Keni Kubo

You are halfway through your journey with MCiM. What has been most surprising about your experience? What have you been able to apply to your work in med-tech management immediately?

As a professional working in a medical device start-up, my biggest surprise in Biodesign was how clearly it laid out a Reimbursement Roadmap: coverage, coding, and payment as a structured journey, plus the supporting mechanisms around it. Before the program, I underestimated the complexity and the extent to which progress depends on sequencing and external gatekeepers. Biodesign gave me a framework to navigate the journey and communicate it with precision. I used that in board-level discussions with our parent company, explaining the pathway and why challenges like coding uncertainty and coverage-pathway risk are not ‘special problems’—they’re typical constraints in medical devices. That reframing improved the quality of the conversation: smoother communication, faster alignment, and increased trust in the company’s plan.

With an interdisciplinary cohort, there is a mixture of students from various backgrounds. Have you found the cohort dynamic challenging or has it changed your perspective on digital health innovation?

In a group project, the most challenging part wasn’t skill; it was coordination under real-life constraints. Because we were mostly working professionals, we didn’t build enough structured time to listen and align early, and our solution direction moved beyond a shared understanding. The misalignment surfaced around midterm. After the midterm, I stepped in as a bridge-builder by calling a reset meeting to listen and ensure team members spoke up, then setting up a cadence that fit busy schedules. Importantly, the team arrived at a focus rule together: narrow first, then go deep, which improved quality and momentum. After that reset, everyone contributed strongly to their own parts while proactively ensuring alignment across deliverables, and the final output became much more coherent.

What advice you would offer a student who is considering the program but is worried they may not be able to maintain a school-work-life balance during the program?

My rule is: if something has to give, it won't be family time. Upfront, I aligned with my wife on fixed class time and set a boundary: if homework threatens family time, I’ll wake up earlier rather than borrow time at home. Because I train for triathlon, I time-stack treadmill or stationary bike becomes study time, and swim sessions become ‘pre-think’ time where I hold the assignment question in my head and generate ideas. To balance the load, I take full ownership on Sundays. Also, when I socialize with classmates or other friends, I always bring my children, which has been a great opportunity for them to meet extraordinary talents in the class.  At work, I aligned with my boss on a win-win support for the program in exchange for bringing back practical learnings—and I proactively make up hours outside normal time when needed. Hence, the company’s value stayed strong despite absences. Make the program a win-win by bringing value back and owning the time tradeoff.

Was there a defining feature of the program or feedback from alumni that convinced you that MCiM was the right program for you?

MCiM stands out because of two intentional design choices. First, it’s in-person and not recorded, which changes the quality of conversation: people share failures, complex tradeoffs, and the intent behind decisions: things you’ll rarely hear in public or in recordings. That psychological safety is especially valuable in the AI era. AI can accelerate gathering public information, but it can’t replace real-world learning from experienced people in the same room where you can ask follow-up questions. Second, it’s built for working professionals: the every-two-week Friday/Saturday cadence makes it realistic to stay employed while learning, and it attracts a diverse cohort, including international super commuters. Bioethics discussions are a good example: face-to-face doesn’t just give you content, it helps you see your own beliefs as one lens among multiple valid ethical frameworks, sharpening judgment, not just knowledge.