associated with sales and distribution, to arrive at the "target cost" a manufacturer must achieve to make the product attractive.
Design Considerations - The RERC-TET's consumer team passes the results of the focus group over to the technical and marketing teams. The technical team then establishes design specifications for the prototype which would meet the expressed customer requirements.[5] During the design process, priority is given to attributes considered to be of greatest importance by the consumers and where substantial gap exists between the consumer requirements and the current market offerings. The marketing team uses the consumer imposed cost constraints developed during the previous phase, to drive the search for competing technologies, methods for manufacturing the device, and distribution channels. The prototype device is then offered to manufacturers for commercialization through license or purchase.[6]
Differentiation and Communication - If the device is not commercialized because it lacks needed refinements, or we are unable to communicate the device's potential successfully, the RERC-TET may elect to partner with the inventor and generate the beta second iteration. It is not enough to design just another product. For an assistive device to gain a differential advantage, the differences in the market offering have to be meaningful -- they must address critical unfulfilled requirements of the target customers. We are focusing on the customer-identified gaps in the current market offerings and assigning greater importance to these product requirements during the design phase. This will be particularly critical when a manufacturer or our internal product design teams must make crucial trade-offs between the device features and performance levels to live within the customer-imposed cost restraints.
An otherwise perfect assistive device could fail in the market place if the customers do not know about its existence and ability to solve their problem. They must be able to quickly grasp what differentiates the manufacturers offering from the crowd and why buying it is in their best interest. For customer awareness, the RERC-TET depends heavily on active companies in the marketplace, on professional societies such as RESNA and on NIDRR-funded projects like the State Tech Act programs. We expect our knowledge of the target customers, their expectations from particular assistive device, perceptions of the competing alternatives and the proposed offerings, will be useful information to disseminate through our partners in the assistive technology marketplace.
OUR EXPERIENCE
Over the past two years, we applied these protocols to about thirty assistive devices -- out of over 140 submissions. More than 500 consumers, family members and professionals have participated. While most assistive devices were rejected by focus groups for lacking meaningful benefits to users, a select few benefitted from the consumer orientation. About ten devices are being licensed to companies for manufacturing and sale. Consumers have strongly endorsed this process. In follow-up surveys 91% of the participants (35% response rate), think customer evaluation of new assistive technology is needed to ensure the introduction of "right" products in the market. Most (87%) thought their participation in the focus groups was either "extremely" or "very" productive.
Inventors also endorsed this process. Our survey revealed that 88% would recommend our program to other inventors (40% response rate), despite the fact that most received evaluats screen, select, develop and offer for commercialization, inventions submitted to the program. Invention evaluation is supported by funding from the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research .