Houston expert: How to navigate the innovation journey — from PoC to MVP

guest column

This Houston expert describes the main phases central to any innovation journey. Photo courtesy of Slalom

As a technologist, one thing I learned early in my career about the technology landscape is its constant improvements and I understood that companies who kept up with those changes remain successful and competitive. However, only companies mastering a disciplined innovation framework are truly able to harness the power of emerging tech to help them solve their most complex business challenges.

Innovative solutions come in all shapes and sizes, but not all of them should come to life. Specifically, when considering digital solutions, there are a few widely accepted innovation approaches in the product engineering field. This quick guide describes the main phases central to any innovation journey.

Feasibility Study

Ideating can be fun but executing a feasibility study will ground you on what will work and what may still be science fiction. The thought here is to spend two to four weeks doing research and talking to experts to answer a few key questions that will help you determine the feasibility of your idea or concept. Through the study, you will learn how to look at it from both a technology and a business perspective. More importantly, to answer the question 'Is it even possible to accomplish your goal with this technology?'

A subject matter expert (SME) will quickly tell you yes or no and why. If you find the technology is indeed suitable, then you will move on to evaluate the business feasibility. Does it make financial sense? Does it work within established business policies? Will there be a healthy Return On Investment (ROI) within an acceptable timeline? If you find positive responses to those questions, then you should feel confident to move on to a Proof of Concept (PoC) or even jump to a Minimum Viable Product (MVP). On the other hand, if either the technology is not feasible or the solution doesn't make business sense, then you've just saved yourself a lot of time, budget, and possibly headaches.

Proof of Concept

This phase is about testing the theory and proving the hypothesis, technically speaking. You'll need to go through a Proof of Concept if the technology solution you have in mind hasn't been tested in either a lab setting or in the field. Thinking outside of the box and innovating is all about trying new approaches and solving problems in a novel way, so you'll have to spend the time and budget ensuring it will work as expected. However, you must be very careful to not get carried away.

A proper PoC should take four to six weeks, max. It should help you quickly determine whether the technology will live up to its promise or if you need to pivot to another approach. Building a team with the right skillset is vital to this process because they are the ones evaluating the proposed solution and comparing it to the expected outcomes. Any signs of discord should empower the team to stop the project, saving further investment, and should help you decide if another approach is even possible. If all criteria has been met, then move on to the MVP stage.

Minimum Viable Product

At this point, you have confirmed the solution you imagined works and you are ready to unlock its potential. But you must start small. You must prioritize all the features you want this product to have and decide what the core functionality should be. This is important because if you choose too many features to start with, you may initially spend too much money and time and may even miss a window of business opportunity you may have lined up. Hence the name of the MVP, it is a product that employs the minimum time, money, and features while still being a viable product.

In summary, if you have an innovative idea for a technology solution, I recommend you first determine whether it's feasible, both technology and business wise, through a short and focused study. If feasible, then you can put that concept to the test through a PoC and determine its desirability. If this product is indeed desirable, then moving into building an MVP will help you understand its viability – and that is how you can successfully innovate while keeping risks at bay.


------

Alfredo Arvide is the director for the products and innovation practice at Slalom Consulting in Houston, where he helps clients solve their most complex business challenges by leveraging emerging technologies and applying innovative technology solutions.

This week's roundup of Houston innovators includes Alfredo Arvide of Slalom Consulting, Allison Post of the Texas Heart Institute, and Jeff Price of Pronto Pay. Courtesy photos

3 Houston innovators to know this week

who's who

Editor's note: In this week's roundup of Houston innovators to know, I'm introducing you to three local innovators across industries — tech consulting, health care, and fintech — recently making headlines in Houston innovation.

Alfredo Arvide, senior principal within product engineering at Slalom Consulting

Should you launch an app? Or just a web page? This consultant weighs in with his advice. Photo courtesy of Slalom

Tech founders have a lot of decisions to make, and Alfredo Arvide of Slalom Consulting wrote a guest column for InnovationMap to help advise on a big one.

"One of the biggest decisions you'll have to make as an entrepreneur is whether you should host your product or service on the web, via an app, or through a webapp," he writes. "Product development has a million intricacies that will dictate – and sometimes demand – a specific route to market." Read more.

Allison Post, manager of innovation partnerships at the Texas Heart Institute

Allison Post joins the Houston Innovators Podcast to share what she's focused on in cardiac innovation. Photo courtesy of THI

In a perfect world, Houston's health care institutions work collaboratively on innovative health care solutions and the city soars as a major hub for life science innovation. That perfect world is Allison Post's goal. As Texas Heart Institute's manager of innovation partnerships, she is in charge of supporting THI innovators and connecting the institute with the rest of the city.

"I only see just phenomenal things for Houston, and what I really want is for the Texas Medical Center to become even more interconnected. We've got to be able to transfer ideas and thoughts and intentions seamlessly between these institutions and right now there are a lot of barriers," Post says. "And I really think Texas Heart is hopefully going to serve as an example of how to take down those barriers." Read more and stream the episode.

Jeff Price, founder and CEO of Pronto Pay

This Houston startup has an app for helping employees get a portion of their paychecks before payday. Photo via Pexels

So much of the country lives paycheck to paycheck, and Jeff Price saw a business opportunity to help out employees who need an advance on their wages. He founded Pronto Pay in the first quarter of 2021. The software aims to connect hourly works with transparent access to wages earned before pay day without disrupting the employers' books.

"When you think about it, payroll hasn't changed in nearly two centuries. As far as we can remember, you get paid weekly or bi-weekly. And that's precisely the point we're trying to solve," Price says. Read more.

Should you launch an app? Or just a web page? This consultant weighs in with his advice. Photo courtesy of Slalom

Web page or app? Houston expert shares his tips for launching your online platform

guest column

One of the biggest decisions you'll have to make as an entrepreneur is whether you should host your product or service on the web, via an app, or through a webapp. In this quick guide, I'll go over a few tips to help you narrow down the options and make an informed decision.

First, allow me to explain each of these terms. In this context, I am assuming your big idea is either a product or service which your customer base will consume in a digital format. The question is, do you deliver your product or service via a regular webpage (web), does it require robust native application functionality (app), or can it be a hybrid model where the app runs on browser (webapp).

Certainly, if you can sell your product or services through a simple online store, then the debate is over: you should just web. If you are just selling a new gadget, for example, you don't need an app nor a webapp. E-Commerce has come such a long way that a simple webpage will suffice.

However, if that is not your situation, then here's three main considerations to help you decide between building an app or a webapp.

Native hardware required

If your product or service will use a hardware component from your audience's mobile device or tablet, such as the GPS, the Camera, the Microphone, or the Gyroscope, then you should heavily lean towards building a native app.

There are web frameworks that will allow you to gain access to a devices' camera or GPS via a webapp, but none are as stable, reliable, or robust as using a native app framework.

The question then becomes, what operating system do you develop your native app in: Apple's iOS, Google's Android, Microsoft's Windows, other or all of them?

Keep in mind there are platforms – such as Xamarin – that enable you to develop in multiple native app ecosystems simultaneously, however, deciding the platform(s) will affect your timeline, budget and audience reach. Also know that if your product or service can or should be accessible offline, then that reinforces your native app decision and eliminates a webapp given they require connectivity to run on a browser.

Universal adoption expected

In contrast, if you are looking to sign-up a broad audience then you should lean towards building a webapp.

All devices, whether mobile, tablets or laptops, have sophisticated and modern web browsers that can easily run webapps. Therefore, if you don't want to worry about deciding between different platforms, then by building a universal webapp that is compatible with all popular browsers all your users will have immediate access.

This route also bypasses all the requirements you must meet and the policies you must comply with to publish your native app to communities such as Apple's App Store or Google Play.

Even better you can update and maintain your webapp at your own pace, not having to rely on Apple's or Google's approval and publish/update schedules.

Investment tolerance 

Now, if you gathered major seed funding or hit it big in a series A round giving you a higher upfront investment tolerance, then I'd advise you to go the native app route.

The aforementioned Apple and Google native app marketplaces, albeit strict, offer amazing features that you would not be able to leverage going the webapp route. Your customer experience will almost certainly be higher going native app, which will increase your ROI, promote repeat subscribers and overall success.

But this route will be more expensive than webapp, especially if you do decide to offer it on multiple major platforms. Hence, if you have the budget, go for it and launch natively. If your investment tolerance is more reserved, then start with a webapp, and simply iterate until you are forced to go native.

Table Description automatically generated

This quick guide is by no means an exhaustive list of considerations. Product development has a million intricacies that will dictate – and sometimes demand – a specific route to market. Yet, if you ask yourself a few of the questions I laid out, you will be able to make an informed decision guiding your commercialization strategy as you kick off your startup journey.

------

Alfredo Arvide is a senior principal within product engineering at Slalom Consulting in Houston, where he helps clients tackle their most complex business challenges by applying innovative technology solutions.

Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

Property Showcase

Houston scores $120M in new cancer research and prevention grants

cancer funding

The Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas has granted more than $120 million to Houston organizations and companies as part of 73 new awards issued statewide.

The funds are part of nearly $154 million approved by the CPRIT's governing board earlier this month, bringing the organization's total investment in cancer prevention and research to more than $4 billion since its inception.

“Today marks an important milestone for CPRIT and for every Texan affected by cancer,” CEO Kristen Doyle said in a news release. “Texas has invested $4 billion in the fight against one of the world’s greatest public health challenges. Over 16 years, that support has helped Texas lead the search for breakthrough treatments, develop new cancer-fighting drugs and devices, and—most importantly—save tens of thousands of lives through early cancer detection and prevention. Every Texan should know this effort matters, and we’re not finished yet. Together, we will conquer cancer.”

A portion of the funding will go toward recruiting leading cancer researchers to Houston. CPRIT granted $5 million to bring John Quackenbush to Baylor College of Medicine. Quackenbush comes from the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health and is an expert in computational and systems biology. His research focuses on complex genomic data to understand cancer and develop targeted therapies.

The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center also received $3 million to recruit Irfan Asangani, an associate professor at the University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine. His research focuses on how chromatin structure and epigenetic regulation drive the development and progression of cancer, especially prostate cancer.

Other funds will go towards research on a rare, aggressive kidney cancer that impacts children and young adults; screening programs for breast and cervical cancer; and diagnostic technology.

In total, cancer grants were given to:

  • The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center: $29.02 million
  • Baylor College of Medicine: $15.04 million
  • The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston: $9.37 million
  • Texas A&M University System Health Science Center: $1.2 million
  • University of Houston: $900,000

Additional Houston-based companies landed grants, including:

  • Crossbridge Bio Inc.: $15.01 million
  • OncoMAGNETx Inc.: $13.97 million
  • Immunogenesis Inc.: $10.85 million
  • Diakonos Oncology Corporation: $7.16 million
  • Iterion Therapeutics Inc.: $7.13 million
  • NovaScan Inc.: $3.7 million
  • EMPIRI Inc.: $2.59 million
  • Air Surgical Inc.: $2.58 million
  • Light and Salt Association: $2.45 million

See the full list of awards here.

U.S. News names 5 Houston suburbs as the best places to retire in 2026

Retirement Report

Houston-area suburbs should be on the lookout for an influx of retirees in 2026. A new study by U.S. News and World Report has declared The Woodlands and Spring as the fourth and fifth best cities to retire in America, with three other local cities making the top 25.

The annual report, called "250 Best Places to Retire in the U.S. in 2026" initially compared 850 U.S. cities, and narrowed the list down to a final 250 cities (up from 150 previously). Each locale was analyzed across six indexes: quality of life for individuals reaching retirement age, value (housing affordability and cost of living), health care quality, tax-friendliness for retirees, senior population and migration rates, and the strength of each city's job market.

Midland, Michigan was crowned the No. 1 best place to retire in 2026. The remaining cities that round out the top five are Weirton, West Virginia (No. 2) and Homosassa Springs, Florida (No. 3).

According to U.S. News, about 15 percent of The Woodlands' population is over the age of 65. The median household income in this suburb is $139,696, far above the national average median household income of $79,466.

Though The Woodlands has a higher cost of living than many other places in the country, the report maintains that the city "offers a higher value of living compared to similarly sized cities."

"If you want to buy a house in The Woodlands, the median home value is $474,279," the city's profile on U.S. News says. "And if you're a renter, you can expect the median rent here to be $1,449." For comparison, the report says the national average home value is $370,489.

Spring ranked as the fifth best place to retire in 2026, boasting a population of more than 68,000 residents, 11 percent of whom are seniors. This suburb is located less than 10 miles south of The Woodlands, while still being far enough away from Houston (about 25 miles) for seniors to escape big city life for the comfort of a smaller community.

"Retirees are prioritizing quality of life over affordability for the first time since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic," said U.S. News contributing editor Tim Smart in a press release.

The median home value in Spring is lower than the national average, at $251,247, making it one of the more affordable places to buy a home in the Houston area. Renters can expect to pay a median $1,326 in monthly rent, the report added.

Elsewhere in Houston, Pearland ranked as the 17th best place to retire for 2026, followed by Conroe (No. 20) and League City (No. 25).

Other Texas cities that ranked among the top 50 best places to retire nationwide include Victoria (No. 12), San Angelo (No. 28), and Flower Mound (No. 37).

The top 10 best U.S. cities to retire in 2026 are:

  • No. 1 – Midland, Michigan
  • No. 2 – Weirton, West Virginia
  • No. 3 – Homosassa Springs, Florida
  • No. 4 – The Woodlands, Texas
  • No. 5 – Spring, Texas
  • No. 6 – Rancho Rio, New Mexico
  • No. 7 – Spring Hill, Florida
  • No. 8 – Altoona, Pennsylvania
  • No. 9 – Palm Coast, Florida
  • No. 10 – Lynchburg, Virginia
---

This article originally appeared on CultureMap.com.

Micro-nuclear reactor to launch at Texas A&M innovation campus in 2026

nuclear pilot

The Texas A&M University System and Last Energy plan to launch a micro-nuclear reactor pilot project next summer at the Texas A&M-RELLIS technology and innovation campus in Bryan.

Washington, D.C.-based Last Energy will build a 5-megawatt reactor that’s a scaled-down version of its 20-megawatt reactor. The micro-reactor initially will aim to demonstrate safety and stability, and test the ability to generate electricity for the grid.

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) fast-tracked the project under its New Reactor Pilot Program. The project will mark Last Energy’s first installation of a nuclear reactor in the U.S.

Private funds are paying for the project, which Robert Albritton, chairman of the Texas A&M system’s board of regents, said is “an example of what’s possible when we try to meet the needs of the state and tap into the latest technologies.”

Glenn Hegar, chancellor of the Texas A&M system, said the 5-megawatt reactor is the kind of project the system had in mind when it built the 2,400-acre Texas A&M-RELLIS campus.

The project is “bold, it’s forward-looking, and it brings together private innovation and public research to solve today’s energy challenges,” Hegar said.

As it gears up to build the reactor, Last Energy has secured a land lease at Texas A&M-RELLIS, obtained uranium fuel, and signed an agreement with DOE. Founder and CEO Bret Kugelmass said the project will usher in “the next atomic era.”

In February, John Sharp, chancellor of Texas A&M’s flagship campus, said the university had offered land at Texas A&M-RELLIS to four companies to build small modular nuclear reactors. Power generated by reactors at Texas A&M-RELLIS may someday be supplied to the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) grid.

Also in February, Last Energy announced plans to develop 30 micro-nuclear reactors at a 200-acre site about halfway between Lubbock and Fort Worth.

---

This article originally appeared on our sister site, EnergyCapitalHTX.com.

View All Listings