Building a Bridge, Not a Wall: Employee Engagement Strategies for Medical Device Startup Success

Introduction

The medical device industry thrives on innovation, with countless startups aiming to revolutionize patient care through groundbreaking diagnostics. However, transitioning from a fledgling, fast-paced startup to a commercially viable medical device entity presents a unique set of hurdles. Stringent regulatory oversight by organizations (i.e. Food and Drug Administration) necessitates strict adherence to rigorous safety and efficacy standards. This gauntlet can be daunting for emerging companies, demanding a significant shift from agile idea-driven environments to highly regulated ones. Unfortunately, a staggering 75% of medical device startups fail to navigate this critical transition successfully (Carol, 2022).

Beyond these external constraints, companies must also address the significant psychological impact on their internal workforce. The whirlwind of rapid technological advancements, stringent regulatory demands, and the pressures of commercialization strategies can create a complex psychological landscape for employees. This confluence of factors presents a crucial challenge for emerging enterprises: effectively engaging their workforce in change management strategies during the critical commercialization transition. Often, this period exacerbates cultural and communication gaps within organization, leading to conflicting priorities, knowledge deficits, and declining employee morale. Inconsistent leadership can further exacerbate these issues, potentially jeopardizing valuable market opportunities and risking reputational damage.

The Importance of Change Management

This research delves into the critical role of change management in mitigating these challenges and fostering a successful transition from startup to regulated commercial entity within the medical device industry. Effective change management strategies can help employees embrace the transition and navigate the complexities involved.

Key Challenges

• Regulatory Hurdles: Meeting stringent regulations can be a significant hurdle for startups accustomed to agile development processes.

• Psychological Impact: The rapid shift in environment and priorities can create stress, anxiety, and resistance to change among employees.

• Communication Gaps: Emerging companies may struggle with clear and consistent communication during the transition, leading to confusion and frustration.

• Leadership Challenges: Inconsistent or ineffective leadership can exacerbate anxieties and hinder employee engagement

Key Findings from Research

This study identified several key themes related to successful change management in emerging enterprises:

• Flexibility and adaptability are crucial during organizational change, while resistance can hinder success (Jacobs & Keegan, 2018; Smollan, 2015; Hassan et al, 2021; Rehman et al, 2021; Druisic-Bojanovic, 2016; Oreg et al, 2024; Doeze Jagar et al, 2021; Vakola, 2016)

• Leaders need to embrace change and encourage adaptability within their teams to drive innovation (Jacobs & Keegan, 2018; Smollan, 2015; Hassan et al, 2021; Rehman et al, 2021; Sung & Kim, 2021; Druisic-Bojanovic, 2016; Shafi et al, 2020; Oreg et al, 2024; Doeze Jagar et al, 2021; Vakola, 2016)

• Employee ethics can influence how they perceive changes, particularly regarding potential impacts on colleagues (Jacobs & Keegan, 2018; Smollan, 2015; Hassan et al, 2021; Druisic-Bojanovic, 2016; Oreg et al, 2024; Doeze Jagar et al, 2021; Vakola, 2016)

• Effective communication, procedural justice, and trust-building are essential for managing stress and promoting change acceptance  (Jacobs & Keegan, 2018; Smollan, 2015; Hassan et al, 2021; Rehman et al, 2021; Sung & Kim, 2021; Druisic-Bojanovic, 2016; Oreg et al, 2024; Doeze Jagar et al, 2021; Vakola, 2016)

Conceptual Framework

The research suggests a conceptual framework for navigating change management in medical device startups during commercialization (Figure 1). This framework highlights the importance of leadership, communication, and employee engagement in facilitating a smooth transition.

Figure 1

Recommendations for Successful Change Management

By following these recommendations, emerging medical device companies can develop effective change management strategies:

• Transparent Communication: Openly sharing relevant information and timely updates can foster trust, which is essential for cooperation and commitment.

• Employee Engagement: Involve employees in change process by soliciting feedback and addressing their concerns.

• Leadership Development: Equip leaders with the skills and knowledge to effectively communicate change and motivate employees.

• Training and Development: Provide employees with the training and resources they need to adapt to the new regulatory environment and commercialization processes

Conclusion

By focusing on effective change management strategies, emerging medical device companies can increase their chances of successfully navigating the critical transition to commercialization. By addressing employee concerns, fostering a culture of open communication, and providing the necessary support, companies can ensure a smoother transition and maintain a highly engaged workforce.

Author

Nicole Litchfield is a certified PMP with 19 years experience in the medical device sector, working for both emerging enterprises and Fortune 500 companies. Currently, she is a practitioner-scholar at UMGC DBA Program (Class of 2025). To connect further, please reach out to nlitchfield.work@gmail.com.

References

Carol, Mark. (2022, June 9). The complex ecosystem of a medical device startup. Focused Ultrasound Foundation. https://www.fusfoundation.org/posts/the-complex-ecosystem-of-a-medical-device-startup/

Doeze Jagar, S.B., Ph.Born, M., & van der Molen, H.T. (2022). The relationship between organizational trust, resistance to change and adaptive and proactive employees’ agility in an unplanned and planned change context. Applied Psychology, 71: 436-460. https://doi.org/10.1111/apps.12327

Durisic-Bojanovic, M. (2015). The interplay between cognitive styles and organizational change. Journal of East European Management Studies, 21(1): 35-59. https://doi.org/10.1688/JEEMS-2016-Durisic-Bojanovic

Hassan, H.A., Zhang, X., Ahmad, A.B., & Liu, B. (2021). Public service motivation and employee change-supportive intention: utilizing the Theory of Planned Behavior. Public Personnel Management, 50(2): 283-304. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091026020934515

Jacobs, G. & Keegan, A. (2018). Ethical considerations and change recipients’ reactions: ‘It’s not all about me.’ Journal of Business Ethics, 152(1): 73-90. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3311-7

Oreg, Sh., Sverdlik, N., Paine, J.W., Seo, M.G. (2024). Activation and valence in responses to organizational change: development and validation of the change response circumplex scale. Journal of Applied Psychology, 10(1): 135-155. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001132

Rehman, N., Mahmood, A., Ibtasam, M., Murtaza, S.A., Iqbal, N., & Molnar, E. The psychology of resistance to change: the antidotal effect of organizational justice, support and leader-member exchange. Frontiers of Psychology, 12: 1-15. https://doi.org/0.3389/fpsyg.2021.678952

Shafi, M., Zoya, Zheng, L., Song, X., Sarker, M.N.I. (2020). The effects of transformational leadership on employee creativity: moderating role of intrinsic motivation. Asia Pacific Management Review, 20: 166-176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmrv.2019.12.002

Smollan, R.K. (2015). Causes of stress before, during and after organizational change: a qualitative study. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 28(2): 301-314. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-03-2014-0055

Sung, W.& Kim, C. (2021). A study on the effect of change management on organizational innovation: focusing on the mediating effect on members’ innovative behavior. Sustainability, 13(2079). https://doi.org/10.3390/su13042079

Vakola, M. (2014). The reasons behind the change recipients’ behavioral reactions: a longitudinal investigation. Journal of Managerial Psychology. 31(1): 202-215. https://doi.org//10.1108/JMP-02-2013-0058