Like any service-based organization, Catapult receives requests from a variety of organizations and individuals.  Some come to us with little more than an idea, others have had their idea in the market for over a decade.  Some are based within the small community they’re trying to affect and others have never traveled to a developing country.  Regardless of the above, many organizations make similar statements regarding their idea. Over the years we’ve developed a healthy amount of skepticism for some of these statements.  In particular, we are always a bit wary when we hear these five most common claims:

Statement 1:  People in the developing world need more “time”

When people say their technology enables more “time” for income generating activity, social needs, education, etc. it’s okay to question that need.  Time is a very Western value not shared with many parts of the world.  When it comes to selling your technology in-country, keep in mind that there are other values your technology could provide that may be more provocative than “time savings.”

Statement 2:  The technology must scale in order to be effective or worthy of investment

There are many technologies designed to meet the needs of a specific population that have value, but will never reach production volumes in the millions. Our world is not homogenized; one size doesn’t necessarily fit all.  While it’s great if your idea translates globally, realize that many do not.

On a related note, a business plan that outlines first year sales greater than 250k I put in the naïve category.  While the number of people in our world who lack basic needs is on the order of 2 billion, the lack of effective marketing and distribution infrastructure in many countries is a roadblock for promising technologies. Establishing and implementing a marketing and distribution plan is achievable, but is often a task more complex and time-intensive than the design development.

Statement 3:  This technology is so clever; everyone will want one!

Beware the solution in search of problem!  Is the technology addressing a real need?  And can you articulate it through a business plan – a business plan that includes research of prior art, your market size, impact number, and implementation strategy? It may sound kinda mean, but it’s common for smart, well-meaning folks to be motivated by a problem highlighted in an article, a documentary, a trip, and to act on it without considering the challenges surrounding new technology development.  “Business” and “humanitarianism” are not contradictory terms.

Statement 4:  I designed a brand new solar cooker

No you didn’t. I don’t deny that there’s a small possibility you did, but it’s highly likely you did not. Hate to break it to you.  Reinvention of the wheel is one of the plagues of the development world. New websites intended to promote collaboration and shared knowledge are attempting to alleviate that problem. Please, please, please do a google search of your idea. Check Engineering for Change, Appropedia, Kopernik, the proceedings of ETHOS, etc. And everyone developing technologies, please document and publish your learnings on one of these sites.

Statement 5:  The development work will be done for free by volunteers

Take it from a crew of folks who spent three years volunteering their professional services – volunteerism is great for the volunteer, but often proves little benefit for the end-user of your technology.  As the saying goes, you get what you pay for.  The many drawbacks of a volunteer workforce is what drove us to start an organization to cater to the needs of promising organizations and ideas with tight financial capacity.  Check out D-Rev, Catapult, Design that Matters, etc.  All are specialized resources for developing humanitarian technology that employ staff with international development experience, design experience, field experience, and connections on the ground to get your project up and running.  When billions of people lives are at stake, it’s worth the investment to work with professionals.