Summary: Ordering a glucose meter can be a positive, information-adequate experience in the U.S. However, a significant portion of brands can learn from peers that provide more information and consider the needs of specific segments.
Introduction: Diabetes affects 11.3% of the U.S. population1. As part of disease management, patients need to monitor sugar levels via glucose monitors. Given this essential aspect, RP Insights set out to learn what kind of digital experience we should expect if anyone were to set out to buy a glucose meter on their own. This is a relevant question as some consumers respond to pressures in the insurance and healthcare market by being proactive in managing their care.
Michael Ross, in a Harvard Business Review article2, he shares three key considerations for customer experience optimization from a business strategy perspective. These considerations are these principles:
- Business totality. User behavior and outcomes need to look at the business in its totality. Here the author believes that outcomes are not merely number of clicks or conversion rates. In his own words, the author encourages us to think about apparent and less apparent results of the digital experience. In a few words, does the experience support the long-term value of the customer?
- Segment prioritization. Users can be divided into segments, each with different value for the business. As a result, businesses need to prioritize higher value segments and consider their opinion and behavior above others. This materializes in options and pathways designed for specific subgroups.
- Zero-sum strategy. Designers benefit from a zero-sum decision-making process. What this means is that designers benefit from a sort of black slate exercise and ask themselves if they would approach things differently today. In a way, this goes to this question: How unique is a particular approach to targeting a particular segment?
In our view, these principles represent key concepts to help evaluate existing digital experiences. In particular, we wonder to what extent the digital experience of people considering purchasing glucose monitors in the US is serving brands as well as they could. We purposefully do not identify any brand as our purpose was not to single out any particular product, but rather to qualify the state of the digital experience of the person who sets out to buy a glucose meter on their own.
Methodology: We consulted ChatGPT 3.5 to identify 10 top brands of glucose meters in the US. A list of 10 brands was produced with the caveat that the list was current as of 2022. Subsequently, a task was designed to allow a member of our team gather information to build confidence for purchasing. The team member visited the websites of 10 brands, and scored each digital experience concept (business totality, segment prioritization, and zero-sum strategy) on a three-point scale: Low (1), Medium (2), and High (3). Each brand was then ranked based on average scores. A description and interpretation of the scale appears in Table 1.
Table 1. Interpretation of the three principles of UX for rating existing digital experiences.
| Principle | Interpretation | Scoring |
| Business totality | Am I led to engage with the brand as opposed to make a purchase right away? | 1=Very limited little brand engagement 2=Noticeable brand engagement 3=Higher brand engagement |
| Segment prioritization | Do I see different user personas being targeted? | 1=Very limited allusion to different segments 2=More than one segment clearly alluded to 3=Diversified customer based implicit in messaging |
| Zero-sum strategy | Does this feel different from the typical shopping experience? | 1=Undifferentiated experience 2=Some level of uniqueness 3=Definitely stands out vs the typical digital experience |
Results: Results by brand appear in Table 2. Two brands provide close to an excellent digital experience and four brands provide an acceptable digital experience. We surmise that glucose meter shoppers benefit from an adequate digital experience that allows them to build reasonable confidence in their purchase.
Table 2. Scoring of 10 glucose monitor brands on digital experience.
| Wholistic Business Perspective | Segment-wise vision | Differentiated experience | Average | |
| Brand 1 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 2.7 |
| Brand 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 2.7 |
| Brand 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2.0 |
| Brand 4 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2.0 |
| Brand 5 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1.7 |
| Brand 6 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1.7 |
| Brand 7 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1.3 |
| Brand 8 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1.0 |
| Brand 9 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1.0 |
| Brand 10 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1.0 |
| Average scores | 1.7 | 1.9 | 1.5 | 1.7 |
In the brands that scored two and above on average, we saw these tactics that are consistent with better UX:
- Gentle nudges to get started as opposed to in-your-face purchase prompts or pop-ups
- Options for users to track progress in their glucose monitor journey
- Information capture screens
- Videos describing products and how to use them
Across all brands, here are some tactics that might need reconsideration:
- Use of language that may not be too clear to the person who has never used a glucose monitor, which renders the brand non-unique and fails to build mind equity
- Intrusive popups, which goes against the business totality principle –value is equated with an on-the spot purchase
- Little information, which indicates inability to motivate any specific segment
Conclusion: The most positive result in our short research is that there are encouraging, benchmark-worthy digital experience examples among top brands of glucose meters. Existing competitors only have to look around to identify best practices. Some of the tactics are easy to emulate. We encourage brands to conduct a self-assessment based on our scale and identify the most obvious areas of potential improvement. Chief among them might be considering different types of patients, that is, providing them with different ordering, monitoring, and learning options. Some brands could benefit by turning their shopping sites into information zones. The brands that scored lower in our exercise tended to provide little information and failed to consider different types of patients or buyers (e.g., caregivers, parents, older adults). It should not take much for a brand to self-evaluate their digital experience and to move the needle in the right direction.
References:
- Diabetes Research Institute. National Diabetes Statistics Report for 2020. Accessed 2024 Apr 9. Available at: https://diabetesresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/national-diabetes-statistics-report-2020.pdf
- Ross, M. 3 Core Principles of Digital Customer Experience. Harvard Business Review. 2023 Mar 9.
