• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Company
  • More Games
  • We’re Hiring!

Business Encounters: Life Scientist

  • About Us
  • The Game
  • Why It Works
  • Resources
  • Glossary
  • Blog
  • Contact

Education and Research in Entrepreneurship (Part 3 of 5)

Jul 26, 2019 | Brad Tanner

Chapter 10 of It’s a Jungle in There stresses the value of research and development in entrepreneurial pursuits.

The first rule of research is garbage in, garbage out. That is, if the question you’re trying to ask is poorly-constructed and has no meaning, then you won’t find anything significant. The second rule of the research is that you must not bias your research toward your preconceived notion of what the correct answer is. That is, you must be open to the possibility that your research will find a solution which is against what your expectations are. The book describes using research tools to refine and improve a restaurant implementation. The possibility that the entrepreneur should not actually have such a restaurant was never an option. This is more accurately iterative product development with input from the target audience. Valuable, yes. Research, no.

The author highlights the need to obtain adequate knowledge to ask essential questions and accomplish research. In one section the author quotes the benefit of putting in a sand pit.

The book says, “For example, when we were designing our T-Rex restaurant, we brought in groups of youngsters to test the viability of our retail offerings and the ‘fossil dig’ (a special archaeological sand pit in one area of the restaurant) where kids could use shovels to unearth dinosaur bones and other prehistoric treasures.”

Many folks do not see the importance of archaeology versus paleontology as a big issue. To them, the confusion may be irrelevant. However, to the many scientists who get PhDs in either field the confusion over the difference is disturbing. Just to be clear, archaeology is focused on human behavior and is a component of anthropology and the study of cultures. Further, both fields are frustrated by the attitude of “get digging.” For an excavation to be of any value, much work must be done before and while digging a site, as well as analyzing the results afterwards.

The amazing Cliff Palace in Mesa Verde National Park is an archaeological treasure. The story of Anasazi is fascinating and inspiring. But, alas, there were no dinosaurs then.

Paleontology is associated with research which goes further back in time and is related to things such as dinosaurs. Someone who is building something that shows the value of jungle habitats and includes dinosaurs should understand this difference or, even better, ponder how the “learning experience” of this restaurant can educate the audience about this crucial distinction.

The point is that education is fantastic, but self-education can trick us into believing that we understand something that we don’t truly understand. That’s the reason why we have structured training with professors and universities. We can’t trust ourselves to self-assess our own understanding of an unfamiliar topic. Would you want to see a doctor who was “self-taught”? We need others to help us understand if we have achieved mastery or if there remain holes in our understanding which still need to be filled. I believe that every student is indeed responsible for their own education (“the harder I work the smarter I get”), but that doesn’t mean that a student should be solely self-taught.

The book chapter also highlights the value of focus groups. Focus groups provide a plethora of input regarding usability and satisfaction. That information can be collected both qualitatively and quantitatively through, respectively, interviews and more structured instruments. There are many different ways to implement focus groups and all require some kind of analysis of the results. Focus groups are an excellent topic to aid people in product design.

The point of bringing this up is to ensure that readers are not left with the false impression that one can “do a focus a group.” A focus group must be carefully constructed, implemented, and analyzed with assistance from individuals skilled in performing focus groups.

Every entrepreneur should implement research and development in the process. But, make sure you’re starting that process without unwarranted assumptions, and with adequate understanding which has been vetted by others or achieved such that it represents an accurate understanding of the topic at hand. Have the tools in place to analyze the results and then use these results to guide your research, be they related to the market and the customer or the more specific details of product development. And be willing to listen to the results, even if the answer isn’t what you wanted to hear.

Further Reading

  • Schussler Steven, Karlins Marvin. It’s a Jungle in There: Inspiring Lessons, Hard-Won Insights, and Other Acts of Entrepreneurial Daring. Vol Reprint edition. New York: Sterling. February 7, 2012.

Photo Credit: Mesa Verde National Park Cliff Palace Right Part 2006 09 12.jpg. 12 September 2006. Andreas F. Borchert. This file is licensed under the Creative CommonsAttribution-Share Alike 3.0 Germany license.

Category: Business Tagged: books entrepreneurship

Health Impact Studio logo

About Health Impact Studio

We are a dedicated team of developers and researchers with the mission to improve the health of individuals through novel technology including games, virtual reality, and role-playing simulations. We welcome input from the full range of stakeholders to create a customer experience with the broadest applicability to improving health outcomes.

Keep Reading

How Else Can Innovation Come to Stagnant Markets? (Part 3 of 3)

Oct 26, 2018

We’ve been discussing creative destruction theories and come to the conclusion that no matter what theory you use, there is not the proper condition for a paradigm shift in medical education. For those of us who feel that a paradigm shift in the process of medical education would be a good thing, this is indeed bad news. It means that creative destruction can’t and won’t happen. The “Normal Science” of medical education will continue unabated and unchallenged until a recession in the health care market takes place. And if the latter theory is true, destruction will only occur on the upswing AFTER the downturn. And ONLY if the recession is so bad that it instills fear that another will come. It sounds hopeless.

Perhaps other factors that enable creative destruction can take hold with, say, the help of competition. Think digital cameras from Canon and Nikon vs. the old film based ones from Kodak (which by the way had digital technology that it chose not to use). Competition pushed creative destruction. Medical schools sadly don’t compete with each other. No hope there. Strike one.

How about unstable labor markets? A stable labor market discourages creative destruction as people stay with what they have and few are incentivized to become entrepreneurs. Although there has been some upheaval in term of PhDs at medical schools, most jobs are pretty secure. That security translates again to less anxiety and less interest in and support for creative destruction. Another dead end. Strike two.

Excess regulation inhibits creative destruction. Examples include cities that are trying to halt AirBNB and Uber with laws that were written 50 years ago, or laws that require Tesla to use dealerships. Medical education is so controlled by government regulations (OSHA, HIPAA, access rules) and systematized by non-governmental organizations that it is indeed highly regulated. Can it be that the original paradigm shift that started with the Flexner Report is now part of the problem? That is, in seeking “consistency” and “quality” we created a system that highlights banality, caution, and a lack of innovation? It seems we have squelched creative destruction in the process just as is seen in markets with excessive government regulation. Is the solution then to loosen standards and dissolve organizational bodies so that schools (like states in the US) can be incubators or novel ideas? Since institutions come but rarely go, this seems rather unlikely. Strike three.

The depressing conclusion (for folks who want change to happen) is that the “creative destruction” model is stymied from action because of the following:

  1. lack of a downturn
  2. lack of a fear of a downturn because of incessant growth and easy access to money
  3. no competition, a comfortable and stable labor market, and tight regulation

It makes sense. Nonetheless, it’s depressing that the environment for creative destruction and subsequent paradigm shift in medical education is extremely poor.

Picture Credit: CC BY-SA 3.0 Nick Youngson

Clinical Tools Wins $200K SBIR Award to Explore Life Science Entrepreneurship

May 1, 2019

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: 5/01/2019

[Chapel Hill, NC – May 1, 2019] – Clinical Tools, Inc. won a $200K Phase I SBIR grant from the National Institutes of Health/National Institute of General Medical Sciences to begin development of the OpenPipe Simulation Experience to Enhance Entrepreneurial Intent and Self-Efficacy. OpenPipe will be a 3D computer role-playing simulation to help post-doc and early-stage life science researchers explore factors that impact entrepreneurial intent and self-efficacy.

The life scientist is key to unlocking the commercial and health impact value of life science research. Unfortunately, scientists have few resources to assess the emotional and logistical ramifications of the challenging change from scientific explorer to entrepreneur. The proposed simulation and decision support experience helps the life scientist explore entrepreneurship, assess entrepreneurial intent, build confidence, and enhance team-building skills. Through subsequent action, they potentially unlock scientific findings that can impact real-world health outcomes.

The simulation will include a game-style interface where life scientists can make decisions on how to best address challenges related to entrepreneurship and experience the outcomes, as well as build knowledge and learn techniques to move from life science to business success!

About Clinical Tools and Health Impact Studio:

Clinical Tools, Inc. (CTI) is a diverse group with expertise in medicine, psychology, public health, basic sciences, programming, project and program management, gaming, information technology, and communications. Based in Chapel Hill, the company has a 20+ year history of success with SBIRT-developed products.

Health Impact Studio, a division of Clinical Tools, utilizes gaming technology to create healthy lifestyle change. The company combines expertise from medicine, psychology, public health with gaming, to create innovative games to positively impact health. Health Impact Studio creates games for healthcare professionals, medical students, and the general public on topics like obesity, addiction, and nutrition.

~~

For Further Information

Company: Clinical Tools and Health Impact Studio

Email: games@healthimpact.studio

Website: BioStartUpAdvice.com

Founder, President, and Vision Leader: Bradley Tanner, MD, ME

Funding Advice from a Recent Conference in Raleigh

Dec 21, 2018

Recently, we attended the CED Tech Venture Conference in Raleigh. There were an excellent set of presentations, many relevant to the future life science entrepreneur. The most notable comment came from Silicon Valley Venture Capitalist John Doerr of Kleiner Perkins. He was intimately involved in support of Amazon, Google, and Apple. He is an icon in the VC field.

The co-presenter asked him what he felt was the most potentially lucrative area for investment going forward. His answer was to ask the presenter how much money is spent on Google and Facebook versus how much of the money is spent on healthcare. With healthcare spending at over 17% of GDP in 2015, the winner is far away healthcare; more than 50 times as much. So his enthusiasm regarding entrepreneurship was in the life sciences. One of the most influential financiers believes that now is the time for an entrepreneur with life science background to pursue a business in order to address a health-related issue.

The conference had some unique Investor Reverse Pitches. It was clear that venture capitalists have particular interests they will fund. For example, the Stanley Tools folks are interested in material science and batteries (no surprise). But others started out saying they are interested in life sciences and then clarified that only a tiny portion of life science interested them.Assume that someone seeking funding would only be able to identify perhaps 2 out of 20 VC firms that would fund a startup with overlapping interests. Also, VCs are primarily interested in later stage companies and large amounts of capital. So, for the early stage entrepreneur, VC holds little potential. Apparently, the days when John Doerr gave money to Google’s founders (even though they didn’t seem to like business) and money to Jeff Bezos (even though he didn’t have a business plan) are very much over.

The presentations by many companies at the conference were excellent. They did a nice job of conveying a simple pitch, outlining their unique value proposition, and providing some financial data to back it up. All of the CEO presenters at this conference were well-funded. The companies that presented were looking for funds to expand globally and already had substantial success. They echoed the above finding. VC is for companies in later stages and a proven business model.

Finally, we were inspired by the Entrepreneur Workshop + Lunch with Scot Wingo by Robbie Allen, Founder & Executive Chairman, Automated Insights. He spoke on “Building a Startup Culture that Scales.” Mr. Allen explained the secret of success for his small business; the low-key atmosphere of the company was the driving force. He knew his employees would work hard and they needed to have a comfortable environment which supported energy and enthusiasm. And to that end he included a ping pong table, which was apparently well-used.

He worried at first that this would make his company look childish, but he found the employees were quite enthusiastic, and in fact it didn’t harm productivity at all. More importantly, he found that when his investors visited the office, they viewed the ping pong table in a positive light. They felt the ping pong table showed that his company was a dynamic and fun place to work. They noted that his space would be attractive to current and future employees. In fact, his employee retention was phenomenal.

Even as the company proliferated and at times was overly crowded, given limited office space, the team morale remained high. His message: Be yourself. If you are someone who enjoys a playful atmosphere, then create a corporate culture that works for you. And you’ll be surrounded by people who share you vision of a comfortable work environment.

Photo Credits: WikiBasti – Own work, Public Domain, Link

Previous Post: « Multitasking Is Really Task Switching and Doesn’t Work (Part 2 of 5)
Next Post: Strategic Partnerships in an Ecosystem Model (Part 4 of 5) »
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
guest
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Primary Sidebar

Business Encounters: Life Scientist
Phase 1 Prototype Demo
View Demo Video

Blog Tags

advertising books engagement entrepreneurship funding innovation structure

Want our blogs right in your inbox?

Get our Newsletter!

Reaching Tomorrow’s Customers: Trends in Digital Marketing

Check out our book!

This project is funded by National Institute of General Medical Sciences (Grant #1 R43 GM131458-01)


  • Contact
  • Copyright & Reproduction Guidelines
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Technology Requirements
  • 508 Compliance

Footer

a product of
Health Impact Studio
a division of Clinical Tools, Inc
  • The Game
  • Contact
  • About
  • Blog
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
games@healthimpact.studio

101 A Market St Chapel Hill, NC 27516
919-960-8118

We're Hiring!

Join the Development Team!

© 2021 · Clinical Tools, Inc · Log in

wpDiscuz
Register

 

Once you have completed viewing the video, please proceed to the survey in order to provide feedback on the demo.

 

Sign up for our Newsletter!