QR codes versus indoor positioning: choosing the minimum viable technology

It is easy to assume that "real" indoor navigation requires Bluetooth beacons or Wi-Fi positioning throughout a building. In our experience, QR-based wayfinding — scan a code at a junction, get a fresh route from that exact point — solves the majority of real patient journeys at a fraction of the cost, complexity and maintenance burden.

Positioning infrastructure earns its cost in specific situations: very large, visually repetitive buildings; continuous live tracking for operational use cases; or where a Trust already has infrastructure in place for another purpose. For a typical outpatient pathway, it is often unnecessary.

Our general guidance is to start with the minimum viable technology that solves the pathway in front of you, prove the value, and only invest in more sophisticated positioning where the evidence from a bounded pilot shows it is needed. This mirrors the implementation model we use across every deployment: discovery, bounded pilot, evidence gate, then scale.

The wrong ordering — infrastructure first, evidence later — is a common reason ambitious wayfinding projects lose momentum before patients ever see the benefit.