# 4 attitudes that hinder healthcare innovation

Canonical source: [https://www.braver.net/en/blog/4-attitudes-that-hinder-healthcare-innovation/](<https://www.braver.net/en/blog/4-attitudes-that-hinder-healthcare-innovation/>)

The Braver journal

Implementing new ideas in healthcare — in other words, bringing innovation to life — is not so simple. Many challenges litter the path of innovation and make it a very bumpy one. Whether in terms of regulations, the openness of the government in power or economic dynamics, the healthcare market offers innovators a rather hostile environment.

![Marie-Lou Gagnon](<https://www.braver.net/blog-assets/39b0cb41df4807f1f2af-960.webp>)

 Marie-Lou Gagnon November 26, 2020

![4 attitudes that hinder healthcare innovation](<https://www.braver.net/blog-assets/legacy-6c93139c7657d1385515-960.webp>)

> *Creativity is thinking of something new. Innovation is the implementation of something new.* - **Paul Sloane**

Yet the external environment in which a company operates is not the only factor influencing the success of its solution: there are also the company's internal capabilities. These can be either strengths or weaknesses in its ability to innovate. But beyond those capabilities, can a company's attitude have an influence? In other words, can my attitude as a business leader affect my company's ability to innovate?

Asking the question is certainly a good starting point. Observing our own behaviour is clearly another step forward. And recognizing that certain attitudes may support or hinder innovation is undoubtedly progress.

Here, then, are four attitudes that can hinder the implementation of innovation in healthcare. Will you recognize them in yourself or in entrepreneurs you know?

## **Elitism**

> Favouring an elite at the expense of the masses.

When we try to innovate in healthcare, the goal is often to improve patient care or the health of our society. To do so, we want the solution to be used by as many people, hospitals, professionals or clinics as possible. In a sense, it is about ensuring enough adoption for the innovation's impact to be meaningful.

With that in mind, how can we achieve this substantial adoption if solution developers or decision-makers behave in ways that engage only a group of individuals considered more remarkable than everyone else?

In other words, why would patients, clinics or professionals adopt a new solution if they are not involved?

Of course, during the innovation process, we may need to assemble a group of people who will be more involved in the project, or select an initial group of users as a starting point. However, this approach should not favour only a group of people considered remarkable. It should be carried out with representativeness, humility and transparency.

Also, as innovators, it is natural to hold on to the idea that we have the "best" solution to a given problem. Yet the most desirable solution for society may not always be the most technologically exciting one, for example. Assuming we know better than others can also be very harmful and potentially lead to failure.

## **Distrust**

> A disposition to be wary (the opposite of trust)

An innovative ecosystem is one in which its participants have succeeded in building relationships of trust ([source](<https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228362888_Market_Knowledge_Dimensions_and_Cross-Functional_Collaboration_Examining_the_Different_Routes_to_Product_Innovation_Performance>)). Distrust is therefore a major barrier to innovation.

When we have a new idea and want to turn it into a successful business, our first instinct is often to protect it in case someone wants to steal it. Yet this fear of having our idea stolen can then fuel distrust toward other entrepreneurs in the same market.

Of course, although the initial idea often comes from the imagination of the founder or co-founders, the way it takes shape in the market, or the way it transforms to ultimately become successful, will emerge through conversations. Conversations with people in the field, with entrepreneurs already in the market, and even with people who know less about innovation. In short, there is far more to gain from speaking openly about your ideas to anyone willing to listen than from doing the opposite.

> *There is consensus in the marketing literature that market knowledge and cross-functional collaboration are two fundamental resources for successful product innovation.* — **Luigi Mario de Luca, [Journal of Marketing](<https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228362888_Market_Knowledge_Dimensions_and_Cross-Functional_Collaboration_Examining_the_Different_Routes_to_Product_Innovation_Performance>)**

## **Opportunism**

> An attitude of adjusting one's conduct to the circumstances of the moment, always seeking to use them to one's own best advantage.

One of the principles underlying innovation within an ecosystem is the importance of shared goals. These shared goals must relate to the impact we are all aiming for. As I mentioned above, in healthcare innovation, this often means making our society healthier. Yet if each partner in the ecosystem supports this broad goal but, at the first turn, decides to make choices that best serve their own short-term interests, it will be very difficult to move forward together.

And avoiding opportunism does not mean avoiding strategy. You have to keep your company's long-term viability in mind! Finding the balance between these two necessities is not always simple, and we have already discussed it in this [article](<https://www.braver.net/en/blog/how-to-balance-revenue-and-a-social-mission/>).

## **Negligence**

> The attitude or state of a person who does not apply their mind to what they are doing or should be doing.

Because the path of healthcare innovation can sometimes be long and difficult, entrepreneurs may want to downplay certain aspects of implementing their solution that require a great deal of work. For example, it can be tempting to bypass certain barriers, such as regulations and data security, to get to market as quickly as possible.

Yet as healthcare entrepreneurs, it is essential to remember why this market is so heavily regulated. Ultimately, it is about protecting the health of *human beings*. Neglecting this aspect can have major consequences for a company's future and certainly will not have the desired effect.

In most cases, certain key players, such as healthcare institutions, would react very poorly to such negligence, because they themselves are required to make technology choices that comply with existing regulations.

1. Do things properly.
2. With integrity.
3. In the patient's best interests.

Healthcare innovation should happen no other way.