Hearing From You: Design Thinking in Audiological Research

PURPOSE

The purpose of this article is to describe the emerging use of design thinking methodologies in hearing health care research using a participatory action approach with a consumer and community involvement panel, audiologists, and adults with hearing loss.

METHOD

Two connected hearing health care projects that adopted design thinking principles are presented here as case studies. Case 1 investigated the applicability and acceptability of smart voice assistant technology as post-hearing aid fitting support. Case 2 investigated the feasibility of providing support for new adult patients with hearing loss before they attend their hearing assessment appointment.

DISCUSSION

The design thinking process provided a flexible structure in which researchers were able to empathize with stakeholders, define their unmet needs, and ideate potential connected hearing health care solutions to develop and evaluate prototypes in clinical and home settings.

CONCLUSION

Utilizing a needs-based, collaborative design thinking approach to conduct development in hearing health care research is a viable and novel option to produce innovative, relevant, and translational hearing health solutions that address stakeholder needs.

THREE PERSPECTIVES ON MANAGING FRONT END INNOVATION: PROCESS, KNOWLEDGE AND TRANSLATION

This paper presents three complementary perspectives on the management of front end innovation: A process model perspective, a knowledge perspective and a translational perspective. While the first two perspectives are well established in literature, we offer the translation perspective as a complementary perspective. The paper combines a literature review with an empirical examination of the application of these multiple perspectives across three cases of front end of innovation (FEI) management in mature product developing companies. While the process models represent the dominant, albeit rather simplistic perspective, they primarily serve as a reference point and communication device. Here, the knowledge perspective offers a supplementary perspective by filling the gaps left by the formal processes with informal cross boarder knowledge exchange. In comparison, the translation perspective is found to represent an emergent approach in managing FEI where process models, knowledge strategies and objects become integrated elements in more advanced navigational strategies for key players.

KEY DIFFERENCES AND SIMILARITIES IN WAYS OF MANAGING AND SUPPORTING RADICAL PHARMACEUTICAL FRONT END INNOVATION — A CASE STUDY OF THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY

The purpose of this paper is to explore how Front End Innovation (FEI) is supported and managed among companies of different nationality within the context of pharmaceutical R&D. The present study is carried out in order to contribute to the development of a clearer understanding of active facilitation of innovation management and FEI in theory and in practice across international borders. I aim to show how different aspects of Pharma and nationality affect the way innovation management and radical FEI are supported within organisations. This is examined through an in-depth case study of the Danish and US based pharmaceutical company, H. Lundbeck A/S, and a comparative study including five European and American pharmaceutical companies. The findings from the study reveal a number of similarities and differences in innovation management and FEI support of radical projects and among the different nationalities. This presents propositions of important aspects to consider in facilitation of radical FEI in general and in multinational pharmaceutical companies. In addition, proposals are made for a global study of innovation management and FEI support including Chinese and other Asian pharmaceutical companies, which represent a growing market. The value added and the contribution of this paper to the existing FEI literature is therefore in the specificity of the empirical setting in which the issue is investigated.