Based on my experience, it is a combination of both, honing in on customer needs to target therapies to address those needs while at the same time development technologies and establishing IP for application to areas of potential opportunity which can also translate to potential customer need once establishment and measures are put into place to focus on customer-centric areas from rare disease states the whole way to broader areas like oncology therapies to address various cancers, sometimes leading to therapies that can be implemented when all other treatments fail.

Thanks Anthony. I ask because I see a duality in the Life Sciences world.
When it comes to medicines, much begins with academic research. Sometimes you don't know what you've found until a context is found.
But in my line, the technology and devices surounding healthcare, you have to begin with human behavioural needs.
I suppose it would be good if there was a facility to meet in the middle.
D

Pharma R&D is first and foremost driven by unmet medical need (the consumer) and based on a disease modifying active. On the way there, many factors are considered. Chief among these are ROI and the potential to make a profit at some point. Generally, the projected market and pricing is forecast based on the ability to leverage IP and exclude others from entering the market for some period of time. I also use patent and competitive research to look at competitor activities as well as the need to license the technology of others even during R&D as well as after launch for e.g. manufacturing. This is another aspect of IP that can make or break margins. Consumer acceptance and compliance certainly enter into consideration along the way in how the final product will have to be administered, packaged, stored, etc.