Disruptive Dozen

The Selection

Each year, a group of leading Mass General Brigham faculty gather to form a committee of “selectors” to jointly choose and rank the final 12 technologies. The selection committee moderators are supported by Mass General Brigham Innovation staff. To receive consideration for the final Disruptive Dozen, nominated technologies have to meet the following criteria

Criteria 1

The innovation has to have the strong potential for significant clinical impact at some point in the next 18 months and offer significant patient benefit in comparison to current practices. The innovation may also have a significant benefit to the delivery/efficiency of the selected field.

Criteria 2

Nominated field-related innovations have to have a high probability of successful commercial deployment—e.g., payers will be expected to support it.

Criteria 3

The innovation must be on the market sometime within the next 18 months.

The Ranking

Round 1

The initial pass of the nominations by the selection committee eliminates all technologies that don’t meet the criteria or don’t have a realistic potential of being ranked in the top 15. The moderators name each technology and ask panel members to vote “yes” or “no” to move the technology to the next round. One “yes” vote is enough to advance the technology.

Round 2

The moderators describe the candidate technology, pointing out salient points, and then ask for comments from committee members. After a discussion of the pros and cons of the technology, panel members vote A, B, or C with a raise of the hand. Innovation staff record the voting.

A. It’s highly probable that the technology will significantly influence the selected field within the next 18 months.
B. It’s probable that the technology will significantly influence the selected field within the next 18 months.
C. It’s not likely that the technology will significantly influence the selected field within the next 18 months.

Round 3

Each surviving technology earns a score with overall rank tied to the size of the score—i.e., the higher the score, the better. Innovation staff report this initial ranking of all technologies.