Digital Transformation Consulting
in HealthTech & Digital Health

The short answer

In digital health the contract that puts outcomes at risk is signed before the operating model that can deliver those outcomes is in place, which is why the platform goes live and the at-risk revenue share stays flat. For digital health companies, this shows up in a particular place. The numbers that carry the answer are at-risk revenue share and engagement rate, and the complication specific to this industry is that outcomes risk is being signed faster than the company can learn whether it can carry it — a 12-month measurement window against an 11-month sales cycle. The general version of this problem and the one you are actually in have different first moves.

The programmes stall because the sequence starts with the platform rather than the pathways that generate engagement rate and attributed outcomes. The current workflows, built around exceptions and manual handoffs, get encoded as they stand. Once live the system records the same touches and delays, so enrolled members show no lift in engagement and the revenue share tied to outcomes never improves.

The business case is assembled from licence and integration figures that appear in year one, while the returns sit in gross margin and PMPM that only appear after the measurement window closes. When the underlying pathways are left unchanged the costs arrive on schedule and the operating gains remain a projection that cannot be tested against actual logo churn.

Underneath sits the question of whether the technology lets the company sell new outcome-based arrangements or merely reduces the cost of running the existing ones. The two require different budgets and different tests; mixing them produces a case that cannot separate commercial upside from operational efficiency for the CEO or CFO.

Digital & Technology Strategy (catalog id t8) works the question in that order: mapping what each process currently consumes in at-risk share and PMPM, isolating the decision steps from the tooling steps, and clarifying whether the case is commercial or operational before any vendor is shortlisted. Where the answer is a straightforward implementation with measurable payback, it states so and an implementation partner follows.

How to tell this is actually your problem

These three together are the signature. One on its own usually points somewhere else.

✓ At-risk share commitments have been signed but baseline engagement rates for the enrolled members have not been established.
✓ The financial model rests on licence reductions rather than projected movement in gross margin or logo churn.
✓ A prior platform went live on schedule and attributed outcomes for the same cohort remained unchanged.

The move that usually makes it worse. Selecting the platform before mapping the care pathways that determine whether outcomes can be attributed and risk can be carried.

Who this is for — and who it is not

It is for you if you run or finance a digital health company and a platform has been shortlisted and the target process has not been drawn. It is the situation where the numbers are available but nobody has put them in an order that produces a decision.

It is not for you if Percision is the wrong tool if you already know the answer and only need execution capacity, or if the business is pre-revenue — then the constraint is evidence about the market, not analysis of your own figures. Percision is not a lawyer, tax advisor, auditor, licensed appraiser, clinical or regulatory filer, or an AI implementation shop. It does not do HR casework, creative-only brand work, or impersonate a named consulting firm. It is a strategy analysis engine — not a template library. Also wrong if you need facilitation, politics, or someone to sit with a lender or buyer. Those are human jobs.

Percision is not a lawyer, tax advisor, auditor, licensed appraiser, clinical or regulatory filer, or an AI implementation shop. It does not do HR casework, creative-only brand work, or impersonate a named consulting firm. It is a strategy analysis engine — not a template library.

What this looks like when the analysis is actually run

Below is an excerpt from a real run of this analysis on a digital health company. It is a sample profile rather than a customer, and it is unedited engine output — this is the format you get, on your own numbers.

The subject is Vantabridge Health, a sample company profile used for testing rather than a customer — $62M ARR, 340,000 enrolled members.

This is one move out of a full analysis. Read a complete report — every page, no email required.

What the engine does with this question

This question routes to Digital & Technology Strategy, one of 29 engagements the platform runs. For digital health companies it works through at-risk revenue share, engagement rate, gross margin and logo churn, then produces the sequence rather than a list of options — which move first, what it funds, and the observation that would say the sequence is wrong.

You watch the analysis get built before paying anything. Read a complete report here if you would rather see the depth first.

Questions people ask about this

Do we need a consultancy or a systems integrator?

Different jobs. A consultancy is for deciding what should change and what the case is; an integrator is for making a chosen platform work. Buying an integrator to answer a strategy question produces a very good implementation of an unexamined process. Buying a consultancy to implement produces a slower, more expensive integrator.

What does digital transformation consulting cost?

The advisory piece is commonly £80k–£300k for eight to sixteen weeks in the mid-market. The implementation that follows is usually five to twenty times that, which is why the advisory phase deserves more scrutiny than its share of the budget suggests — it is the phase that sizes everything after it.

How do we know whether the problem is the technology or the process?

Take one transaction and count the manual touches and the waiting time between them. If most of the elapsed time is people waiting for a decision or an approval, it is a process and governance problem, and a new system will preserve it. If most of it is rekeying, reconciliation or lookup, it is genuinely a tooling problem and technology will move the number.

Is this different in healthtech & digital health than in other industries?

Materially, yes. Outcomes risk is being signed faster than the company can learn whether it can carry it — a 12-month measurement window against an 11-month sales cycle — which changes both the diagnosis and the order of the fixes. The metrics that decide it here are at-risk revenue share, engagement rate, gross margin, and an answer built on industry-general benchmarks will usually point at the wrong one first.

What data do I need before this analysis is worth running for a digital health company?

Less than most people expect. Your last twelve months of revenue and cost split the way you already split it, plus whatever you hold on at-risk revenue share and engagement rate. The analysis is explicit about what it is assuming where your data stops, which is more useful than waiting for numbers you may never have.

When is Percision the wrong tool?

Percision is the wrong tool if you already know the answer and only need execution capacity, or if the business is pre-revenue — then the constraint is evidence about the market, not analysis of your own figures. Percision is not a lawyer, tax advisor, auditor, licensed appraiser, clinical or regulatory filer, or an AI implementation shop. It does not do HR casework, creative-only brand work, or impersonate a named consulting firm. It is a strategy analysis engine — not a template library. Also wrong if you need facilitation, politics, or someone to sit with a lender or buyer. Those are human jobs.

Does Percision replace a lawyer, tax advisor, auditor, or AI implementation team?

Percision is not a lawyer, tax advisor, auditor, licensed appraiser, clinical or regulatory filer, or an AI implementation shop. It does not do HR casework, creative-only brand work, or impersonate a named consulting firm. It is a strategy analysis engine — not a template library.