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 named the No.1 emerging city for biopharma in inaugural report

Biopharma Leader

Houston is ranked No.1 on the first-ever Next 10 U.S. Biopharma Clusters report published by Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News (GEN).

The report, which ranks the best emerging hubs for life science activities, considered patents, NIH funding, lab space, venture capital investments, and the number of jobs in regions in cities, states and “clusters” across the U.S. GEN touts Houston as the top city for the biopharma industry due to a surge in funding, job creation, medical innovations and startup success.

Here’s how Houston ranked in the report’s different categories;

  • No. 1 for NIH funding with 2,262 awards totaling more than $1.25 billion
  • No. 2 for emerging regions for jobs, with 28,000 jobs
  • No. 2 for lab space, with roughly 8 million square feet in the market
  • No. 6 for patents, with 2,760 patent families

According to BioHouston chairman Jeff Wade, Houston secured half a billion dollars in venture capital funding in 2025 and 2026 to date.

The report called out major biopharm news out of Houston in the last few months, including Bristol Myers Squibb selecting Houston for its $1 billion, 600,000-square-foot manufacturing site and Eli Lily selecting Houston for its $6.5 billion, 236-acre manufacturing site. Both facilities will be located within Generation Park, a 4,300-acre, master-planned commercial district near Lake Houston.

Houston startups like CrossBridge Bio and Duracyte were also mentioned in the report. CrossBridge, which develops antibody-drug conjugates for cancer, was acquired by Eli Lily in April for $300 million. Duracyte, a “living pharmacy” company, was launched out of Rice University’s biotech venture studio RBL LLC this spring and is backed by up to a $45 million Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health (ARPA-H) award.

The startup is working to commercialize its Hybrid Advanced Molecular Manufacturing Regulator (HAMMR) technology, a rechargeable, implantable device that can sense biological signals, monitor tumor environments and adjust therapeutic output in real time.

“There’s a lot of great talent, but the unique advantage that we have is we are able to benefit from a lot of unique clinical infrastructure and clinician insights,” Omid Veiseh, Duracyte co-founder and managing partner of RBL LLC, told GEN. “There are a lot of clinicians here who are eager to partner on investigator-initiated trials.”

The report also touted Houston’s Texas Medical Center, home to the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center and Baylor College of Medicine, and international partnerships like the recently expanded TMC Korea BioBridge.

Other cities to make the list include:

  • No. 2 Minneapolis-St. Paul
  • No. 3 Denver-Boulder
  • No. 4 St. Louis
  • No. 5 Dallas-Fort Worth

States to make the list include:

  • No. 1 Ohio (including Cincinnati, Cleveland, and Columbus)
  • No. 2 Indiana (including Indianapolis)
  • No. 3 Florida (including Jacksonville and Miami-Fort Lauderdale)
  • No. 4 Georgia (including Atlanta and Augusta)
  • No. 5 Wisconsin (including Madison and Kenosha)

Regional state clusters to watch include:

  • Phoenix
  • Pittsburgh
  • Greater Richmond, Virginia
  • South Carolina
  • Utah

See the full report here.

Major Texas-based airlines ground humanoid robots as passengers

In The Air

Two major airlines based in Texas are drawing a hard line between human and humanoid: American Airlines and Southwest Airlines won’t permit human-like or animal-like robots to board flights as passengers.

Fort Worth-based American and Dallas-based Southwest recently adopted bans on robotic passengers after two incidents in which human-like robots joined flesh-and-blood passengers on Southwest flights.

In May, Aaron Mehdizadeh, owner of The Robot Studio rental company in Dallas, was heading from Las Vegas to Dallas Love Field with 3.5-foot-tall Stewie, according to CBS News Texas. Rather than shipping Stewie as cargo, Mehdizadeh bought the robot its own seat using a type of ticket often purchased for fragile items such as wedding dresses and equipment.

But because Stewie was technically a carry-on item, the robot wasn’t supposed to occupy a seat, according to eWeek. Crew members wound up disconnecting Stewie’s battery and relocating the robot to a window seat before takeoff.

Mehdizadeh pushed back on Southwest’s stance regarding the battery, telling CBS News Texas that Stewie’s power supply is a standard battery that’s similar to one for a laptop.

Stewie isn’t the only robot making mischief in the skies. In May, a 70-pound, human-like robot named Bebop caused a stir on a Southwest flight from Oakland, California, to San Diego.

The robot prompted a nearly one-hour flight delay after crew members realized it violated restrictions on large carry-ons and raised concerns about the battery, San Francisco TV station KGO reported. Dallas-based Elite Event Robotics owns Bebop.

Southwest seized Bebop’s lithium-ion battery, but the airline did let Bebop take the San Diego-bound flight.

Southwest’s new robot policy prohibits human-like or animal-like robots from riding in an airplane cabin or as checked baggage, no matter their size or purpose. All other robots, including toys, must fit in a carry-on size bag and comply with battery restrictions, the airline says.

In a statement sent to CultureMap, a Southwest spokeswoman says the airline “has taken a strong stance on this issue and has led the U.S. airline industry with our battery policy.”

“The robot policy is a further evolution of a [safety] journey we have been on for several months. This move was not in response to any single incident,” the spokeswoman adds. “To eliminate confusion, the policy applies to all similar devices, regardless of size.”

Lithium-ion batteries can overheat, catch on fire, or explode on airplanes.

American’s new robot policy, which took effect Monday, August 17, is similar to Southwest’s. The policy prohibits human-like and animal-like robots from sitting in a purchased seat, being stored in an overhead bin or traveling as checked baggage. The ban applies to U.S., international, and regional flights.

“While there have been no known events involving this type of robot on any American flight, this policy was developed following a comprehensive review of safety risks associated with these devices, including the large lithium-ion batteries that power them,” the airline said in an internal memo obtained by the View From the Wing travel blog.

American gate agents have been told not to allow a passenger accompanied by a robot to board a plane or to let a robot travel as a checked item, the memo say.

If a robot is discovered after check-in, American employees are supposed to follow the Federal Aviation Administration’s “undeclared dangerous goods” procedures. These procedures cover hazardous shipments like lithium-ion batteries, explosives, flammable liquids, and compressed gases that lack required warning labels or shipping documents.

---

This article originally appeared on CultureMap.com.

Texas A&M, UH rise in global rankings of universities attracting the most attention

visibility report

Houston and Texas universities had a strong showing on the 2026-27 Global University Visibility (GUV) Rankings compiled by D.C.-based higher ed market research firm American Caldwell.

Texas A&M ranked No. 6 on the list—the top rank of any Texas university. Meanwhile, the University of Houston ranked No. 52, a 15-spot jump from its previous ranking.

The GUV rankings rate colleges that garner the most global attention via news coverage, social media influence, website traffic, YouTube views, and general public interest. GUV evaluated over 1,200 universities across 193 United Nations-recognized countries.

Texas A&M, with its No. 6 global ranking, also claimed the No. 5 spot among U.S. institutions. The university climbed 21 spots from its previous rank.

“News mentions were a driver of Texas A&M’s movement in this year’s rankings, and earned media remains one of the strongest signals of relevance,” Tim Doty, associate vice president for earned media at Texas A&M, said in a news release. “Much of that visibility begins with our faculty and research experts, whose work helps explain, solve and give context to issues people care about. When Texas A&M experts appear in news stories about research, discovery, national security, agriculture, health, engineering, service and the future of Texas, audiences see the university not only as large or well known, but as useful, relevant and necessary to the conversations shaping our state and country.”

In the “Public Interest” category, UH also claimed a top 10 global ranking at No.6. UH touts its overall GUV rankings success to Guggenheim Fellowships, MacArthur “Genius” grants, National Academy membership, studies like researchers breaking the superconductivity temperature record, and success on the football field and basketball courts.

“Across the board, there is no question that the University of Houston is a brand on the rise,” Shawn Lindsey, interim vice president for marketing and communications, said in a news release. “People are seeing our story, hearing about the amazing things happening at UH and actively seeking us out to learn more. We are seeing it in record-high student applications, we are seeing increases in trademark licensing revenue, our faculty are earning global accolades. It’s an exciting time to be a Houston Cougar.”

Other Texas institutions to make the top 250 on the list include:

  • No. 22 The University of Texas at Austin
  • No. 104 University of Texas at Dallas
  • No. 159 Texas Tech University
  • No. 178 Rice University
  • No. 191 University of North Texas
  • No. 248 Texas State University

For the fourth year in a row, Harvard University secured the top spot on the list, followed by MIT, Stanford University and Purdue University. The University of Oxford was the top non-U.S. institution at No. 5.

See the full list here.

View All Listings