The services on a limited budget. Innovative technological solutions

The Healthcare sector
faces intense pressure to offer quality services on a limited budget. Innovative
technological solutions might be the answer to this riddle. The adoption of new
technology is an effective way to boost productivity and performance, thus
addressing both sides of the challenge.  It
contains a range of complex inter-connecting factors involving multiple
stakeholders. Various types of new technologies may be incorporated through diverse
avenues in a particular healthcare system. This thesis explores the philosophy and mechanisms related
to the increasing development, acceptance and abandonment of nanomaterials, as
well as the information regarding their cost. This interdisciplinary thesis
approaches the subject from two theoretical viewpoints: economic and science studies.
It examines the lack of or limited availability of information regarding nanomaterial
markets and studies the impact on financial performance through technology
adoption and innovation.Cost estimation plays a crucial role for any industry considering
that the slightest error in estimations will affect the sales and profits.
Therefore, cost estimation is one of the most important tasks in a product’s
lifecycle. So far, the full cost related to the use of nanomaterials has been
given little attention in the research community.In this study, we discuss the process of Total Cost of Ownership
(TCO) and set the basis for future theoretical research. The Total Cost of
Ownership concerns all costs of an investment throughout its entire life cycle.
Ignoring the significant costs that occur in a nanomaterial’s life cycle, such
as market price, maintenance, depreciation costs and energy costs, will with no
doubt negatively influence decision-making processes. The theoretical purpose of this thesis is to
identify the cost factors that have the greatest impact on a TCO calculation
for a nanomaterial. The practical goal is to develop a generic framework on TCO
where cost elements with high impact are prioritized. The objective is to
reduce the amount of input variables and thus increase the usability of the
framework. Main research question: Which costs should be included in a total cost of ownership framework
regarding nanomaterials and what input variables are needed in order to
calculate those costs? By answering this question we will gain enough knowledge to provide strategic and
managerial recommendations to the industry, acting as a foundation for future
decision making. This effort consists of extensive
literature reviews on nanomaterials, technology adoption, risks, and factors
that determine and control the TCO of a nanomaterial and design a framework on
the aspect of future nanomaterial cost estimation and determine the cost categories that together form the TCO of a
nanomaterial.
The framework is
divided in fouLG1 r components:

A remarkable finding was that the cost
information in decision making and future planning has been often neglected where
a review in the literature analyzing the economic impact of using
nanomaterials in health has been hindered by limited metrics and lack of a
framework that would encompass all economical aspects stemming from their
adoption.In
this study, a flexible, generic yet comprehensive TCO framework was developed,
which calculates the overall costs related to the adoption of nanomaterials for
different cost deployment scenarios. This conceptual framework was established based on the
former extensive literature review and after taking into account
the research questions and considering known cost management concepts. The innovation of
framework is twofold:·     
Theoretical: 
It allows for the integration of heterogeneous information that aims to
bring sustainability to the nano-health industry. ·     
Practical: This framework is interdisciplinary, is
highly scalable and aspires to bridge the nano industry with healthcare needs via
a TCO approach. ++++++??1  Table
X. Framework Components of the Cost Estimation of a Nanomaterial

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

Approach/Methodology

Description

Patent Research
on nanomaterials

USPTO &
EPO: in a defined period of
time (2010-2015) an extensive patent research was conducted using the search
keywords nano, porous, nanoporous, microporous, mesoporous and microporous in
their title or abstract text.

Choose
 TCO indicators

Examination of TCO
components that apply in the case of nanomaterials, in order to measure the
total cost of their adoption in healthcare

Input

Description

EPO & USPTO
patents and related materials

A group of  the most popular Nanomaterials that are
mentioned in health related patents stemming from our search

TCO Components

Raw material cost: The method of cost evaluation starts with raw material cost. The
economic role of these products in development processes was investigated through
recipes.
Energy Cost: The second
step it to calculate energy cost. In general the amount of energy required for the production of any
material is a large factor in the final cost. If placing them on a cost/energy
chart, the materials lie on a line starting the from bottom left (low
cost/low energy requirements) to top right (high cost/high energy requirements)
Market Price: A price summary was created by examining the publicized pricelists of
companies selling the studied group of nanomaterials.
Toxicity Testing
cost: This study explores the link
between toxicity and cost in an effort to analyse the impact of in
vitro studies so that it is later used to determine if such
costs can be sustained in terms of both time and money required
Personnel Wages:
Maintenance Cost:
Depreciation of apparatus and equipment:
Manufacturing Cost:LG2 

Output

Description

TCO Model
 

Practical study
of the TCO of nanomaterials, in terms of adoption in healthcare directly or
as part of nano-products.
 
TCO = Crmc +Cmc+ Ctc+ Chc+
Cec+ Cdae+ Cr+ Cpc
 

Despite its apparent usefulness, the concept of TCO is very
little used in industry. (Ellram and Siferd, 1998; Ferrin and Plank, 2002;
Hurkens et al., 2006). For example, a Dutch study suggested that most managers
have very limited experience in using TCO and value analyses (Wouters et al.,
2005). This could be explained by the fact that managers often fail to conceptualize
purchases as a strategic resource (Ellram and Siferd, 1998). AnotherLG1  possible explanation for
the limited use of this model could be attributed to the mostly
undifferentiated attitude towards TCO. Prior research consistently examines TCO
from one specific focused perspective, therefore limiting the whole process to
a technical question of selecting appropriate cost factors (Ferrin and Plank,
2002), examination of pre- or post-transactions (Ellram, 1993a; Tibben-Lembke,
1998), mathematically shaping TCO frameworks (Degraeve et al., 2000) or coordinating
the purchases based on procurement approaches of TCO (Ellram and Siferd, 1998).
Researchers have stated, however, that “no one TCO model fits all purchase
situations.” (Ellram and Siferd, 1998, p. 67).

The TCO conceprt has been
designated as appropriate for analyzing and choosing among available suppliers
(Ellram 1995; Degraeve and Roodhooft 1999; Degraeve et al. 2005; Garfamy 2006),
considering that this method checks beyond the market price and includes a
broader range of various types of known and unforeseen or difficult to quantify
costs in acquisition decisions, providing a broader overview of all costs related
to the purchase of a certain product or service. Thus, the benefits of utilizing
the total cost of ownership model are numerous and impactful. Ellram (1994)
suggests that these benefits can be split into five main categories– improvement
of supplier performance measurement, improvement of decision making processes,
improvement of general communications, and reaching a more holistic perception
of the purchased goods, services, and supplier performance, as well as the
support of a company’s advancement efforts.