TL;DR
As I found this year, successful Australian medtech startups follow three key pillars: being science-first, hiring interdisciplinary staff and and carefully balancing product breadth with depth.
Background
Being an Australian medical student with undergraduate and industry experience in technology, my curiosity was naturally drawn to the domestic medtech landscape. What kind of hurdles are faced by scientists in their pursuit to transition today’s technological advancements into the clinical status quo?
Sydney based company Resonait is exploring the potential therapeutic applications of EEG devices - mobile headsets which detect the electrophysiological activity of the brain. Building on the post-doctural findings of startup founder and former Oxford neuroscientist Cameron Higgins (Higgins et al. 2021), the company enables Australia’s therapist community (psychologists, psychiatrists and mentors alike) to access real-time measurements of their patients’ default mode network activation, the network in the brain linked with depressive symptoms such as rumination. This achievement represents and impressive confluence of hardware design and machine learning powered insights, not to mention their work in translating and communicating these insights to the practitioners whose therapy session benefit from them.
Higgins and Fractional CTO Ilya Kuzovkin were happy to welcome me to the fold, where I contributed to their codebase and accompanied them in meetings with clinical partners.
1) Danger in pursuing multiple projects
Receiving grant funding and attracting unicorn investors is the nectar that nourishes the lofty ambitions of medtech startups. So it comes as no surprise that Resonait has its fingers in many technological pies, exploring a wide range of therapeutic applications for their software in order to cast the net wide in the pursuit of funding. Securing funding can feel like a lottery, so why not buy as many tickets as possible?
Their flagship product Cadence promises psychological insights from EEG measurements and ultimately proved most prolific in securing funding, but client interest in Resonait’s closed-loop TMS (Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation) constantly popped up too. What’s more, brand new product ideas also arose at the strategy meeting. The question naturally arose: which of these ideas justified deeper investment? Should a company focus on quantity of products, developing quality only once its foot is in the door?
In my experience, diversifying a product portfolio too early can endanger a company’s identity. For a small startup to be taken seriously as a disruptor, VCs often prefer efforts to be focused on a single core product, fleshed out sufficiently to demonstrate the true potential of its application. Stretching a small team thin to pursue multiple avenues risks delaying the establishment of reliable revenue from a flagship offering. The central challenge is not choosing between scientific purity and commercial viability, but deciding which compromises are acceptable, and when.
2) Staff willing to be interdisciplinary
My first days with Resonait included their annual strategy meeting, held in person at the Sydney Knowledge Hub. I recall being surprised at the makeup of staff powering such a complex initiative - many split their weeks between Resonait and other academic or professional pursuits. I was equally surprised at the emphasis placed on hearing input from all staff regardless of position. The CMO offered crucial advice on managing investor expectations, clinical advisors pointed to grant applications worth applying for, and even my advice was sought to provide a fresh external perspective on the broader objectives of the company.
I realised that the brainstorming and debating of ideas hinges on the interdisciplinary skillset of the body of staff at a small startup like Resonait. Without team-wide critique, business plans lack intellectual and operational rigour.
It goes without saying that widespread passion is needed too. Engineers should hold genuine interest in the company marketing to contextualise the value of their work. Conversely, marketing experts understanding the limitations of the software stack ensures accurate promotion. Being so early in my own neurotechnology career, I found this deeply enriching. The implicit value in reading up on all things Resonait ultimately made my experience there highly conducive to professional growth.
The challenge for startups here is two-pronged. Hiring staff with mixed backgrounds and a proven passion for medical technologies is essential. Furthermore, proper documentation of business operations future-proofs organisations against staff turnover and mitigates key-person risk. Speaking from personal experience, a central knowledge base allows new staff to seamlessly access the range of information needed to offer such valuable input.
3) Science at the heart of operations
Compared with competitors in the field, Resonait defines itself as scientifically rooted - their software is validated in academic literature. However there’s still a temptation to oversimplify or ‘cheapen’ the complexity of their product for logistical convenience, for staff minimisation, or to capitalise quickly on market entry opportunities.
In neurotechnology, scientific integrity is also inseparable from regulatory reality. Navigating TGA and/or FDA approval pathways introduces timelines and constraints that fundamentally shape product design, often forcing trade-offs that would be invisible in a purely academic setting.
Ensuring correct use of expensive EEG headsets to reduce signal noise, iteratively validating the accuracy of their underlying model, and setting client expectations on the limitations of the technology all come at a cost. The company was confronted with many forks in the road where compromising on one of these operations could have offered short-term success. These dilemmas will continue to arise in the future.
So far, those scientists at Resonait’s helm have opted to stick true to their founding mantra, cognisant that prioritising short-term gain risks undermining long-term credibility among medical clinicians. This seems like a wise a decision, and one that is informed by—and admired within—the practitioner relationships they maintain. That said, medtech companies that temporarily compromise on scientific rigour to secure early revenue may also be acting rationally, if it enables later expansion and consolidation.
Being rooted in science offers benefits outside of industry reputation: Resonait’s links with The University of Sydney also allow for sporadic use of campus facilities and leveraging student internship programs. Their connections to Australia’s CSIRO and QIMR offer regular insights into neurotechnology developments, opportunities for clinical trials, and a clearer view on the grant application process that powers their growth.