HAIVISIO Tool 1: Critical success factors for the project.
  • Home»
  • Blog »
  • HAIVISIO Tool 1: Critical success factors for the project.

HAIVISIO Tool 1: Critical success factors for the project.

HAIVISIO Value Proposition is a set of tools and services to the four customer segments that allow assess the impact of a certain project. As far as we are aware of, there are no other initiatives providing such tools and services. The need of these utilities has been expressed by different projects as it has been reflected in HAIVISIO. Tool 1: Critical success factors for the project. This tool consists of a number of questions that can help to position the projects:

•        Asset integrity - coherent solutions vs components.   There is a tendency for integrated, platform-oriented project assets to separate into constituent elements when considering future exploitation.
        Exploitation integrity – consortium vs individual partners (splitting IP).  There are a few instances where a consortium will stay together for future joint exploitation.   However, there is a strong tendency for consortia to dissolve or new groupings/consortia to form when progressing to future stages.   This often involves the dis-aggregation of IP.
•        Market continuum – from consumer proposition to systemic change.   Projects are having difficulty bringing forward the value proposition of their solutions when they need to span both consumer and service-provider behavioural, process, operational change.
•        Maintaining momentum – efforts, energies and the finish line syndrome.   The experience and procedures associated with undertaking, completing and finishing R&D projects, can be very energy draining, where the focus shifts towards finishing (or finding the next new project) rather than on-ward development.
•        Commercial expertise - skills gaps for business modelling exploitation and commercialisation. There are many situations where there are gaps in the consortia’s composition in relation to downstream business modelling and commercialisation planning.
•        Acceptance and acceptability – privacy, safety, and ethical considerations.   For projects involving home-based sensor applications, there are concerns about how to address consumer and market acceptability in relation to privacy and ethical issues.
•        Underpinning principles: personal empowerment vs system effectiveness.  There are some situations where there are service and/or system design challenges to achieve good balance between the motivations of client’s personal empowerment, and professional control and service efficiency.
•        European fragmentation and diversity - local, regional and national.  The diversity of public systems and services structures and organisation, the role of private companies and non-profit organisations, and the rights and responsibilities of citizens, presents a very fragmented market where it is difficult to envisage ‘social interoperability’ without considerable local adaptation.
•        Platform/integration complexity and re-use.   There is quite an amount of continuous investment (and little re-use) in the development of platforms through the integration of sensors, devices, interfaces, gateways, repositories, processing engines and analytical tools.
•        Assets of policy influence: Real-world and larger scale trials and implementation.  There are only a few examples of assets/results that are sufficiently mature to influence policy. Policy influence guidance is sought by some who understand the appetite for policy/practice innovation, but lack the know-how to influence or raise awareness at appropriate levels.
•        Dissemination events – targeted vs shotgun, quality vs quantity.   There is a need to better qualify and target dissemination events that are better matched to project’s output needs.  With many projects needing to address multiple, though specialised stakeholder groups, it can be difficult to get to the right people in the right place at the right time, together.
•        Pilots at scale - RCTs / PCTs and Continuous Quality Improvement.  Many projects indicate that they need more, and larger trials, to strengthen the evidence base and underpin clinical validation.  For some, the innovation is less about technology and more about wider process change for service improvement.
•        The funding continuum – R&D, pilots, structural funds, innovation funds, VCs.   With the trend towards a greater emphasis on project impact, exploitation of results and innovation diffusion, there is a greater need for projects/consortia to look to complementary sources of funding on the pathways to commercialisation.
•        Innovation - technical, social, and/or enterprise? For some projects/assets, the exploitation potential is less about technology innovation, but more on the need for social or enterprise innovation to bring forward new business models within an evolving eco-system of stakeholder relationships.