At first glance, Microsoft’s HealthVault and Google Health appear quite similar. When these two companies go at it, a review of past battles informs us how this conflict is likely to turn out: Google will triumph over Microsoft yet again. This time, it’s not turning out that way, so it’s worth a deeper look.
Microsoft’s HealthVault vision is ambitious. They are seeking to fundamentally change the way we store and use health information. In place of the traditional proprietary (i.e. paper-based, location-specific) medical records, Microsoft is advocating a network model for health data where information is stored centrally as standards-based data and accessed where and when needed.
The full HealthVault vision encompasses not only key medical data from one’s primary care physician or medical group, but all relevant healthcare records from all of our various providers. For example, an oral surgeon prescribing a pain killer or antibiotic wouldn’t have to depend on a patient’s memory in determining potential interactions.
The rub with all healthcare portals is that they need data. Expecting consumers to enter all of their own data won’t work. Getting a wide range of providers to upload patient data will only happen when (a) each of the many providers sees value to themselves from participating, or (b) patients demand it. High value, but infrequent and low probability events such as being incapacitated while traveling are unlikely to provide the needed impetus. A better strategy is to create a broad range of applications aimed at consumers so that there are more frequent touch points. This will drive consumer demand.
Where Microsoft separates itself from Google is in its expertise in creating developer ecosystems. Microsoft doesn’t have to figure out how to build and deploy all these applications—third-party developers will do so on their own dime. Fundamentally, Microsoft has adopted a B2B model versus Google’s B2C model, with Microsoft not only facilitating, but encouraging third-party applications to sit on top of HealthVault. While consumers need a HealthVault account, all their interactions can be via third-party HealthVault applications. Current applications range from health and fitness tracking to diabetes assessments, cardiac care, automatically updated MedicAlert information, and other specialized applications. HealthVault becomes not an application, but primarily a repository for standardized data and mechanism for privacy control.
Microsoft can offer HealthVault for free because they intend to monetize the data via search. When someone searches for answers regarding high blood pressure, they will see paid results for devices, books, and services related to high blood pressure. Success here for Microsoft is far from assured as it requires success in search where Microsoft historically has struggled. They also need to be careful about how they use a consumer’s medical information.
Tags: Google, healthcare, Microsoft, strategy