Change Request: RQ-IP-CI
Customer Input into R&D Capability
Summary of Proposed Change
| Current | Proposed | |
|---|---|---|
| Category 5: R&D Information Management | Committed (In Progress) | Discontinue |
| Category 8: Customer Input into R&D | Not committed | Add |
This Change Request should be read in conjunction with RQ-IP (IP Capability substitution).
Context
Bridge Point is at an early R&D stage with multiple potential innovation pathways. Our R&D direction is genuinely uncertain - we have several capabilities that could be developed and potentially protected, but we do not yet know which would deliver the most value to customers or warrant focused investment.
The original commitment to R&D Information Management made sense when we anticipated a longer, more complex R&D journey building proprietary AI models. The landscape has shifted: commercial AI APIs now handle much of what we planned to research, and our primary capability gap is no longer documentation systems - it's understanding what to build.
We need customer input to inform R&D priorities before we can meaningfully proceed.
Original Commitment: Category 5
Original deliverable: "Establish a centralised research information management system to securely store and organise R&D data, ensuring efficient access, compliance, and integration with other internal systems."
Current status: Partially commenced (Gitcode reporting refactored).
Why we are proposing to discontinue this activity:
While information management remains important, it is not our primary capability gap. Building a sophisticated documentation system before we know what we're documenting puts the cart before the horse.
Our genuine capability need right now is understanding:
- Which of our potential innovations should we focus on?
- What problems do customers most need solved?
- What technical requirements emerge from real user needs?
Once we have clarity on R&D direction (informed by customer input), information management becomes relevant again. But investing $25,000+ in documentation systems for R&D activities we haven't yet prioritised is premature.
Proposed Replacement: Category 8
Proposed activity: Engage a specialist contractor to conduct customer research that directly informs R&D priorities.
What this involves:
Per Callaghan's eligible costs guidance, this category covers one-off costs of learning how to:
- Facilitate customer focus groups
- Design effective customer surveys
- Conduct customer and subject matter expert interviews
- Undertake competitor product analysis
- Undertake rapid prototyping
- Run brainstorming/ideation workshops
The output of these activities must inform R&D priorities and plan.
Proposed Scope of Work
Engagement: Customer Research for R&D Prioritisation
Duration: 8 weeks
Budget: $20,000 - $40,000
Phase 1: Research Design & Capability Transfer (Week 1-2)
The contractor will develop research methodologies and transfer capability to Bridge Point:
- Interview protocols and question frameworks for healthcare sector SMEs
- Survey instruments for gathering structured feedback on technical requirements
- Competitor analysis methodology and templates
- Training for Bridge Point team on research execution
Rationale: This is capability building - we learn how to conduct this research, not just receive findings.
Phase 2: Primary Research (Week 3-6)
Execution of research activities:
- 8-12 structured interviews with target customers and subject matter experts
- Customer survey targeting 30-50 responses from healthcare decision-makers
- Competitor product analysis of 3-5 competing solutions
- 1-2 ideation workshops with potential users to explore unmet needs
Rationale: Sufficient sample size to identify patterns without over-engineering. Focus on healthcare sector where Bridge Point has domain expertise.
Phase 3: Analysis & R&D Input (Week 7-8)
Synthesis and documentation:
- Customer Insights Report - findings from interviews, surveys, workshops
- Competitor Gap Analysis - where existing solutions fall short
- R&D Priority Matrix - ranked development priorities based on customer value
- Technical Requirements Document - customer-derived specifications
Rationale: Deliverables directly feed into R&D planning. Priority matrix enables evidence-based resource allocation.
Why this is genuine capability development:
This engagement builds Bridge Point's internal capability to:
- Design and execute customer research for R&D purposes
- Translate customer insights into technical requirements
- Prioritise R&D investment based on validated customer needs
- Repeat this process for future R&D decisions
The methodology toolkit and training transfer ensure this capability persists beyond this project.
What this is NOT:
- General sales promotion or marketing activities
- Non-R&D related consumer surveys
- End product market research
- Market sizing, market testing, or commercialisation activity
- Go-to-market strategy or sales channel development
Estimated cost: $20,000 – $40,000
Budget Impact
| Activity | Original | Proposed |
|---|---|---|
| R&D Information Management (Cat 5) | $36,000 | $0 |
| Customer Input into R&D (Cat 8) | $0 | $20,000 – $40,000 |
| Net Change (this CR) | $36,000 | $20,000 – $40,000 |
Eligibility Confirmation
Per the New to R&D Grant Eligible Costs guidance, Category 8 (Customer Input into R&D) activities:
Must be:
- Undertaken as part of the R&D programme ✓
- Output must inform R&D priorities and plan ✓
- One-off capability building costs ✓
Must NOT be:
- General sales promotion or marketing activities ✗ (explicitly excluded from scope)
- Non-R&D related consumer surveys ✗ (surveys inform technical requirements)
- End product market research ✗ (no end product exists yet)
- Market sizing, market testing, or commercialisation ✗ (excluded from scope)
Questions for Callaghan
- Is the proposed substitution of Category 5 for Category 8 acceptable in principle?
- Does the proposed scope of work clearly demonstrate R&D input rather than commercialisation?
- Is the capability transfer component (teaching Bridge Point how to conduct research) sufficiently emphasised?
- Are there any concerns with discontinuing Information Management given partial progress?
- What documentation is required to demonstrate the link between research outputs and R&D planning?
Next Steps
- Submit this Change Request alongside RQ-IP
- Discuss with Callaghan contact
- Clarify any concerns or required adjustments
- If approved, procure contractor for Q3-Q4 2026
- Document research outputs and link to R&D planning
- Submit claims in subsequent reporting periods
Prepared by: Bridge Point
Contract: CONT-96212-N2RD-BRIDG
Change Request: RQ-IP-CI
Date: July 2026