Why some medtech companies are folding training into commercialization

Training is being framed as commercial infrastructure, not a side activity

In medtech, training is often discussed as a support function: useful, necessary and easy to separate from the rest of the business. But the evidence in ZimVie’s investor materials points to a more commercial reading. The company places medical education alongside direct sales, distribution, product innovation and digital workflow adoption in the same growth story.

That does not prove training drives revenue on its own. What it does show is that at least some medtech companies are treating education as part of the machinery that helps products move, workflows change and customer relationships deepen.

For commercial leaders, that matters because it changes how training should be evaluated. It is not only a cost center or a brand-building exercise. In the model ZimVie describes, it sits closer to market access, adoption support and sales execution.

ZimVie’s model ties education to sales coverage and market reach

ZimVie says its global infrastructure includes sales and distribution capabilities, with 95% of sales direct and third-party distributors used in smaller geographies. It also says its customer base includes oral surgeons, general dentists, dental labs, DSOs, spine surgeons, hospitals and ASCs.

Within that structure, the company says it has five medical education and training locations as well as commercial, training and R&D facilities. That is a notable signal. The training footprint is not presented as a separate educational initiative; it is embedded in the same operating model that supports selling and distribution.

The commercial implication is straightforward. If a company sells into multiple customer groups and uses different routes to market across geographies, training can help standardize the message, build confidence in the product and support field teams. It can also give the company a physical presence where customers can learn, evaluate and adopt new workflows.

Digital workflow adoption appears to be the real prize

ZimVie describes digital dentistry as one of its dental growth drivers and says it aims to drive digital workflow adoption and implant penetration. It also says it will deploy new product innovation and medical education across segments while scaling efficient digital workflow solutions across its most attractive geographies.

That combination is important. It suggests training is not simply about teaching users how to operate a product. It is part of a wider effort to move customers toward a specific way of working.

For medtech companies, that is a different commercial challenge. New workflows often require more than product awareness. They may require behavior change, confidence building, process adaptation and practical support. Training can help bridge that gap, especially when the business wants to encourage adoption of digital tools or integrated solutions rather than one-off product purchases.

In that sense, medical education can function as a pull-through mechanism. It helps create the conditions for product use, especially where the company’s growth strategy depends on adoption rather than simple distribution.

Geography matters when training is part of the go-to-market plan

ZimVie also says it will scale efficient digital workflow solutions across its most attractive geographies. That language matters because it links education to expansion. Training is not only about helping current customers do more; it is also about enabling entry into new or strategically important markets.

This is where education can become commercial infrastructure in a practical sense. A company with direct sales in some markets and distributors in others may need a consistent way to introduce products, reinforce use cases and support local adoption. Training locations and education teams can help fill that role.

For marketers and commercial leaders, the lesson is to treat education assets the same way they would treat any other market-expansion capability. Where are the customers? Which segments need more hands-on support? Which geographies require more local credibility? Those are commercial questions, not just learning questions.

FDA guidance sets the boundaries

The FDA’s guidance documents page is relevant here because it outlines the agency’s interpretation of policy across areas such as design, production, labeling, promotion, manufacturing, testing, submissions, inspection and enforcement. In other words, medtech training does not exist outside the regulatory environment.

That matters whenever education materials overlap with product claims, labeling or promotional content. If training is being used to support adoption and commercial execution, companies need to be clear about where education ends and regulated communication begins.

This is not a detailed rulebook for training content. It is a reminder that medtech education can sit close to regulated topics and therefore needs governance. The more tightly training is connected to promotion or product claims, the more important that boundary becomes.

What medtech teams should take from this

The evidence here is narrow, but the commercial pattern is useful. ZimVie’s materials show training being positioned alongside direct sales, digital adoption and geographic expansion. That suggests a more strategic way to think about medical education inside medtech companies.

For commercial teams, the practical questions are these: Is training helping the field team sell? Is it helping customers adopt the workflow the company wants to scale? Is it supporting expansion into the geographies or segments that matter most? And is the content governed appropriately when it touches regulated claims or labeling?

If the answer to those questions is yes, training is doing more than educating. It is helping the company execute its commercial strategy.