Runsafe case study v2

Please download to get full document.

View again

All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
 3
 
  1. RUNSAFE CASE STUDY Data Driven Decision Making 2. RunSafe™ is a medically-based, high-end, add-on injury prevention and performance improvement program for running.…
Related documents
Share
Transcript
  • 1. RUNSAFE CASE STUDY Data Driven Decision Making
  • 2. RunSafe™ is a medically-based, high-end, add-on injury prevention and performance improvement program for running.
  • 3. UCSF CTSI – Catalyst Program ◉ Hired by UCSF (2011) ◉ Evaluate technology and business, ◉ Mentor key players, and ◉ Design a phased customer development plan. http://ctsi.ucsf.edu/catalyst
  • 4. Created by Dr. Anthony Luke M.P.H., M.D. Board certified in primary care for sports medicine: ◉ UCSF Concussion and Brain Injury Program, ◉ UCSF Human Performance Center, ◉ UCSF Sports Medicine Center, and ◉ UCSF RunSafe Clinic.
  • 5. Evaluation Services 3D Motion Evaluation - Data Collection, approximately 1 hour. - Analysis, approximately 1/2 hour with a Dr. or trained medical student. - Recommendations, provided in a report encouraging changes in the clients motion and habits. Physical Therapy The goal of the physical therapy screening is to conduct a screen of strength, flexibility, range of motion, and balance/ proprioception tests as they relate to potential injuries for runners. Nutrition The purpose of the nutrition screening is to help the client learn how nutrition can optimize both their performance and recovery. Foot and Footwear The goal of the foot and foot wear screening is to evaluate the morphology of the foot, discuss with current footwear, periodic or chronic problems, and teach clients how to best select footwear that match their habits, needs and goals.
  • 6. SWOT ANALYSIS S O W T Strengths - Expertise. - University support. - Customers. Opportunities - Univ. partnerships. - Licensing. - Derivative products and services. Weaknesses - Lack of startup experience. - University involvement. Threats - Protectability. - Lack of Regulation.
  • 7. TOWS MARTIX S O W T Min – Min - Hire new management. - Cut ties with university. - Create new IP from scratch. - Make less dependent on expertise. Min – Max - Create partnerships with other univ. - Hire new management. - Create new IP Min – Max - Use expertise to enhance existing IP - Encourage univ. Support, but remove from decision making. - Use existing customers and data to improve IP. Max – Max - Improve experts bus. Skills - Leverage Univ. support for $, IP and partnerships. - Push for regulation. - Use existing customers and data to improve IP.
  • 8. Data in Decision Making Market Not large Large Market type Existing Resegment New Business models Price Change No change Cost Change Labor Technology No change Make things as quantitative as possible.
  • 9. Market Market Not large Large Market type Existing Resegment New Business models Price Change No change Cost Change Labor Technology No change
  • 10. 29,200,000Runners/Joggers - National Sporting Goods Association
  • 11. 63% $90+ on shoes 73.5% $120+ on apparel 3% 5% 9% 21% 25% 37% >$25k $25k<$35k $35k<$50k $50k<$75K $75K<$100k $100k<$150K - National Runners Survey Household Income
  • 12. 54.4%Took 4 or more days off in the last 12 months because of an injury. – National Runners Survey
  • 13. Market Type Market Not large Large Market type Existing Resegment New Business models Price Change No change Cost Change Labor Technology No change
  • 14. Market Type ◉ Existing - Known needs. - Known customers. - Known Business. Models. - Known basis of competition. ◉ Resegment - Monopoly/Duopoly own large part of existing market. - Niche opportunity. - Low cost opportunity. ◉ New - New class of product/customer. - Previously unavailable. - Innovation needed.
  • 15. Market Type ◉ No Google or Arthur Murray in the space. ◉ No ‘apps’ from Nike, etc. at the time. ◉ Existing researchers in the field. ◉ Coaching: - RRCA - USATF
  • 16. Market Type ◉ Existing - Known needs. - Known customers. - Known Business. Models. - Known basis of competition. ◉ Resegment - Monopoly/Duopoly own large part of existing market. - Niche opportunity. - Low cost opportunity. ◉ New - New class of product/customer. - Previously unavailable. - Innovation needed.
  • 17. Business Model Market Not large Large Market type Existing Resegment New Business models Price Change No change Cost Change Labor Technology No change
  • 18. Business Model Canvas Key Partners - Universities - Research Inst. - USATF - Video game Consoles? - National fitness chains? Key Activities - Evaluations - Business Development/Sales - Customer service - Software dev.? Key Resources - Research data - IP - Expertise - Software? Value Prop - Prevent Injury - Improve performance - Bring in new patients/custo mers (halo effect). Customer Relationships - Direct (via clinic) - Licensing - Franchise - Direct (software) Customer Segments - Runners - Hospitals - Coaches Cost Structure - Evaluations (salaries, facilities, equipment) - PR/BD/Sales - Software Dev. Revenue Streams - Pay for evaluation - Annual licensing/franchise fee - Software sales/subscription Channels - Universities - National fitness chains - Video Game consoles - USATF - Coaches
  • 19. Value Proposition Validated ◉ 3D and other evaluations helps improve locomotion thus preventing injury (cohort study and case studies). ◉ People are paying for it. ◉ Word-of-mouth and referrals are getting new customers.
  • 20. Problem 3d testing works, but: - Cost = Expensive: ~ $ 500,000 dollars is needed to create the facility, buy imaging equipment, and license imaging software. Additionally, there is a need to employ M.S. or higher degree level facilitators that run data collection, analyze data, interface with clients and make recommendations. - Revenue = customers pay below cost ($300).
  • 21. Identify and Validate Market Not large Large Market type Existing Resegment New Business models Price Change No change Cost Change Labor Technology No change
  • 22. Key Activities Business model Price to end user Survey Change No change Cost Study Change Labor Study Doctor Technician Machine Study Doctor Technicians Technology 3D 2D Human Machine Camera Kinect No change
  • 23. Testing Price
  • 24. Survey ◉ Voluntary email survey. ◉ Survey Monkey to facilitate. ◉ To provide context, the survey covered demographic, income, running experience, feelings about their experience with RunSafe and pricing.
  • 25. Demographics and Feedback - 84 complete survey responses. - 42% of respondents were male and - 57% female. - Average age was 43.6 with a range of 23 to 65. - Most clients were in an income bracket >$151K. - Running for fitness (38.8%) - Runners running races were mainly experienced runners (7 or more races) (42.9%). - Based on the survey responses, a majority of the clients have participated in other types of running programs, suggesting that this is an educated group of runners who have tried other assessments and find value in RunSafe.
  • 26. Pricing ◉ Former clients were asked: “ Since RunSafe incorporate 4 specialists into a single integrated session at one location, how much would you be willing to pay given the time can cost savings?”
  • 27. Key Activities Business model Price to end user Survey Change No change Cost Study Change Labor Study Doctor Technician Machine Study Doctor Technicians Technology 3D 2D Human Machine Camera Kinect No change
  • 28. Testing Cost Reduction
  • 29. 2D Study Hypothesis: “we can analyze the 2 dimensional (2D) video capture and compare the assessment to 3 dimensional (3D) analysis in order to identify statistically relevant deviations in diagnosis between methods, address any shortcomings in the 2D analysis and seek methods to mitigate downside risks.”
  • 30. 2D Study ◉ CHR approved for full research project (IRB #: 11-05907) on 3/18/2011 ◉ Pilot study for 20 subjects and validity study for 2D versus 3D with two experienced physicians. ◉ Subjects were evaluated with 3D and 2D simultaneously. ◉ Physicians would evaluate the 2D and their observations were compared to the 3D capture.
  • 31. 2D Study
  • 32. 2D Study ◉ Preliminary findings demonstrated that physicians looking at video could approximate many of the 3D observations. ◉ There were a few notable exceptions, but it may due to the small sample size of the pilot.
  • 33. Key Activities Business model Price to end user Survey Change No change Cost Study Change Labor Study Doctor Technician Machine Study Doctor Technicians Technology 3D 2D Human Machine Camera Kinect No change
  • 34. Validation Market Not large Large Market type Existing Resegment New Business models Price Change No change Cost Change Labor Technology No change
  • 35. Business Models Business models Direct Clinics Franchise Wholly owned Licensing Clinics Other Direct to Consumer
  • Related Search
    We Need Your Support
    Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

    Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

    No, Thanks