Helixa — powered by SolidPro
Free guide · PDFFor medical device manufacturers under margin pressure

Why most medical devices cost 20–40% more than they need to

The hidden engineering decisions that quietly destroy product margins — and the eight levers that give them back.

70–80%

of a product's cost is locked in before purchasing ever sees it — by engineering decisions, most made quickly, by people who were not thinking about cost.

A 20-minute read · 8 cost levers · 10 myths · 12-question readiness check · decision matrix

picture_as_pdf

Get the free guide

Four fields. The PDF downloads straight away.

No obligation · No sales call · Unsubscribe anytime

If you read nothing else

The whole guide, in five lines.

1

Purchasing cannot fix a design problem. Squeezing suppliers moves 3–8%. Changing the design moves 15–40%.

2

The biggest cost driver is not a part. It is a requirement. A tolerance nobody needed, a feature nobody asked for, a spec copied from a competitor.

3

Cost per function, not cost per part. A part is expensive relative to what it does. The outliers become indefensible.

4

Should-cost changes every negotiation. If you know what a part ought to cost, a quotation stops being a fact and becomes an opening position.

5

Do not cost-optimize a product that should not exist. A 30% reduction on a product nobody wants is a 30% reduction of nothing.

Where every ₹100 goes

The money is upstream of the bill of materials.

35Requirements
20Architecture
15Manufacturing
10Tolerances
8Assembly
7Packaging
5Other

Conceptual model, not measured data. The proportions vary by device and volume — what does not vary is the shape: the three largest slices are all engineering decisions, and none of them appear as a line on a BOM.

The uncomfortable truth about timing

Cost is committed long before it is ever spent.

By the time money leaves the building, almost all of your freedom is gone. This is the single most important chart in the guide.

StageCommittedIncurredWhat it means
Concept~50%~2%Almost no money spent. Half the cost already decided.
Detailed design~75%~8%Architecture, tolerances and material choices all locked here.
Design verification~85%~15%Changes now cost retest, revalidation and redocumentation.
Production ramp~95%~50%You are negotiating pennies inside a structure fixed years ago.
Full production100%100%Purchasing fights for 3% because engineering gave away 30%.
Where the money actually hides

Most guides list five levers. Those are the last five.

The first three are where the money is, and they are the ones nobody looks at — because none of them appear on a bill of materials.

1Requirements10–25%
2Tolerances5–15%
3Architecture8–20%
4Materials5–15%
5Sourcing5–12%
6Process5–15%
7Assembly3–10%
8Packaging2–6%
1 · Requirements & over-specification — 10–25%

The biggest single lever, and the least used. Every feature you inherited unexamined is a cost you inherited unexamined. If nobody can name the customer, the standard or the regulation, you have just found money.

2 · Tolerances & specifications — 5–15%

A tolerance is a cost, and most tolerances are copied rather than calculated. Tightening a dimension by a factor of two can double the machining cost of that feature. Most tolerances loosen once someone does the stack-up.

3 · Architecture & part count — 8–20%

A part costs you its price, plus purchasing, inspection, inventory, a line in the device master record, a supplier to qualify and audit, and a failure mode to analyse. In a regulated industry the overhead per part number is enormous.

Notice the pattern. The three biggest levers are all engineering decisions, and none of them are visible on a bill of materials. That is precisely why they survive year after year, unexamined and expensive.

The discipline that changes every negotiation

A quotation is not a fact. It is an opening position.

Should-cost means building up, from first principles, what a part ought to cost. When you can do that, the conversation changes completely — you stop negotiating against your own budget and start negotiating against physics.

ElementBasisValue
Material0.42 kg 316L × ₹620/kg₹260
Machining11 min × ₹38/min machine rate₹418
Setup₹3,200 amortised over batch of 250₹13
Scrap4% of material + process₹28
Overhead + margin28% on cost₹207
Should-costQuoted: ₹4,200₹926

The side effect nobody expects. Should-cost models frequently reveal that the supplier is not overcharging at all — you are simply asking for the wrong thing. The tolerance forces a grinding operation. The material forces a specialist. That is not a negotiation problem. That is a design problem, and it is worth ten times more.

The idea at the heart of VAVE

Stop asking what a part costs. Start asking what a function costs.

A part is not expensive in isolation. It is expensive relative to what it does. Allocate every rupee of cost to the function it delivers — then stare at the result until it becomes uncomfortable.

FunctionCost todayShare of BOMReasonable?
Deliver fluid at a controlled rate₹2,40033%Yes — this is the device
Detect an occlusion₹1,10015%Question it. A route exists at ₹150.
Recognise the syringe size₹3204%Yes
Prevent free-flow₹1802%Yes
Look modern (touchscreen)₹2,20030%No. A rotary encoder is ₹1,500, works with gloves, and clinicians prefer it.

Thirty per cent of the bill of materials is being spent on looking modern — and the cheaper alternative is not a compromise, it is better. Gloved hands cannot use capacitive touch reliably. The clinician wanted the knob.

Worked example · Class B device, 8,000 units a year

₹7,250 → ₹4,050. A 44% reduction.

Margin under pressure from a tender competitor pricing 18% below. The instinct in the room was to demand 15% from suppliers. Here is what the teardown found instead.

Before₹7,250
  • Force sensor for occlusion — ₹1,100
  • Capacitive touchscreen — ₹2,200
  • Air-in-line sensor — ₹700
  • Machined aluminium chassis
  • 3 brackets + 6 fasteners
  • Sole-sourced display driver
→
After₹4,050
  • Motor-current sensing — same spec
  • Rotary encoder — clinicians prefer it
  • Sensor removed — standard does not require it
  • Sheet-metal chassis
  • One moulded feature
  • Second source qualified

Same function. Same compliance. ₹3,200 less, on every unit, every year.

₹690Ships immediately

Chassis process + bracket consolidation. No regulatory impact at all.

₹1,110After verification

Motor-current sensing + second source qualification.

₹1,400Needs justification

Touchscreen + air-in-line sensor. Risk-file update required.

Illustrative worked example built from typical engineering economics, not an account of a specific client engagement. Numbers are indicative and volume-dependent.

What to attack first

The matrix that decides your first ninety days.

Saving alone is the wrong sort order. Sequence by saving against effort and regulatory impact — because the items with no regulatory consequence can ship while the rest are still in review, and they fund the programme.

OpportunitySavingEffortRegulatoryPriority
Requirements & over-specHighMediumLow★★★★★
Architecture & part countHighHighMedium★★★★★
TolerancesMediumLowLow★★★★★
Manufacturing processMediumMediumLow★★★★★
MaterialsMediumMediumHigh★★★★★
Components & sourcingLowLowMedium★★★★★
Assembly & testLowMediumLow★★★★★
Packaging & logisticsLowLowHigh★★★★★

Read the top two rows again. Requirements and tolerances are the highest priority not because they save the most in absolute terms, but because they combine real saving with low regulatory drag. They are also the two that no purchasing exercise will ever surface.

The section that costs us work

Do not run a teardown if any of these are true.

A cost teardown is not always the right project. Sometimes it is an expensive way to avoid a harder conversation. We would rather tell you now than take the engagement.

cancel
The volume is not there

A 30% reduction on 400 units a year saves less than the work costs. Fix the market first.

cancel
The product is at end of life

You will spend the savings on revalidation and recover nothing.

cancel
The problem is price, not cost

If you are losing on brand, service or distribution, a cheaper device loses more cheaply.

cancel
The current design is not stable

Optimising an unvalidated product means revalidating twice. Finish, then optimise.

cancel
It is really a scale problem

If a competitor has 20× your volume on a commodity, cost engineering narrows the gap but will not close it.

Why we put this in a marketing document. Because the fastest way to lose a technical buyer is to sell them a project that cannot work. If your answer to any of the five above is yes, a teardown is the wrong spend this quarter — and we will say so on the call, for free, before anyone signs anything.

Are you ready to do this?

Twelve questions. Maximum 24.

Score 2 for a confident yes, 1 for partial, 0 for no — answered with your actual BOM open. The full checklist is in the guide; here is what your total means.

20–24Ready
A teardown will find money quickly, and you will be able to act on it.
13–19Foundations there
Fix the BOM and the should-cost model first — a teardown on bad data produces confident nonsense.
7–12Start with data
Start with the data, not the design. You cannot optimise what you cannot see.
0–6Not yet
Do not start a cost programme yet. Build the cost picture first — that work is itself worth doing.

The ninety-day roadmap

Week 1–2Build the truth

Landed-cost BOM with real yields, scrap and volumes.

Week 3–4Function allocation

Every rupee mapped to a function. The outliers surface here.

Week 5–6Challenge & generate

Requirements interrogated. Three routes per high-cost function.

Week 7–12Ship the free wins

Zero-regulatory-impact items implemented while the rest go through review.

Also in the guide

Ten cost myths, and what they actually cost you.

“A lower supplier price means a lower product cost.” “Tighter tolerances improve quality.” “We will do it at the next design refresh.” Each is answered in full — because they all locate cost somewhere it is not.

  • check_circleWhy CFOs should care more than engineers do — margin, tenders, working capital and payback.
  • check_circleThe six-step teardown, four to six weeks, and the step everyone skips.
  • check_circleAll eight levers in detail, each with a worked example.
  • check_circleThe full 12-question readiness check with scoring.
The question

Somewhere inside your product is a requirement
no customer values.

The question isn't whether it exists. The question is how much it has been costing you every year.

Free · 20 pages · No sales call required