Methods to identify unmet needs

Methods to identify unmet
needs in eHealth

How to identify unmet needs in health?
these are our methods
The approaches used by GET to identify unmet needs
included:
1. In depth interviews. One to one exchanges with
stakeholders knowledgeable in the market. For instance
CIOs, medical directors, clinical opinion leaders or patient
association representatives. The advantage is that you
obtain very deep knowledge, and potentially a partner or
at least an advisor. You will need to confirm the insights
with a wider audience to validate them.
2. Focus groups. A focus group is a form of qualitative
research in which a group of people are asked about their
perceptions, opinions and beliefs. It identifies and
prioritizes unmet needs common to several people at the
same time, but has to be properly conducted to avoid
contamination of opinions and requires a logistical effort
to physically bring together the group.
3. Unmet need corner. This approach aims to take
advantage of relevant (eHealth) events to capture
information, while minimizing the logistical overhead of
contacting and visiting time-pressed stakeholders.
Attendees of the event are asked to propose needs, using
an innovative visual format to attract attention. It
requires coordination with the event organizer and pro-
activity to motivate participation of the attendees.
4. On-line surveys. Web tools can be a relatively economical
way to collect feedback from a wide audience. Both
structured and unstructured information can be easily
managed and analysed by the web tools. However,
information has to be very clear to get valuable answers.
5. Third party challenges. Related to Open Innovation, a
paradigm that assumes that firms can and should use
external ideas as well as internal ones. In this case the
need is already identified by a sponsor organization
seeking solutions. Interested solution providers submit
proposals and a selection process takes place, so one of
them is awarded. Apart from cash, visibility and
recognition, participants winning the challenge may also
get a partner to support making the idea a reality.
Competition can to be tough in these challenges.
6. Informal exchanges. Unmet needs can also be identified
through informal exchanges e.g. conversations in the
workplace, reading the news etc.
You can access the lessons learnt from
these methods by clicking here
2

Methods to identify
unmet needs in eHealth
In depth interviews
In the provision of the Fill the Gap service , one to one
interviews with experts were organized to identify unmet
needs. Chief Information Officers (CIOs) of local private and
public Healthcare organizations were initially selected.
Though the interviews can in principle be done on-line, only
face to face interactions were arranged, visiting them in their
place of work. The conversations were not recorded to avoid
off-putting the speaker, but written notes were taken.
The process followed in GET was:
1. Each stakeholder is contacted via email explaining the
purpose of the visit, expected duration and proposed time
slot. Follow up calls were made to those that did not
respond in a reasonable time.
2. A script is prepared to serve as the guide for the
conversation.
3. The interview takes place using this script.
• Explanation of the objectives of the meeting in the
context of identifying unmet needs.
• Background of the organization and role. Ask
general questions regarding the organization they
work for and their role within it. These questions also
serve as an ice-breaker.
• Organization strategy. Identify the priorities of the
Healthcare organization in the near and mid-term
future, including the ones of the IT department.
• Unmet need identification. Directly ask for unmet
needs and continue exploring until you have a full
understanding of the origin of the need, not just its
consequences.
• Recap and farewell. Highlight of the most relevant
findings and follow up actions if any. Thank them for
their contribution. You could ask them to recommend
contacts to set up other interviews.
4. The collected information is assessed shortly after the
visit. Unmet needs are explicitly written down.
5. If required, a follow up call can be made to confirm the
assessment and clarify any questions.
Some hints and recommendations
Depending on your interest, you could target other types of
stakeholders apart from managers, like healthcare
professionals or patient association representatives, and
adjust the script accordingly.
3

Methods to identify
Let them talk first about their priorities. If your would like to
validate an idea, introduce it after some initial needs have
been verbalized from their side. Observe their reaction,
including body language, and write down their answer.
Benchmark your proposal against the priorities they initially
referred to, and assess if they are in the same level of
relevance, so you can evaluate if you are addressing a “must
have” or a “nice to have”. People tend to work better with
comparison rather than with verbalization, so encourage them
to come up with new areas of need. Read more lessons learnt
in this document.
The advantage of “In depth interviews” is that you can obtain
valuable insight in one interaction with relatively easy
logistics (a meeting in their place of work). As a bonus, the
stakeholder could even become a partner of your project, or
at least an advisor in the development of your solution.
However, you will need to confirm the insight with a wider
group of stakeholders and experts to validate the input, since
the information you receive can be very specific to personal
interests of your contacts and/or the circumstances of the
organization they work for.
4

Methods to identify
Focus groups
A focus group is a form of qualitative research in which a
group of people are asked about their perceptions, opinions
and beliefs. Questions are asked in an interactive group
setting where participants are free to talk with other group
members. They have been widely used in marketing, to
acquire feedback regarding new products usually at the early
stages of product concept development.
Within the GET context, we organized focus groups bringing
together patients and stakeholders, with around 10-14
participants including a moderator and a note taker.
A methodology based on the expertise of Sandra Bates,
member of the GET project Advisory Board, was followed.
More information in Sandra’s book “The social innovation
imperative”, and the work of Tony Ulwick and its Outcome
Driven Innovation based on the jobs to be done theory. There
are many more references in the literature and we suggest
that after reading your best picks, you choose which approach
best suits your needs.
As a summary, this is how the GET focus groups were executed
in what is a simplified version of the above methodologies:
1. Participants are identified and contacted. For this
example, patients were invited to participate.
2. Logistics are arranged. Look for a suitable room for the
expected amount of people, and make sure you have the
needed material (boards, pens, post-its).
3. A detailed script is prepared to serve as a guide for the
focus group.
4. The event takes place using the script to structure it.
• Welcome and introduction. The moderator thanks the
attendees for their time and briefly introduces himself
and the note-taker. Participants are asked to introduce
themselves.
• Explanation of the objectives and structure. The script
was structured in ´themes´ about how information and
knowledge is managed by patients in different
situations. In addition to questions, some scenarios were
also used to make the exercise easier to understand.
• Interaction management. For each theme, we asked
open ended questions and proposed scenarios. Every
time a potential unmet need is identified, the
participant is asked to write it down in a post-it and
hand it to the moderator. The moderator sticks them in
the board.
5

Methods to identify
• Clustering of needs. When all the themes are done, the
different ideas in the post-its are grouped together in
what we call “categories”. Some proposals may be too
granular and it helps conceptually to create umbrella
concepts that cluster them. The categories are given a
name and moved to a new board called the “need
blossom” in Sandra Bates’ methodology. The rest of the
post-it are then moved from the first board to the need
blossom, and placed around the category they best fit in
(see picture below).
• Need blossom discussion. The need blossom helps to
organize the participants’ inputs around high level key
concepts represented by the categories. Participants
help to better characterize the categories by adding new
insight about them.
• Prioritization of outcomes. Not all needs are equally
relevant. In order to focus your efforts, there should be
a quantification of the insights, at least at the category
level. There are two key criteria: a) how important is
each item, and b) how well it is currently satisfied.
Items are then listed and each participant is asked to
mark (1-lowest/ 5-highest) them under these criteria:
importance and current satisfaction. Data is collected
and aggregated. Items with an average mark of 4-5 in
importance and 1-2 in current satisfaction are the main
areas of opportunity. The moderator highlights them and
starts a conversation about them to get further insight,
especially from those participants with little
contribution during the meeting.
• Thank you and farewell. Thank again the attendees,
and let them know about the intended use of the
collected information.
5. Hospitality. Light refreshments are available for
attendees as an acknowledgment of their contribution and
time. It can also be a good opportunity to continue to
gather relevant information. Some people feel more open
to raise topics in a more private setting, like the casual
conversations that take place during this time. Be a
proactive listener, and watch for new opportunities during
these exchanges.
6

6. Assessment. The collected information is assessed shortly
after the meeting. The most relevant unmet needs are
described in detail.
Some hints and recommendations:
• The more homogenous the group (eg. patients with the
same pathology), the more agreement you will get among
the participants. If you address an area that is very
horizontal (eg. Medication Adherence) and invite
participants with different diseases, you will get very
different responses because the therapies are different. As
a result, it would not be easy to get consensus and/or
clear priorities. On the other hand, if it is too homogenous
the market can be too small and if the profiles are too
similar, you are not collecting the variety of views. A
trade-off is desirable.
• The moderator has a key role. S/he should let everybody
express their opinion (though some will always talk more
than others), and should prevent the monopolization of
the conversation by a few participants. Also, s/he should
avoid biasing the conversation with their own views.
• Go to the root cause. Keep on asking till is understood the
ultimate cause or job to be done that is critical to the
participants.
• If you have doubts about approach or execution, seek
external advice from people with experience and/or read
current literature.
• As always, preparation is critical. Compose a good script
and rehearse until you feel confident with it.
• Remember that till the last person leaves, you can collect
valuable inputs even in casual conversations.
• Use your common sense and avoid any confrontation. Make
it fluid and ideally fun. It should be an enjoyable
experience for all involved.
Focus groups can produce new insights induced by the group
dynamics, as listening to others stimulates memories and
ideas. However, the setting can also influence participants
and obtain answers the participants feel the moderator
wants to hear (especially if the script is subtlety designed to
validate a pre-conceptualized theory). If the group includes
patients and doctors, the lack of anonymity can limit the
open exchange. As with in depth interviews, several editions
of the focus group with different actors should give you more
confidence in the answers if they converge.
7
Methods to identify

Unmet need corner
The GET consortium tested a new novel approach to collect
unmet needs in a cost-effective way. The idea is to leverage
the presence of stakeholders in eHealth events, and ask them
about their unmet needs on the spot.
To attract attention and engage the audience of the event, a
visually attractive space (the unmet need corner) was
designed. The setting makes use of an array of envelopes
arranged in a big matrix. Each envelope contains a card that
participants use to write down their contribution. Visitors are
asked to provide an unmet need per card, together with
affiliation and contact information, and the card is then
placed in an envelope. To get inspiration, visitors can read
needs provided by previous contributions. Questions about the
objectives of the initiative and further explanations are
answered by the personnel staffing the corner.
To maximize visual impact, the appearance of the corner
should be as attractive as possible, and you may choose to
make use of a table with chairs to facilitate writing. The
corner should be located in a hot spot that gets a lot of visitor
traffic. Those hot spots can be at the catering area, the
exhibition space or close to the entrance.
You can increase the level of interest by directing visitors to
the corner, including it as a feature in the conference
programme and announcing it in a plenary.
The outcomes will vary depending on how successful you are
engaging the visitors, and how well they can recall unmet
needs. Prepare a concise yet informative pitch about what you
are doing and why. A selection of good examples also helps.
You can choose to tailor this approach to meet your specific
context and resources.
8
Methods to identify

Methods to identify
On-line surveys
There is a plethora of web tools that can cost-effectively
collect information over a wide on-line audience (eg. Google
Forms or Survey Monkey). The tools can gather both closed
and open answers from hundreds of people. All that is
required is to create a web survey and share it with your
contacts.
Critical factors to the success of the survey are the size of
your network, the trust you generate, and the motivation you
provoke to fill the data. If your network is small, you could
partner with other organizations (eg. patient associations) to
leverage theirs. Otherwise you can target social media or web
platforms with traffic from your target group.
For trust, make sure that privacy and security concerns are
properly addressed. Be transparent about your intended use of
the data and the value the responders may get out of it.
Responders need to understand the question and its context to
provide proper answers. We recommend you make concise and
easy to understand questions, and add explanatory context
below them (something that is possible with most tools). The
use of examples can be tricky because you may alienate or
narrow down the scope with them, so use them with
judgement.
It is usually a good idea to have a combination of open and
closed questions, and make the critical ones compulsory to be
answered. Avoid including a lot of questions that require
significant time from your responders and probably decrease
the response rate. Before public dissemination, you may want
to share the web form with some stakeholders of your
confidence, to spot errors or improve wording. A deadline
should be stated in the dissemination, to encourage timely
completion.
Very positive about online surveys is that you can get
information from a large number people worldwide, even in
different languages. Besides, the information is already in
digital format which facilitates its analysis.
Be aware though that open surveys do not have statistical
power because they are not randomized. So the collected
information only reflects the views of the responders, which
may not be representative of your target population. For
instance, it may sorely reflect the views of those that are
technologically savvy and do not mind using web tools.
Therefore, your conclusions are indicative, and should be
contrasted with other, more diverse samples. Having said that,
if a lot of people from your survey agree on identifying the
same unmet need, it is reasonable to assume that there will
be a market for it, though its size may not be the one of the
whole population.
9

3rd party challenges
In the last years, there is a growing trend of organizing
challenges, prizes and competitions so that organizations can
tap into external talent to develop new products and services.
It is partly related to the popularity of the open innovation
and crowdsourcing paradigms.
Typically, a sponsor organization identifies a challenge and
sets up a procedure so external persons can submit their ideas
following some guidelines. Proposals are then evaluated, and
winners are announced. The competition usually awards (cash)
prizes to stimulate participation, together with the
opportunity to work together with the proposer to push the
solution further. Actually, the latter may become the biggest
reward for the entrepreneur. At a minimum, the winner gets
visibility and recognition.
Due to the popularity of the approach, there are a number of
on-line platforms that liaise with sponsor organizations, set up
challenges and manage the registration and communication.
Some of the best well known marketplaces are Innocentive,
Yet2.com or the European Innoget.
Some challenges are multi-stage and even request a fee to
enter -like the Qualcomm tricorder X prize with 10M$ in
prizes-, while the majority award some thousands of euros in
cash with a very straightforward procedure (on-line
submission of documentation).
There are also specialized platforms that only publish Digital
Health related initiatives, like healthdatachallenges.com. For
example, at the time of writing the Aetna foundation
challenge, with 4.5M€ in prizes, seeks solutions that empower
members of underserved populations to take control of their
health with real-world solutions that fit into their everyday
lives through technology they are already using. Some
Pharmaceutical companies like Janssen have set up their own
challenges, so information should be searched directly in their
websites.
Some challenges restrict the participation to some
geographies (usually the USA), but even so it could be worth
to get to get to know them to identify requests at a global
level. In Europe, the new research framework Horizon 2020
managed by the European Commission includes a new
instrument called Horizon Prizes, that aims to deliver
breakthrough solutions to specific issues. Each of them has a
1M€ budget. One of the Prizes is related to eHealth, and
promotes the development of an affordable device (a food
scanner) that will allow citizens to make informed choices on
food intake in a quick and non-invasive manner. There are also
EU projects that support the identification of unmet needs in
Health and maintain a list of challenges and opportunities,
like FISTAR.
10
Methods to identify

Needlessly to say, the competition is tough especially for
those with the biggest prizes so the success ratios are low.
Therefore you should carefully evaluate if you have the time,
resources and stamina to follow through. On the up side, if
you win you would not only get cash, visibility and recognition
but also a potential partner (the sponsor organization) to
make your idea a reality.
Informal exchanges
Casual private conversations with healthcare professionals or
managers can help you to identify current pain points or
bottle necks. Be quick to spot them, and ask for a follow up
conversation once you have given them a thought. A related
source can be speakers in conferences or public events that
talk about difficulties or hidden areas of need.
Also, from time to time articles appear in the (social) media
with food for thought and hints. Typical sources include end-
of-year articles that identify trends for the coming year
(examples here and here), or content produced by Digital
Health accelerators like Rock Health, TMCx, etc. Watch out,
some of them can be very technology driven, rather than
coming from a real demand in health.
11
Methods to identify

About the project
The GET project delivers four high-impact services to eHealth
SMEs and entrepreneurs in order to boost their growth and
move them to the next level of competitiveness. Each life-
transforming service has been designed to provide cross-
border value to a different target group of companies. It will
do by offering training, mentoring, market intelligence,
support and, above all, quality contacts.
These services are:
• Get on track Targets early-stage companies, start-ups and
entrepreneurs. It supports them to optimize their business
model and commercialization strategy.
• Get funded Designed for SMEs looking for a second round
of funding. It provides training, resources and networking
opportunities with investors at European level.
• Get global Helps mature SMEs to access international
markets by putting them in contact with foreign
commercialization partners and potential customers.
• Get inspired Identifies and disseminates unmet needs in
eHealth that can become business opportunities for
entrepreneurs and SMEs.
If you want to know what GET can do for
you, access resources or receive insight
Contact us!
project@get-ehealth.eu
www.get-ehealth.eu
Follow us on twitter!
@GET_eHealth
This document is a deliverable of the European Project GET, funded
by the European Commission with Grant Agreement number 611709
12

Methods to identify unmet needs

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Similar to Methods to identify unmet needs (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Methods to identify unmet needs