Page 11 - ourHK_eng_PartA_1-15_B.indd

iv. Cultural Differences and Difficulties in Product Localisation (Gap 14):

There are examples of commercially successful gerontechnology products
overseas – they are functional, well-designed with seamless user experience
and are well-received by the target consumer market. Theoretically, they
should also be successful if introduced in Hong Kong. However, this is not
the case due to cultural differences. For instance, bathing is an important
ritual in Japanese culture but this is not the case in Hong Kong, where
showering is more common. If a commercially successful assistive bathing
device from Japan were brought to Hong Kong, it would be unlikely for the
device to be as successful due to the lack of a bathing culture in Hong Kong.

In addition to cultural differences, another difficulty in developing
gerontechnology products for a different market is product localisation.
Differences such as language setting and maintenance service options
have to be readjusted for local use and different certifications are required
to sell products in different regions. GPS tracking shoes developed in the US
were successfully sold to the local American market and could be refined
and localised for a Hong Kong market. However, because Hong Kong’s gross
elderly market is small compared to other markets, such as its mainland
neighbour, it would be too costly to localise a product for a smaller market
when more lucrative business opportunities are available elsewhere.

v. Lack of Testing Ground for New Products (Gap 13):

The lack of a testing ground for products and services is a significant gap in the
gerontechnology ecosystem. In the later stage of product development, new
products require thorough market research and in particular, user feedback
from both elderly users and caregivers during the development process to
turn a prototype into a final product that is targeted and tailored to elderly
consumers. However, Hong Kong currently lacks testing grounds for new
gerontechnology products. Care workers in Hong Kong’s RCHEs are already
facing huge workloads, and adapting to a new assistive device takes time.

Testing new products may increase their workload and lower their efficiency
of work at the beginning, as they need to be trained, learn and practise using
the products. Some of the test products may fail in the end and not improve
their work at all. The adoption of a failed product would end up wasting the care
worker’s time in the trial period and provide no benefit to the RCHEs. Hence to
the RCHEs, new product testing is a speculation with a high cost. Therefore it
is not surprising that RCHEs are not keen to test new technologies, but turn
to enjoy the mature products with proven quality by their peers, or use the
resources to hire extra workers instead. As a result, product developers can
hardly find a suitable testing ground for their products.

10 Executive Summary