Medisys Corp.
Presented By:
Group 2
Contents
• Background of the company
• Situation arose in the company
• IntensCare Project
• IntensCare Team
• Good practices of the company
• Bad practices of the company
• Problems that the company faces
• Solution to the problems
Background
• Privately held US based medical device manufacturer
• Founded in 2002
• Annual revenue $400 million(2008)
• Employed 1750 people
• Developed, manufactured and sold medical monitoring systems for
hospital segment
• First two successful products: Speciality pulmonary system and Renal
monitoring system
Situation
• Two major competitors planning to compete with IntensCare
• To counteract, Art Beaumont introduced some changes in the
organisational structure:
Created an executive committee consisting of 5 VP from different
functional areas: Sales and Marketing, R&D, design and engineering,
production and administration
Created a cross functional team including people from all critical functions
Art Beaumont
President
Len Broman,VP
D&E
Dipesh
Mukherjee
SDM
Bret O’ Brien
SEM
Martha Hill, VP
Production
Jack Fogel
SPM, PL
Peter Fisher, VP
S&M
Valerie Merz
MM, BL
Amie Fredrick,
VP
R&D
Aaron Gerson
Scientist
Zoe Thompson,
VP
Administration
Karen Baio
Regulatory
Affairs
IntensCare Project
• A patient monitoring system that would collect data of patient in intensive
care unit:
Post it to an electronic database that would provide an integrated profile of
an individual patient’s health
Would send an email message to physicians and nurses involved in the
patient’s care
Sept.
2006
• R&D person gets inspiration for the product
Oct.
2006
• Sales person vets the concept in the market
Dec.
2006
• Conversations include software designer
June
2007
• Ad hoc team presents product concept to senior leaders
July
2007
• Senior leadership allocates $500000 for development
Jan
2008
• Beaumont hired as president
Aug.
2008
• Beaumont formalises NPD and charters a core team to develop IntensCare
Aug.
2009
• Projected IntensCare launch date
IntensCare Team
Name Post Description
1 Valerie Merz MM Concerns focused on the budget and delivery of the product
Lack of information constrained her ability to work
2 Jack Fogel SPM Concerns focused on the production details
One dimensional approach limited his understanding of marketing
and sales issues
3 Dipesh Mukherjee SM Concerns focused on managing issues in India related to software
development
Portrayed confidence about the ability of the overseas personnel to
deliver quality software
Name Post Description
4 Bret O’
Brien
SEM Concerns focused on how to utilise the HR available for this
project
Opposed Valerie Merz’s product modularisation proposal
5 Karen Baio RA Concerns focused on how to meet the strict quality and regulatory
medical industry’s standards
Team members avoided dealing with her due to the nature of her
role
6 Aaron
Gerson
R&D Concern was the overseas software development team
Knew the competition well and was confident about the success
of the project; was only stringent about the outsourcing approach
of Mukherjee
Good Practices
• Encouraged innovative thinking
• Had entrepreneurial culture
• They tailor made products according to customer needs and responses
• Introduced a new parallel system for product development
• Employees embraced cross functional team design
• Developed an executive team and implemented a strategy for growing the
business swiftly
Bad Practices
• Debate on modular design
• Non compliance with the deadline given-very aggressive deadlines
• Conflict among employees regarding cross functional team design and
parallel development process
• Employees were not open, patient and didn’t trust each other
• Software developed overseas were notoriously problematic in the medical
diagnostics field
Problems
Problem
Internal
Management
Changing of
the working
pattern
Forming of the
core team created
a narrow span of
control
Formation of the
parallel
development
team
Tight
deadline
Team
Absence of
trust
Lack of
Communication
Individualism
Inefficient project/team
leader
Fear of
conflictInattention
to results
Technical
Issues
Modular
design
Delay in
hardware
engineering
Delay in
software
engineering
Problem in fitting
data display and
battery units as per
customer
specifications
External
Market
Two reputed competitors
were coming with similar
products
Recommendations
• For the HR management
The company needs to encourage the IntensCare members to work as a
team
It can give them a group reward if the team can achieve the project
The company should convene all team members to announce about the
mutual reward and have an open talking about the problems
The company should let them negotiate about the period of time they need
to spend on their own functions with each other
Recommendations(Contd…)
The company can set up a party or a recreation activity
The core team members should share the progress of their function on the
same office screen or board
The company should prioritize the urgency and importance of every
project they have
After doing this if it considers that the IntensCare project is the most
urgent and important, then there should be a increase in staff to help
achieve this project
Recommendations(Contd…)
• For the Operations management
They should contact with the Indian firm to confirm about the date it can
deliver
At the same time, they should start searching for other companies that can
develop and deliver the software that they want within the time limit. If
the Indian firm cannot send the product within the committed period, they
should hire other companies to be responsible for this project
The engineering team should talk with the marketing to figure out the size
of the data displays and battery units that both teams are satisfied with
Recommendations(Contd…)
• For the Time management
The company needs to consider about the due date whether they should
stick to the same period or postpone it
After talking with people about time they need to use, the situation can be
understood well and proper decisions can be taken
Case 1 Medisys Corp

Case 1 Medisys Corp

  • 1.
  • 2.
    Contents • Background ofthe company • Situation arose in the company • IntensCare Project • IntensCare Team • Good practices of the company • Bad practices of the company • Problems that the company faces • Solution to the problems
  • 3.
    Background • Privately heldUS based medical device manufacturer • Founded in 2002 • Annual revenue $400 million(2008) • Employed 1750 people • Developed, manufactured and sold medical monitoring systems for hospital segment • First two successful products: Speciality pulmonary system and Renal monitoring system
  • 4.
    Situation • Two majorcompetitors planning to compete with IntensCare • To counteract, Art Beaumont introduced some changes in the organisational structure: Created an executive committee consisting of 5 VP from different functional areas: Sales and Marketing, R&D, design and engineering, production and administration Created a cross functional team including people from all critical functions
  • 5.
    Art Beaumont President Len Broman,VP D&E Dipesh Mukherjee SDM BretO’ Brien SEM Martha Hill, VP Production Jack Fogel SPM, PL Peter Fisher, VP S&M Valerie Merz MM, BL Amie Fredrick, VP R&D Aaron Gerson Scientist Zoe Thompson, VP Administration Karen Baio Regulatory Affairs
  • 6.
    IntensCare Project • Apatient monitoring system that would collect data of patient in intensive care unit: Post it to an electronic database that would provide an integrated profile of an individual patient’s health Would send an email message to physicians and nurses involved in the patient’s care
  • 7.
    Sept. 2006 • R&D persongets inspiration for the product Oct. 2006 • Sales person vets the concept in the market Dec. 2006 • Conversations include software designer June 2007 • Ad hoc team presents product concept to senior leaders July 2007 • Senior leadership allocates $500000 for development Jan 2008 • Beaumont hired as president Aug. 2008 • Beaumont formalises NPD and charters a core team to develop IntensCare Aug. 2009 • Projected IntensCare launch date
  • 8.
    IntensCare Team Name PostDescription 1 Valerie Merz MM Concerns focused on the budget and delivery of the product Lack of information constrained her ability to work 2 Jack Fogel SPM Concerns focused on the production details One dimensional approach limited his understanding of marketing and sales issues 3 Dipesh Mukherjee SM Concerns focused on managing issues in India related to software development Portrayed confidence about the ability of the overseas personnel to deliver quality software
  • 9.
    Name Post Description 4Bret O’ Brien SEM Concerns focused on how to utilise the HR available for this project Opposed Valerie Merz’s product modularisation proposal 5 Karen Baio RA Concerns focused on how to meet the strict quality and regulatory medical industry’s standards Team members avoided dealing with her due to the nature of her role 6 Aaron Gerson R&D Concern was the overseas software development team Knew the competition well and was confident about the success of the project; was only stringent about the outsourcing approach of Mukherjee
  • 10.
    Good Practices • Encouragedinnovative thinking • Had entrepreneurial culture • They tailor made products according to customer needs and responses • Introduced a new parallel system for product development • Employees embraced cross functional team design • Developed an executive team and implemented a strategy for growing the business swiftly
  • 11.
    Bad Practices • Debateon modular design • Non compliance with the deadline given-very aggressive deadlines • Conflict among employees regarding cross functional team design and parallel development process • Employees were not open, patient and didn’t trust each other • Software developed overseas were notoriously problematic in the medical diagnostics field
  • 12.
  • 13.
    Problem Internal Management Changing of the working pattern Formingof the core team created a narrow span of control Formation of the parallel development team Tight deadline Team Absence of trust Lack of Communication Individualism Inefficient project/team leader Fear of conflictInattention to results Technical Issues Modular design Delay in hardware engineering Delay in software engineering Problem in fitting data display and battery units as per customer specifications External Market Two reputed competitors were coming with similar products
  • 14.
    Recommendations • For theHR management The company needs to encourage the IntensCare members to work as a team It can give them a group reward if the team can achieve the project The company should convene all team members to announce about the mutual reward and have an open talking about the problems The company should let them negotiate about the period of time they need to spend on their own functions with each other
  • 15.
    Recommendations(Contd…) The company canset up a party or a recreation activity The core team members should share the progress of their function on the same office screen or board The company should prioritize the urgency and importance of every project they have After doing this if it considers that the IntensCare project is the most urgent and important, then there should be a increase in staff to help achieve this project
  • 16.
    Recommendations(Contd…) • For theOperations management They should contact with the Indian firm to confirm about the date it can deliver At the same time, they should start searching for other companies that can develop and deliver the software that they want within the time limit. If the Indian firm cannot send the product within the committed period, they should hire other companies to be responsible for this project The engineering team should talk with the marketing to figure out the size of the data displays and battery units that both teams are satisfied with
  • 17.
    Recommendations(Contd…) • For theTime management The company needs to consider about the due date whether they should stick to the same period or postpone it After talking with people about time they need to use, the situation can be understood well and proper decisions can be taken

Editor's Notes