Strategic Alliances In Healthcare

In MedTech, there’s no shortage of brilliant ideas. I meet founders every week who are developing amazing technologies that could transform health care as we know it. But when it comes to attracting investors, too many startups miss the mark. Here are four lessons every MedTech entrepreneur should keep in mind: 1.     Clinical benefit matters most. A breakthrough device that’s faster, cheaper, and more accurate will always capture investor attention. Yet I still see companies lean too heavily on technical details without answering the essential question: does this product improve outcomes for patients and make clinicians better at what they already do? It's not about the shiny object, it's about the unmet clinical need. The ability to articulate and quantify how a product improves patient care is one of the most compelling arguments for startups to make. 2.     Strategic partnerships are the future. Most startups will not become standalone manufacturers — and that’s a good thing. Many MedTech startups — including HyperSpectral — build a strategy around partnering with major diagnostics players who already have the platforms, channels, and credibility to get the job done. Investors understand this dynamic. They want to see a clear path to integration with larger ecosystems, whether through acquisition, licensing, or subsidiary status.   3.     The funding game has changed. The funding environment for MedTech has changed dramatically since the 2010s, when capital was flowing freely and investors were willing to take big risks. Today, VCs expect you to do much more of the heavy lifting upfront: build the product, secure regulatory clearance, and generate clinical evidence. Sometimes even start making revenue! Investors now are far more selective, backing only those startups that demonstrate early traction and can clearly articulate ROI.   4.     Speak the language of VCs. One of the most common mistakes founders make is failing to present their company in terms investors care about: financial returns and valuation milestones. Investors want to see a clear roadmap of when and how they will get their money back. A strong pitch deck must highlight inflection points — FDA clearance, reimbursement approval, strategic partnerships — that drive company valuation. Speaking this language shows an understanding of what motivates investors, which can significantly improve the chances of securing funding. The MedTech journey is complex, but the investor playbook is consistent: prove clinical benefit, chart a path to partnership, and communicate in terms that investors care about. That’s how groundbreaking ideas become investable opportunities. #MedTech #HealthcareInnovation #FutureOfHealthcare

I recently reviewed Barclays’ latest Global Hospital Capex Survey, and the outlook for 2026 is notably more optimistic and tech‑forward. Hospitals worldwide are planning accelerated capital investment, supported by improving procedure volumes, stronger revenue expectations, and greater stability across major markets. Here are the highlights shaping investment and what they mean for service teams and value‑based partnerships: What is driving investment in 2026? • Global hospital capex is expected to grow +6.2%, up from +4.3% last year • The US remains resilient, while China shows renewed upside as anti‑corruption impacts recede • Spending is increasingly focused on advanced imaging, workflow optimization, and high‑efficiency technologies Service insights: Where hospitals expect more from vendors One of the strongest themes in this year’s survey is the rising strategic importance of service and partnerships. Hospitals are not just buying equipment, they are seeking integrated, long‑horizon value. • Reliability, uptime, and total cost of ownership are becoming core decision drivers, reinforcing the importance of predictive service models and remote diagnostics • AI‑enabled service workflows are gaining traction, particularly in case prioritization, worklist management, and diagnostic support • Staffing shortages are pushing hospitals to prioritize workflow automation, training support, and efficiency‑boosting services • Value‑based partnerships are accelerating, with health systems looking for single‑vendor ecosystems that connect imaging, therapy, and informatics What this means for MedTech leaders as capital spending rebounds, differentiation is shifting beyond hardware: • Integrate clinical innovation with operational efficiency • Provide end‑to‑end service ecosystems • Reduce complexity for overwhelmed clinical teams • Demonstrate long‑term ROI through data‑driven service models   These shifts signal a fundamental change in how hospitals evaluate value. As capital investment accelerates, hospitals are becoming far more intentional about the partners they choose. In 2026, success will be defined by who can translate technology investment into operational resilience, clinical efficiency, and long‑term value. This is where long‑term partnership begins to outweigh transactional exchange.

After more than two decades of investing in healthcare, I've learned three things: be patient, resist trend-chasing, and wait until timing makes sense. With experience on dozens of boards, witnessing thousands of pitches, navigating frothy portfolio activity, and surviving the dud markets while waiting on good ones to return, I know that time and timing is key for success in healthcare investing. The challenge is, how do I convince LPs that the wait will be worth it? Peek at Relentless Venture Fund diversity of companies that span regenerative medicine to software-as-a-medical-device (SaMD), includes a repeat entrepreneur who practiced medicine, to technical founders who figured out IP rights in a way that only newbies to the industry would contemplate. The beauty of diversified portfolio construction, regulatory and risk balance. Deep bets take time. That's the opportunity in healthcare investing. BC has structural advantages that make deep bets work. World-class science from The University of British Columbia, Simon Fraser University, University of Victoria, BCCA and our research hospitals. Clinical trial facilities such as the new Phase 1 Clinical Trial Unit at Providence Health Care. Provincial commitment to the innovation ecosystem such as the government's participation in Aspect Biosystems' $200M, multi-year project to ensure a world class team thrives in a world class facility in our province. What would further amplify our potential? Procurement strategies that let BC companies prove themselves locally before going global. As a member of DIGITAL's investment committee, I evaluate and advance private/public partnerships that derisk technology and accelerate commercial adoption in BC and across Canada. These collaborations are shortening the path from lab to market. Timelines for liquidity in healthcare may be longer than other venture sectors, but the wins are foreshadowed years ahead. Canary Medical Inc. locked in a commercial partnership with Zimmer Biomet before regulatory approval. Aspect secured a $2.6B partnership with Novo Nordisk on pre-clinical data. Two BC founded, Relentless portfolio companies. It will be approximately one decade from our original investment in Aspect to their first human clinical trial. I am not fussed by the timeline. Each strategic partnership and validation of data by customers sets the stage for a high value exit. The beauty of investing in healthcare innovation is regulatory timelines are getting shorter and costs are dropping; innovation is expediting discovery, diagnosis, treatment and care options never imagined when I started my VC career. I know deep science takes time, and patient capital wins. And when they do, BC has an opportunity to capture value that historically flowed south. With the right policy support and patient capital aligned, we can continue to build category defining healthcare companies that scale from our province, not just launch here and relocate. Life Sciences BC

Your AI strategy will fail if clinicians are not involved from day one. There will be no use for AI if they are not involved. Most organizations tend to miss this key part,  involving key players early on, and it's hurting your adoption rates. From healthcare professionals to patients, administrative staff to tech providers, each stakeholder plays a crucial role in successful implementation. Here's how to engage them effectively: Healthcare Professionals (Doctors, Nurses, Specialists) 1. Engage early in the decision-making process 2. Gather input on practical requirements and potential challenges 3. Involve in pilot programs to assess usability and integration challenges 4. Provide comprehensive training on new technologies Patients 1. Educate about new technologies and their benefits 2. Screen for digital literacy to identify those who may need extra support 3. Choose user-friendly technologies that don't require logins or downloads 4. Explain how new tools will save time or improve health outcomes Administrative Staff 1. Include in needs assessment to identify inefficiencies in workflows 2. Provide training on new systems and processes 3. Gather feedback on technology effectiveness and areas for improvement Technology Providers 1. Involve in stakeholder discussions to understand healthcare-specific needs 2. Collaborate on pilot programs and validation of technologies 3. Ensure technology is effective for healthcare professionals and interoperable with existing healthcare infrastructure 4. Ensure intuitive navigation in healthcare technology systems to facilitate adoption Organizational Leadership 1. Conduct thorough needs assessments to align technology with organizational goals 2. Develop a strategic plan with SMART goals for digital transformation 3. Establish key success metrics to evaluate technology effectiveness 4. Create a common forum for stakeholder discussions Including the different stakeholders can lead to: 1) Shared vision 2) Trust building 3) Addressing (and avoiding) conflicting interest 4) Improved compatibility 5) Ethical considerations What learnings do you have from implementing new technical tools in your organization?

The recent announcement that Eli Lilly and Company and Andreessen Horowitz (a16z) have launched a $500M venture fund is a strong signal of where biotech and healthcare innovation is heading. This is not a traditional pharma investment play. The fund is focused on platform-based bio and health startups, particularly those leveraging AI, data, and scalable biological technologies to transform how therapies are discovered, developed, and delivered. What stands out is the model itself: Big Pharmais bringing deep scientific, clinical, and regulatory expertise A leading VC firm contributing technology-first thinking, capital discipline, and founder networks A clear emphasis on long-term platforms, not single-asset bets In an environment where early-stage biotech funding has tightened, this type of partnership helps bridge a critical gap — providing founders with both patient capital and real-world development support. For anyone working in pharmaceuticals, biotech, or health tech, this is another clear indication that the future of the industry sits at the intersection of biology, technology, and data-driven platforms. #Biotech #Pharma #HealthTech #VentureCapital #LifeSciences #Innovation #AIinHealthcare

After 12 years and 300+ Digital Health programs, I've found that a Stakeholder Gap is the No. 1 reason Digital Health implementations fail. Let me explain… When Digital Health initiatives fail, it’s often not because the Tech didn’t actually work as intended. Almost always it’s because something failed at the People and Process level, which ultimately means something failed at the People level - because People drive the Process. Now when all your key stakeholders are present and aligned - because purpose and incentives are on the same page - magic happens. Things get done. However, if buy-in from even one key stakeholder ingredient is missing, you get a Stakeholder Gap… and you get failure. I’ve found it helpful to boil Stakeholder Gaps down to three common scenarios, revolving around three key types of Stakeholders: → Clinical champions who bring everyone together and drive the initiative forward → Executive sponsors who secure the funding and resources to support the initiative → Frontline stakeholders who execute day-to-day on the initiative If you miss one of these key Stakeholders… your Digital Health implementation is on the road to failure. Let me show you why… 1️⃣ Clinical champion buy-in + frontline staff buy-in BUT executive sponsor disengaged = Great pilot results, BUT no funding/resources to sustain and scale This happens when a single department implements a Digital Health tool without first getting true leadership buy-in. So they often achieve success on KPIs they picked… but never got alignment with the executives that these would be success metrics that would justify on-going resources. Or even if it turns out they hit the right KPIs, the executive sponsors were unhappy that they were excluded from the initial decision to pilot. 2️⃣ Executive sponsor buy-in + Clinical champion buy-in BUT frontline staff disengaged = Great press release, BUT no actual adoption or results This happens when there is a top-down push to implement Tech, but frontline buy-in beyond a clinical champion was never actually secured. For particularly exuberant leaders, they go ahead and announce the new Tech partnership… but you may never hear about it again. Because they picked a piece of Tech that frontline staff were never bought into either. Often it’s because the Tech looked great on paper, but the vendor lacked real clinical subject matter expertise. 3️⃣ Executive sponsor buy-in + frontline staff buy-in + Clinical champion disengaged = Great start BUT… slowly grinds to a halt The most common reason this happens is when clinical champions leave the organization. So yes the initiative had buy-in from all three groups initially, but lost it when the original Clinical champion was gone - and not enough effort was made to ensure there were other Clinical champions in place. And with no champion to keep driving the bus for the Tech, eventually people may move onto other things. What would you add?

Value-based care is proving a point. Quality and revenue can grow together. Healthcare organizations using coordinated care platforms are seeing measurable wins: 🔹 real-time alerts catch unnecessary ED visits before they happen, 🔹 proactive follow-ups close care gaps during transitions, 🔹 4.5% drop in 30-day ED re-admissions through care manager coordination. The shift from fee-for-service is no longer theoretical. Providers who nail data integration and care coordination are finding financial stability doesn't require compromising patient outcomes. The model works when incentives align across the continuum.

The U.S. is putting $10B/year on the table from 2026–2030 for rural health transformation. SF investors will look for Care Delivery startups that can actually deploy at scale — aka distribution edge + implementation reality, not demos. That single policy signal quietly reshapes how healthcare capital flows in San Francisco. And it explains why so many strong healthtech startups still fail to raise. Here’s the uncomfortable truth I see in 2026: Founders aren’t failing because their tech is weak. They’re failing because they’re pitching the wrong capital element. SF healthcare funding now behaves like a periodic table — not a generic VC market. Each investor cluster optimizes for a different survival trait. The 10 SF Healthcare Capital “Elements”: When I mapped the ecosystem visually, patterns became obvious: • Care Delivery & Operator Capital → Can you deploy in real clinics, fast? • Infrastructure & Pick-and-Shovel Capital → Are you the rail everyone else must use? • AI, Platform & Scale Capital → Do you have a data flywheel + distribution leverage? • Bridge & Ecosystem Capital → Can pilots reliably convert to expansion? • Clinical & Vertical Specialists → Do you win on outcomes and trust, not breadth? • Regulatory-Heavy / Science Capital → Is compliance your moat, not your risk? • Frontier / Contrarian Capital → Are you creating a category, not chasing one? • Early Conviction Capital → Is your wedge inevitable, even before proof? • Hybrid / Strategic Capital → Do you unlock optionality across systems? • Distribution-Edge Capital → Who already wants to sell this for you? With $10B/year flowing into underserved and rural care models, capital is shifting toward startups that can: ✔ Embed into workflows ✔ Show ROI in months, not years ✔ Prove distribution beyond founder-led sales ✔ Survive real-world constraints (staffing, reimbursement, compliance) In other words: implementation beats vision in 2026. The hidden fundraising mistake (I see this weekly): - A startup with strong Infrastructure signals pitches Frontier funds. - A Care-Delivery company sells vision instead of deployment proof. - An AI platform talks model performance instead of distribution mechanics. Result? “Love the idea. Not a fit for us right now.” That’s why I built the SF HealthTech Funding Elements framework — and a free Capital-Fit Calculator that: • Scores your startup against the 10 SF capital elements • Shows which investor archetypes you should target first • Flags why partners say yes… then still pass • Generates a 90-day outreach + proof-building sequence It forces alignment between: your proof → your narrative → the capital you chase I’ve shared the full SF Healthcare VC Power Stack visual, deeper breakdowns, and the free tool in the blog. If you want help turning this into a VC-grade fundraising system, that’s the missing link I work on with founders. 📩 DM “SF ELEMENTS” and I’ll send the framework + tool.

How would #Operational_Excellence and #Clinical_Governance work together in #Healthcare systems ??🤔 ** Here 👇🏼are several integrated strategies: 1. Process #Standardization and #Improvement: - #Op_Excellence: Uses methodologies like Lean and Six Sigma to standardize and improve processes. - #Cl_Governance: Ensures processes adhere to #Clinical_Guidelines and best practices. - #Integration: Standardized processes reduce variability and errors, enhancing patient care quality. 2. Performance #Measurement and #Monitoring : - #Op_Excellence: Implements #metrics to monitor #efficiency and resource use. - #Cl_Governance: Uses clinical #indicators to track patient outcomes and safety. - #Integration: Combining these metrics offers a comprehensive view of both efficiency and effectiveness, guiding targeted improvements. 3. Continuous Improvement #Culture: - #Op_Excellence: Encourages staff to identify and address inefficiencies. - #Cl_Governance: Promotes quality improvement and adherence to clinical standards. - #Integration: A unified improvement culture drives both operational and clinical enhancements. 4. Staff #Training and Development: - #Op_Excellence:Provides training on process improvement techniques. - #Cl_Governance: Offers training on clinical best practices and safety protocols. - #Integration: Comprehensive training programs ensure staff can deliver high-quality, efficient care. 5. #Technology & #Data_Analytics: - #Op_Excellence: Utilizes technology and data to optimize workflows. - #Cl_Governance: Uses data to track clinical outcomes and support evidence-based practices. - #Integration: Combining technology and data analytics enhances both operational efficiency and clinical quality. 6. #Risk_Management & #Patient_Safety: - #Op_Excellence: Identifies and mitigates process-related risks. - #Cl_Governance: Focuses on clinical risk mitigation and patient safety. - #Integration: Coordinated risk management addresses both operational and clinical risks, ensuring a safer healthcare environment. 7. #Patient_Centered Care: - #Op_Excellence: Streamlines processes to improve the patient experience. - #Cl_Governance: Ensures care is safe, effective, and patient-centered. - #Integration: Enhancing both efficiency and quality improves patient satisfaction and care delivery. 8. #Leadership & Governance: - #Op_Excellence: Needs strong leadership for process improvements. - #Cl_Governance: Requires leadership to maintain clinical standards. - #Integration: Leaders prioritizing both operational excellence and clinical governance ensure balanced and effective healthcare management. By aligning #operational_excellence with #clinical_governance, healthcare systems achieve #synergy, enhancing both efficiency and care quality. This integration supports high #clinical_standards through efficient processes, leading to better patient outcomes and overall system performance.

🎗️💰 Atlas Oncology Partners Raises $28M #Series #A to Scale Value-Based Cancer Care Value-based oncology continues to gain momentum. Atlas Oncology Partners has closed a $28 million Series A, led by Flare Capital Partners, with significant participation from Rubicon Founders, the healthcare investment firm that incubated the company. This is more than a funding round — it’s a structural bet on risk-bearing oncology enablement. Here’s what stands out 👇 🏥 1️⃣ Embedding care teams inside community oncology Atlas integrates: ✔️ Providers ✔️ Nurses ✔️ Patient navigators ✔️ Social workers directly into oncology practices to coordinate care during and beyond active treatment. 🧠 2️⃣ Full medical cost risk model Unlike advisory-only enablement platforms, Atlas: • Assumes full medical cost risk from payors • Aligns incentives with oncology practices • Invests in operational infrastructure to reduce avoidable costs That’s a bold move in one of healthcare’s most complex and expensive categories. 🗣️ Kate Barnard Roberts — President & Co-Founder, Atlas Oncology Partners emphasized simplifying the patient experience from diagnosis forward. 🗣️ Matt Kim — Partner, Rubicon Founders highlighted the model as a fundamental rethink of cancer delivery — embedding interdisciplinary teams while taking financial accountability. 🗣️ Ian Chiang — Partner, Flare Capital Partners described Atlas as aligned across patients, oncologists, and payers in the value-based ecosystem. 📈 3️⃣ Capital deployment focus The $28M will support: • Geographic expansion • More oncology practice partnerships • Clinical & operational infrastructure buildout 🧩 My takeaway Oncology is one of the hardest sectors to shift into value-based models due to: • High drug spend • Fragmented care pathways • Complex psychosocial needs Atlas is attempting to solve this by combining: ✔️ Embedded interdisciplinary teams ✔️ Risk-bearing alignment ✔️ Operational enablement If executed well, this could become a blueprint for scaling value-based care in specialty medicine — not just oncology. The real differentiator won’t just be navigation. It will be proving durable cost and outcome improvements under full-risk arrangements. #Oncology #ValueBasedCare #HealthcareInnovation #CancerCare #HealthTech #SeriesA #CareDelivery #PopulationHealth https://lnkd.in/gC4apd5m