Where it started
A medtech company making urinary catheters had five development projects running, and budget and people for three. Every project had an owner who could argue for it, and the arguments did not use the same yardstick.
The strategic question
Which projects continue, which pause, and which stop?
What we found
Each project was scored 1–5 on potential, cost, time and risk, on scales agreed with management before any project was scored. Potential divided by the other three gave a priority score. The score was the starting point, not the answer: each project was then held up against technology, commercial, rights and organization. Every project got a one-pager with both.
Project | Potential | Cost | Time | Risk | Priority score | Peak sales / yr | The pillars say |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A · Hydrophilic coating, next generation | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1.00 | €40M | Ready |
B · Compact catheter for travel | 4 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0.67 | €75M | Strong market pull |
D · Shared packaging platform | 3 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 0.43 | €75M | Lowers cost for B and E |
E · Catheter with infection-reducing surface | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 0.33 | €300M | Technology not ready. Largest upside |
C · Connected app for catheter users | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 0.14 | €25M | Low commercial pull |