iBiology

Bringing the World's Best Biology to You

Home » Careers » Professional Development

Business Concepts for Biomedical Scientists: Strategic Collaborations

Part 1: Biopharma and Academic Collaborations

00:00:12:23 Hello, my name is Girish Aakalu.
00:00:14:18 I'm Vice President of Scientific Affairs
00:00:16:07 North America for Ipsen.
00:00:17:24 I received my PhD in neurobiology from Caltech.
00:00:21:04 I'd like to talk to you today about
00:00:22:12 Academic-Biopharma Strategic Collaborations.
00:00:26:21 By the end of this class you should be able to define
00:00:29:01 what industry seeks to achieve
00:00:30:09 when partnering with an academic lab.
00:00:32:06 Describe common industry-academic partnering models.
00:00:35:01 Understand how partnering process works
00:00:37:19 and list key best practices
00:00:39:04 for industry-academic collaborations.
00:00:44:05 First let's discuss what makes a collaboration strategic?
00:00:47:18 Collaborations are strategic when it helps meet
00:00:50:12 an organization's goals through its stated strategy.
00:00:53:07 In industry this makes a collaboration strategic
00:00:56:27 if it helps deliver drugs patients
00:00:59:07 typically by enhancing the company's pipeline
00:01:01:22 and/or capabilities.
00:01:03:24 Academia often has broader goals.
00:01:05:20 So, for an academic institution,
00:01:07:18 collaboration may be strategic
00:01:08:28 if it helps further scientific knowledge
00:01:10:27 and/or human health typically by
00:01:14:01 enabling scientific publication
00:01:15:28 and/or delivering drugs to patients.
00:01:18:16 It is important to understand
00:01:19:24 that the strategy of an organization
00:01:21:17 guides the actions it takes to achieve its goals.
00:01:24:20 As discussed in the previous lecture
00:01:26:06 an organization strategy should be informed
00:01:28:10 by its value proposition and organizational context.
00:01:32:12 In turn, the strategy should inform
00:01:34:22 the type of collaboration that an organization pursues.
00:01:37:23 For a biopharma company,
00:01:39:16 the influence of strategy
00:01:40:25 on the type of collaborations pursued
00:01:43:05 can be broken down into two main categories,
00:01:45:15 science, in other words, what disease areas,
00:01:48:11 mechanisms of action or technologies
00:01:50:26 a company is interested in
00:01:52:11 based on the types of therapies
00:01:53:20 it intends to bring to market.
00:01:55:29 And relationships or how an organization
00:01:58:07 would prefer to work with partners.
00:02:00:14 Two important conventions of this aspect
00:02:02:07 of partnering approach are how flexible an organization is
00:02:05:15 with its partnering models,
00:02:06:29 and how collaborative as opposed
00:02:09:01 to transactional or inquisitive
00:02:10:21 an organization prefers to be.
00:02:14:11 We just talked at a high level
00:02:16:00 about how an organization strategy
00:02:17:27 should inform what it seeks in a collaboration
00:02:20:18 but it might be useful to walk through a few examples
00:02:23:10 of how translation of strategy
00:02:25:17 to partnering interests works in more detail
00:02:28:02 with the folks around the science category.
00:02:30:22 For example, a biopharma company
00:02:32:20 often specializes in specific areas
00:02:35:01 to be able to build deep expertise and capabilities.
00:02:39:05 Even more pharma companies have moved
00:02:41:06 to specialized and specific disease areas
00:02:43:10 and smaller biotech companies often specialize
00:02:45:20 in specific therapeutic modalities
00:02:47:18 such as antibodies, peptides or cell therapies.
00:02:50:11 And typically companies are primarily interested in
00:02:53:15 seeking partnerships to advanced therapies
00:02:55:26 in their areas of specialization or focus.
00:02:59:18 Appetite for risk in partnership
00:03:01:02 is also informed by strategy.
00:03:02:29 Some companies focus on more proven, lower risk approaches
00:03:06:07 while other companies seek novel breaking science
00:03:08:29 to support their high-risk, high reward strategies.
00:03:11:27 Thus some companies may be more interested
00:03:14:04 in partnering to advanced early stage science discoveries
00:03:17:18 while others may be more focused
00:03:19:02 on acquiring molecules that have more data
00:03:21:09 and impress validated molecular targets.
00:03:25:05 A company's business model also plays a critical factor
00:03:28:07 in defining the types of partnerships
00:03:29:25 that are of interest to it.
00:03:31:10 Some biopharma companies seek to develop
00:03:33:13 and commercialize products
00:03:34:25 for all aspects of disease management
00:03:37:07 and thus are interested in diagnostics,
00:03:38:27 supportive care, as well as therapeutics.
00:03:41:15 Other companies may only be interested
00:03:43:15 in commercializing therapeutics
00:03:45:11 so it would be less interested in science
00:03:47:06 that wouldn't form a supportive care option
00:03:49:12 even for a disease area that they specialize in.
00:03:54:15 Next, we'll discuss how partnerships are structured.
00:03:57:21 Previously in the series of lectures
00:03:59:23 we've covered the common deal types.
00:04:02:10 The deal structures most commonly used
00:04:04:04 in the context of academic collaborations
00:04:06:00 with biopharma companies
00:04:07:14 are research collaborations, licenses and license options.
00:04:11:10 As it's discussed in the business development lecture,
00:04:13:20 you can expect that many deals
00:04:15:13 would be a combination of the aforementioned deal types.
00:04:19:21 Whatever deal type pursued,
00:04:21:08 the partnership agreement should be built on
00:04:23:03 based on a clear understanding
00:04:24:24 of the goals of the partnership.
00:04:26:13 In other words, what you hope to achieve by working together
00:04:29:23 as well as each partner's capabilities,
00:04:31:22 resources and constraints
00:04:33:04 which will inform who may be best suited
00:04:34:25 to perform a given task.
00:04:39:03 At a slightly more granular level
00:04:40:28 the answers to the following questions
00:04:42:13 can help guide the structure of a partnership
00:04:44:19 and ultimately the agreement or contract
00:04:46:28 that will govern a relationship.
00:04:49:01 What we want to achieve and who will do what?
00:04:52:00 Who pays for what?
00:04:53:13 How is intellectual property handled?
00:04:55:28 How are publications handled?
00:04:57:18 And how are risk and reward shared?
00:05:02:11 Now let's take a closer look
00:05:03:20 at some interesting partnering models
00:05:05:06 employed across the biopharma industry
00:05:07:04 and some example deals.
00:05:09:00 The first example we'll look at
00:05:10:11 is Pfizer's Centers for Therapeutic Innovation or CTI.
00:05:14:11 The goal for CTI is to enable more seamless
00:05:16:28 and interactive collaboration of Pfizer
00:05:19:08 and academic scientists by physically collocating
00:05:22:04 Pfizer's scientists and capabilities
00:05:24:04 in or near academic centers.
00:05:26:12 The first CTI site in collaboration
00:05:28:17 was established with UCSF in 2010
00:05:31:20 and has since been expanded to cover
00:05:33:08 roughly 20 academic centers.
00:05:36:09 The CTI model folks is exclusively
00:05:38:10 on antibody and small molecule
00:05:39:26 drug discovery collaborations.
00:05:42:10 New opportunities are sourced
00:05:44:09 by a request for proposal process
00:05:46:05 that work similarly across all academic partners.
00:05:49:08 General deal structure which includes
00:05:51:14 milestones and royalties
00:05:52:23 and alliance management approach
00:05:54:07 also work similarly across projects and academic partners.
00:05:59:11 The next example we'll explore
00:06:00:21 is the Harvard-Ipsen research alliance.
00:06:02:19 This alliance was established in 2015.
00:06:05:23 The first goal of this alliance
00:06:07:13 was to increase the likelihood of Ipsen
00:06:09:02 identifying collaboration opportunities of interest
00:06:11:27 both through a formal RFP process
00:06:14:00 as well facilitating ad hoc discussions.
00:06:17:02 The second important goal of this alliance
00:06:19:05 is to shrink the time to launch collaboration
00:06:21:06 with a Harvard PI.
00:06:22:16 By streamlining the agreement development process
00:06:25:04 but still managing to maintain flexibility
00:06:27:12 to support a wide range of scientific efforts.
00:06:31:18 The last example we'll discuss
00:06:33:02 relates to the use of an accelerator model.
00:06:35:20 Accelerators typically provide
00:06:37:09 both funding and guidance
00:06:38:26 to help translate science
00:06:40:11 into concrete drug discovery programs
00:06:42:18 or even stand-alone businesses.
00:06:44:28 In this example, Harvard professor Matthew Shair
00:06:48:06 worked with a Harvard biomedical accelerator
00:06:51:19 to advance his kinase inhibitors
00:06:53:25 for the treatment of acute myeloid leukemia
00:06:56:17 to a more advanced stage of pre-clinical development
00:06:59:13 and typically possible, an academic setting.
00:07:02:27 With this more advanced program and dataset,
00:07:05:06 Harvard team was able to attract
00:07:06:28 the interest of Merck
00:07:08:07 who agreed to provide significant financial compensation
00:07:11:08 for licensing the program
00:07:12:22 including a $20 million payment
00:07:14:26 in the form of an upfront and royalties.
00:07:18:13 Now in Merck's hands, hopefully this program
00:07:20:13 will rapidly move towards the clinical testing
00:07:22:24 to enable benefit of patients.
00:07:25:11 Now let's talk about how the partnering process works.
00:07:28:01 It's first important to understand
00:07:29:14 who the players of the deal process are.
00:07:31:19 With regards to the scientist in the academic side,
00:07:34:10 the key scientific stakeholders
00:07:35:22 are the primary investigator,
00:07:37:18 and often they're postdocs, grad students and staff.
00:07:40:11 While the PI typically takes the lead role
00:07:42:07 at negotiating partnerships
00:07:43:18 and guiding the scientific strategy,
00:07:45:16 their lab members frequently play a key part
00:07:47:28 in drafting the research plans
00:07:49:07 and of course executing the collaborative research
00:07:51:10 once an agreement is in place.
00:07:53:24 On a company side, the type and role of scientist
00:07:56:00 participating in the partnering discussions
00:07:57:28 vary company by company
00:07:59:14 but they can typically be divided into two groups,
00:08:01:26 scientific scouts and internal R&D scientists.
00:08:04:28 The primary role of scientific scouts
00:08:06:26 is to identify breaking science
00:08:08:08 or drug discovery efforts
00:08:09:21 that their company could help advance
00:08:11:03 into marketed therapies.
00:08:12:26 These individuals will often be the first
00:08:14:25 to reach out to a PI
00:08:16:19 or who a tech transfer office will contact
00:08:18:22 to make company aware of an opportunity.
00:08:22:09 Internal R&D scientists are typically people
00:08:25:15 who actually run drug discovery efforts in a company
00:08:28:14 and they will often also be
00:08:29:19 part of the partnering discussions
00:08:31:00 once the scientific scout has done some initial assessment
00:08:34:01 of the academic team's proposal.
00:08:35:28 The internal R&D scientists
00:08:37:18 also play a key role in drafting the research plan
00:08:40:11 and executing parts of the collaborative research
00:08:43:02 once a partnership is in place.
00:08:45:29 With regards to the business aspects of negotiation,
00:08:48:12 on the academic side the tech transfer
00:08:50:13 development office professionals
00:08:52:05 or strategic alliance group typically will play a key role.
00:08:55:29 On the company side, the scientific scouts
00:08:57:29 or business development professionals
00:08:59:16 will lead business aspect of the partnering process.
00:09:02:13 Finally, both the company and academic institution
00:09:05:18 will have transactional and IP attorneys
00:09:07:23 involved to assess the post-partnership
00:09:09:29 from a legal perspective
00:09:11:10 and lead the development of partnership agreement.
00:09:14:27 Next, let's review the typical high level steps
00:09:17:03 in putting an academic industry partnership in place.
00:09:20:13 Typically, the genesis of the process
00:09:22:00 is the interest of a PI in seeking an industry partner
00:09:24:23 to help fund and/or advance
00:09:27:09 a therapeutically relevant finding
00:09:29:06 or drug discovery effort into a medicine.
00:09:32:03 Or a company's interest in the expertise
00:09:34:11 or capabilities of primary investigator
00:09:36:16 to help advance one their drug discovery efforts.
00:09:41:01 The next critical step is making contact
00:09:43:12 with potential academic or industry partner.
00:09:45:29 Historically this was a surprisingly
00:09:48:04 and unfortunately challenging step.
00:09:50:12 However, with the growing sophistication
00:09:52:00 of tech transfer offices
00:09:53:12 and the proliferation of scientific scouting teams,
00:09:55:28 this process is finding interested potential partners
00:09:59:00 has become less challenging
00:10:00:19 and is still far from efficient.
00:10:04:02 The next step in a company's partnering process
00:10:06:13 is for the scientific scout to evaluate
00:10:09:01 the academic group's proposal for strategic fit.
00:10:12:08 As we discussed previously,
00:10:13:19 this assessment will include if the proposal
00:10:16:11 fits with the company's area of focus,
00:10:18:23 therapeutic modality, et cetera,
00:10:20:22 as well as the company's risk tolerance
00:10:22:22 and business model and other elements company strategy.
00:10:27:20 If there is a good strategic fit
00:10:29:24 and the science seems to be sound at a high level
00:10:32:10 the next step would be for the academic
00:10:34:13 and company scientist
00:10:35:23 to have in depth scientific discussions.
00:10:38:12 Initially these would be non-confidential discussions,
00:10:41:09 in other words discussions and information exchange
00:10:44:08 not governed by confidentiality agreements.
00:10:47:05 If there is mutual interest in pursuing discussions
00:10:50:00 at a greater level of depth,
00:10:51:24 often confidentiality agreements
00:10:53:29 are put into place to ensure information exchange
00:10:57:24 by each of the groups are not shared by third parties
00:11:00:08 and is only used for the purposes
00:11:02:03 of advancing potential partnership.
00:11:04:17 The next key step is developing
00:11:06:00 a clear and thorough research plan
00:11:07:12 with the well-defined decision points
00:11:09:15 built on aligned and well-articulated project goals.
00:11:12:05 This is a critically important step
00:11:13:26 and one that is well-worth
00:11:15:07 investing time and effort doing well.
00:11:18:19 Once a research plan is in place,
00:11:20:08 the potential partners can start discussing business terms
00:11:22:29 in developing a contract to govern the collaboration.
00:11:26:05 Some of the business and legal discussions
00:11:28:03 can occur in parallel with the research plan development
00:11:30:27 but the research plan plays a critical role
00:11:32:25 in defining the business terms
00:11:34:11 and often even the structure of the contract.
00:11:36:27 It is important to note,
00:11:38:07 the contract should include
00:11:39:12 clear alliance management plan
00:11:40:22 describing the decision making bodies
00:11:43:01 and process for the collaboration.
00:11:46:17 Finally, once a contract is in place,
00:11:48:25 collaborative research can finally begin.
00:11:51:08 Note that the timing this process takes
00:11:52:28 can vary quite a bit
00:11:54:00 based on the complexity and the scope of the project
00:11:56:08 that often can take six months of more
00:11:58:13 between initial contact to having a contract in place.
00:12:01:26 The decision making process
00:12:03:02 for approving a collaboration on the company side
00:12:05:19 can vary quite a bit from company to company.
00:12:08:08 However, the complexity and process
00:12:10:27 and seniority of the approvers
00:12:12:20 typically increases as a function of the overall budget
00:12:15:07 financial terms to collaboration.
00:12:17:12 It is important that you ask
00:12:18:26 company team that you are working with
00:12:20:26 to describe their company's approval process
00:12:23:10 including key decision points and timelines early on.
00:12:26:11 They should be happy to provide this for you.
00:12:30:02 Next, let's review a few key
00:12:32:01 success factors for collaborations.
00:12:34:13 As I mentioned before, it's critical that before embarking
00:12:37:19 on a collaborative research effort
00:12:39:11 that there's a clear alignment on project goals,
00:12:41:21 a well-defined research plan,
00:12:43:20 a clearly articulated alliance management plan in place.
00:12:48:11 This may seem like a set of
00:12:50:03 cumbersome administrative tasks
00:12:52:00 as you are itching to get started in your project ASAP,
00:12:54:26 however, these elements will help ensure
00:12:56:13 that the years of work to come
00:12:57:28 will have the best chance of meeting both partner's goals
00:13:00:04 and ultimately impacting human health.
00:13:03:20 The other key success factor
00:13:05:01 is regular and clear communication
00:13:07:07 both during a process of establishing the partnership
00:13:10:07 and as research is being conducted.
00:13:12:03 The more regularly both parties are in touch,
00:13:14:06 the more likely you are to stay aligned
00:13:16:09 and can efficiently course correct as needed.
00:13:20:15 The consequences of not pursuing these key success factors
00:13:25:22 should be fairly clear.
00:13:27:15 A collaboration by its nature
00:13:29:02 is not an independent activity.
00:13:31:09 You are acting part of the team
00:13:34:00 and the team that involves two different organizations
00:13:36:03 typically in two or more places.
00:13:37:29 Thus misalignment is a natural outcome
00:13:40:04 without the appropriate tools in place
00:13:42:06 to ensure that you are working together
00:13:44:10 towards a common goal
00:13:45:21 and that you keep doing so
00:13:46:26 through the life of the collaboration.
00:13:51:05 Finally, I'd like to mention a few items
00:13:53:13 that may make garnering biopharma interest challenging.
00:13:58:03 The first is an unwillingness to discuss
00:13:59:27 a potential opportunity
00:14:01:07 on a non-confidential basis at a high level.
00:14:04:00 Confidentiality agreement represents
00:14:06:00 this very serious obligation
00:14:07:23 and a company needs to be sure
00:14:09:15 that there is at least a high level strategic fit
00:14:11:26 and no conflict with internal programs
00:14:14:01 before agreeing to put such an agreement in place.
00:14:17:09 The second is lack of enthusiasm
00:14:18:26 for collaborative dialog or approach.
00:14:21:04 A collaboration is different from a grant.
00:14:23:08 In the context of a collaboration,
00:14:24:20 the company is not interested
00:14:26:10 in just funding a PI's research and staying at arms length.
00:14:29:10 The company wants to work together with the academic team
00:14:32:16 to advance or support drug discovery efforts as a team.
00:14:37:06 Another frequent challenge
00:14:38:08 to go from initial discussion to partner and collaboration,
00:14:41:07 put a partner and collaboration in place
00:14:43:04 is the unwillingness to focus.
00:14:45:17 While a particular avenue of research
00:14:47:04 may have many possible directions to pursue,
00:14:49:13 companies need to define focused efforts
00:14:52:02 to efficiently evaluate the therapeutic approaches.
00:14:54:19 Again, there is always room for flexibility
00:14:56:17 to evolve research plans.
00:14:58:13 A few companies have the appetite
00:14:59:22 to pursue open-ended research without clear deliverables.
00:15:03:23 A few additional topics
00:15:05:00 that we didn't have an opportunity to cover in depth
00:15:07:02 include intellectual property,
00:15:08:23 contracts and alliance management.
00:15:10:23 Many of these topics may be highlighted
00:15:13:02 in the podcast strategy for scientists.
00:15:15:17 Please check it out.
00:15:18:19 Now that we've concluded this lesson,
00:15:20:13 hopefully you should now be able to define
00:15:22:17 industry seeks to achieve
00:15:23:20 when partnering with an academic lab.
00:15:26:10 Common industry-academic partnering approaches.
00:15:29:22 Understanding how the partnering process works
00:15:32:22 and highlighting a few best practices
00:15:34:17 for industry-academic collaborations.
00:15:37:08 Thank you for watching.

Part 2: On Being Collaborative and Influential

00:00:12:23 Hi, I'm Jessica Tashker,
00:00:14:08 and I did my graduate work at Duke and my postdoc at UCSF,
00:00:18:07 and I'm here to talk to you about:
00:00:19:21 On being influential and collaborative
00:00:22:01 in the business world.
00:00:24:17 So our collaboration learning objectives are,
00:00:27:01 we hope that by the end of this class you will be able to:
00:00:29:16 Identify effective business communication etiquette,
00:00:33:00 to define structures for working together,
00:00:35:18 to explain ways you can be effectively influential,
00:00:38:13 and to understand the purpose
00:00:39:18 of feedback in a business context.
00:00:43:15 So maybe you're asking at this point,
00:00:45:06 why is this important?
00:00:47:21 I was a bench scientist,
00:00:48:26 and I was very used to working independently.
00:00:50:22 We become very used to working independently.
00:00:53:06 And if there is any attention paid to collaborations,
00:00:56:04 because you have one, you're working with someone else,
00:00:57:24 you typically follow the lab culture
00:00:59:11 or figure out the rules as you go.
00:01:01:13 It's not something that needs to be defined very explicitly.
00:01:05:29 Our goal today is to introduce frameworks
00:01:08:12 for working collaboratively in business environments.
00:01:11:03 And the reason I think it needs to be
00:01:12:28 a little bit more defined and specific
00:01:16:04 is because business environments and academic environments
00:01:18:29 require very different soft skills to succeed.
00:01:22:12 I can tell you that I personally,
00:01:23:20 when I was approached about doing this course,
00:01:27:16 I thought about if I could go back in time
00:01:29:23 and tell my 15-years-younger self what I would want to know,
00:01:32:07 these are the skills that I would want to know.
00:01:34:06 Being smart and analytical is table stakes
00:01:37:06 in the business world.
00:01:38:01 Most people are smart enough and analytical enough,
00:01:40:14 and just adding a little bit more smarts
00:01:41:26 or a little bit more analytical
00:01:42:27 is not really what's gonna put you over the top.
00:01:44:26 What will put you over the top is your ability
00:01:46:21 to work well with others and influence decisions.
00:01:51:00 So again, this is what I wish that I had known,
00:01:53:16 and I'm hoping that it will be useful to you, as well.
00:01:57:02 So to compare and contrast the collaborative needs
00:02:01:17 of the business environment versus the biotech environment,
00:02:04:23 in order to do anything in a biotech environment,
00:02:07:14 launch a drug, launch a diagnostic,
00:02:09:09 launch any kind of product,
00:02:11:01 you're going to need to have a deep collaboration
00:02:13:13 between deep functional experts:
00:02:15:09 Scientific, regulatory, clinical, and commercial
00:02:20:00 in order to meet business goals.
00:02:22:08 You can't do it all yourself,
00:02:23:25 and it's necessary to work well with other people
00:02:26:11 in order to achieve this very complicated goal
00:02:29:06 in a very highly regulated industry.
00:02:32:04 Conversely, in academia,
00:02:33:11 collaborations between labs are important.
00:02:35:10 They help individuals meet career goals
00:02:37:03 in terms of publishing, tenure, and grants,
00:02:39:11 and it helps further overall scientific knowledge.
00:02:42:03 But there is very little where you are crucially dependent
00:02:45:05 on that other person in order to execute or meet your goal.
00:02:52:01 Okay, so first, how do you communicate effectively?
00:02:56:14 How do you get your message out there?
00:02:58:18 Business etiquette for verbal
00:02:59:23 and written communication is different.
00:03:02:09 First of all, brevity is prized.
00:03:04:08 It's important to be able to get it
00:03:05:14 out there sort of succinctly.
00:03:08:12 Secondly, it's always good to lead
00:03:10:04 with your recommendations, your conclusions, your asks.
00:03:13:03 Don't bury it underneath a whole lot of detail,
00:03:16:07 because it might get lost.
00:03:17:27 Thirdly, in terms of detail,
00:03:19:17 it's necessary to build out detail for the right audience.
00:03:23:09 Alright, in business formal presentations,
00:03:26:00 you are going to want to lead and end with a conclusion.
00:03:29:12 I'm gonna give an example here,
00:03:30:25 which is going to be based on an in-licensing project.
00:03:35:03 Let's say you're working for a company
00:03:36:11 and you've been assigned to be a member of a deal team,
00:03:39:04 which is charged with advising the business
00:03:42:12 about whether or not they should in-license this drug,
00:03:44:20 spend millions of dollars.
00:03:46:16 So for your final presentation
00:03:48:04 which you're giving to the vice president,
00:03:49:28 who's gonna recommend to the board
00:03:51:25 to pursue this deal or not,
00:03:54:03 you are gonna start with your recommendation.
00:03:55:27 In-license Drug X because it will rapidly become profitable.
00:03:59:09 Then you're gonna have the elements,
00:04:00:22 the data that back up your recommendation.
00:04:03:16 NASH affects two to 3% of the population.
00:04:05:23 Well, it's pretty common, okay.
00:04:07:24 Current treatments are largely ineffective.
00:04:09:12 Oh, so there's an unmet need.
00:04:11:10 This drug meets that unmet need,
00:04:13:04 and we did some physician research,
00:04:14:17 and it's estimated to reach 50% share by 2023.
00:04:17:26 Oh, this product profile is attractive to physicians.
00:04:21:04 And lastly, we've done revenue and cost projection,
00:04:24:01 and they show a positive net present value,
00:04:27:22 so it'll be profitable.
00:04:29:08 Then again, you end with in-license Drug X
00:04:31:26 because it will rapidly become profitable.
00:04:33:15 You should compare and contrast this
00:04:36:17 with a scientific paper.
00:04:37:28 In a scientific paper, you start with
00:04:40:10 the context, the introduction.
00:04:41:25 Then you move on to the data,
00:04:44:19 and then you move on to your methods.
00:04:45:25 And it's only at the very end
00:04:47:11 you get to what you actually think the data means.
00:04:49:26 You need to flip that on it's head
00:04:51:27 to be effective in this context.
00:04:56:19 Alright, the tricky part can be
00:04:58:28 giving the right amount of detail for the stakeholder.
00:05:03:10 You know, we scientists love data.
00:05:05:06 Data is very comforting and beautiful,
00:05:07:02 and we like to give it all.
00:05:08:04 But the truth is is that not every person needs to know
00:05:11:15 the data all the way down to the bottom.
00:05:14:07 The level of detail is gonna be
00:05:15:11 less for a senior decision maker
00:05:17:07 and more for your working team partners.
00:05:20:04 The decision makers really need
00:05:21:22 to understand the conclusions.
00:05:23:14 You're recommending that you buy the drug,
00:05:25:23 50% of patients will get it, and the risk around that.
00:05:30:02 Well, we said two to 3% of the population.
00:05:32:11 What are the chances that we're wrong
00:05:33:26 and it's really 0.2% of the population?
00:05:36:00 Or what are the chances that physicians said 50%,
00:05:38:20 but really it's gonna be five?
00:05:40:17 Because that would really massively impact
00:05:43:11 the profitability of your in-licensing deal.
00:05:47:09 Conversely, the working team really probably needs
00:05:49:21 to understand on a more deep level your methodology
00:05:51:26 so they can pressure test it.
00:05:53:26 You've read all these epidemiology studies,
00:05:55:17 why did you settle the two to 3%?
00:05:57:08 There's actually some variability.
00:06:00:00 An example, a scientist on the team, for the working team,
00:06:04:10 they might need to say, in the working team context,
00:06:07:09 we've put Drug X through these
00:06:08:26 five different kinds of assays,
00:06:10:27 and in this type of assay, this type of assay,
00:06:13:14 and this type of assay,
00:06:14:18 it showed between 30 and 40% reduction of this enzyme.
00:06:19:01 In these other two assays, it didn't work as well,
00:06:21:03 but there's some reason to think that those assays
00:06:22:29 might not be the most effective,
00:06:24:18 and here are the reasons why.
00:06:27:06 The VP does not need to hear all that.
00:06:28:22 Instead, if the VP says,
00:06:30:19 Do you think this is gonna work, scientist?
00:06:32:15 You could say something like,
00:06:34:06 we've put the drug through a lot of different assays,
00:06:36:17 and although there is some variability,
00:06:38:18 we do believe with some confidence
00:06:40:14 that it has a real chance of being effective in humans.
00:06:44:00 I like to use a term,
00:06:45:01 if you are faced with a senior stakeholder
00:06:46:24 and you don't know how much detail to use,
00:06:48:24 with peeling the onion.
00:06:50:12 Start with the top layer and see if it's enough.
00:06:53:09 If they don't ask any questions, you're probably good.
00:06:55:16 That's probably enough detail.
00:06:57:08 If they ask a question, peel away one layer
00:06:59:08 and add a little bit more and a little bit more.
00:07:01:16 You probably want to have three or four levels prepared,
00:07:04:12 and for the first few layers you might want to have
00:07:06:27 some backup slides or some backup data
00:07:08:29 that you've committed to memory
00:07:10:08 so you can answer that question fluidly.
00:07:12:13 But don't give it all at once because the message
00:07:14:13 is gonna be lost and you're gonna get a reputation
00:07:16:14 as someone who kinda can't see the forest for the trees.
00:07:19:11 It's something that, when working with people
00:07:22:05 who've made the transition from
00:07:23:01 the scientific world to the business world,
00:07:25:27 it's something that we all say,
00:07:26:22 oh, she communicates like a scientist,
00:07:28:05 a lot of data, a lot of information right away.
00:07:30:29 And it's something that we, and I include myself in this,
00:07:34:02 have tried to get away from,
00:07:35:15 to be more effective communicators in this environment.
00:07:40:11 Okay, so I'm gonna give some examples here.
00:07:42:19 So let's say we're still talking about NASH,
00:07:45:20 how much detail do you want to give?
00:07:47:16 Okay, you're decision maker here in this case,
00:07:49:16 let's say it is the vice president who's in charge
00:07:54:03 of recommending to the CEO to buy this company or not.
00:07:57:25 So for your decision maker you say
00:07:59:13 NASH affects an estimated two to 3% of the population.
00:08:03:13 By contrast, in your working team,
00:08:05:10 you've probably read a lot of epidemiology studies,
00:08:08:05 and the estimates vary pretty widely from one to 10%,
00:08:11:01 but you've decided to go for this two to 3%
00:08:13:12 because those are the higher quality studies.
00:08:15:25 And you'd also want to know with your working team,
00:08:17:23 what are your criteria for a high quality study?
00:08:19:26 Because your working team is probably
00:08:20:28 gonna pressure test that with you.
00:08:23:19 And again, you should know this level of detail,
00:08:26:01 because the decision maker might ask,
00:08:27:20 how risky is that two to 3% population?
00:08:29:28 I see the word estimated.
00:08:31:04 There might be some uncertainty here.
00:08:34:21 Another example for market sizing,
00:08:36:21 you've done some market research
00:08:37:24 and you've learned that Drug X meets an unmet need
00:08:40:14 and it's estimated to reach 50% share by 2023.
00:08:43:20 So you've done some market research.
00:08:45:19 How many physicians?
00:08:46:18 What was your methodology?
00:08:47:21 Was it quantitative, was it qualitative?
00:08:49:22 Did you call them up and talk to them?
00:08:51:01 Did they fill out an online survey?
00:08:53:05 Did you show them a target product profile?
00:08:55:11 All of these sort of details are things
00:08:56:29 that the working team is gonna need.
00:08:58:20 But that senior decision maker
00:09:00:04 probably doesn't need to know.
00:09:03:07 Looking at an example in the therapeutic aspect,
00:09:06:28 decision makers might need to know
00:09:08:12 current treatments are limited to weight loss.
00:09:10:17 Your working team might need to know,
00:09:12:22 okay, well does weight loss work?
00:09:14:17 They need to lose three to 5%
00:09:16:06 of body weight to improve liver enzymes,
00:09:17:27 but 10% to improve inflammation.
00:09:19:25 Probably a little too much detail for your decision makers,
00:09:22:02 but this level of detail might help the working team
00:09:25:20 understand what the level of unmet need is.
00:09:28:12 How hard is it to lose three to 5% versus 10%?
00:09:32:06 It'll help you to understand how well current
00:09:36:10 prescriptions are working in this disease area.
00:09:41:12 Lastly, financial.
00:09:43:00 Decision makers probably want to know
00:09:44:03 revenues and cost projections, showing a positive NPV.
00:09:46:22 Whereas, your working team probably
00:09:47:27 has a more detailed financial model that involves
00:09:50:10 discounted cash flow, what all the interplay is.
00:09:53:23 Again, the decision maker doesn't need to know that,
00:09:55:19 but your working team probably does.
00:09:57:02 And you should know the answer when the decision maker says,
00:10:00:06 what kind of discounted cash flow are we using these days?
00:10:05:03 Okay, moving on to email etiquette.
00:10:07:22 I did want to put something in here
00:10:09:04 about email etiquette because we send a lot of email.
00:10:11:06 It does depend on the company.
00:10:12:11 This is really context dependent.
00:10:15:04 Because we did talk about brevity,
00:10:16:15 I think a good rule is to try to get
00:10:18:00 the message on a single screen,
00:10:19:11 and if it starts going beyond that,
00:10:20:23 maybe you need a phone call or a meeting
00:10:22:25 to discuss it in more depth.
00:10:25:03 You're gonna want to match your company style
00:10:26:15 for salutations and sign offs.
00:10:27:27 Some companies are more formal
00:10:29:09 and have dear and thank you at the end.
00:10:31:07 Some completely dispense with that.
00:10:33:26 So really depends on what environment you find yourself in.
00:10:38:01 I do think it's usually good,
00:10:39:25 similar to all types of communication,
00:10:41:09 to lead with your conclusion, your ask.
00:10:44:18 Be careful about bolding or underlining.
00:10:46:20 It's the same thing as communicating on the internet.
00:10:49:01 You can't read the intent, so you should
00:10:52:28 be careful about how it comes through because
00:10:56:18 bolding, underlining, caps can come across as rude.
00:11:00:05 If you do get one of those bolded,
00:11:01:18 underlined, all-caps emails,
00:11:03:08 it's best to assume positive intent.
00:11:07:09 It's tricky to read intent through email,
00:11:09:16 so try to always presume that the other person
00:11:11:24 is trying to communicate effectively and politely.
00:11:15:04 I did want to give you a sample email.
00:11:17:02 This is an email requesting an informational interview
00:11:19:22 to learn more about industry research.
00:11:21:23 So you can see, as we discussed,
00:11:23:20 the ask is about 2/3 of the way through the interview,
00:11:26:19 and it's bolded and underlined.
00:11:29:13 This email is relatively clear, but it's not ideal.
00:11:31:28 If someone's scanning through their email,
00:11:33:19 they might go to, my name is Rita ...
00:11:36:16 It might not land the way you intend, which is that,
00:11:39:13 okay, well what does this person want from me?
00:11:40:28 They have to read through the whole paragraph
00:11:42:07 to get to the second paragraph to get to what the ask is.
00:11:45:18 Instead, consider putting the ask up front.
00:11:49:05 That way, you don't need to bold or underline,
00:11:51:29 and it sort of leaps out at first.
00:11:53:13 And hopefully if the person is available,
00:11:55:02 then they can read the rest of the email
00:11:56:15 and get a little bit more context.
00:12:01:10 Okay, next I'd like to talk about
00:12:02:21 structures for working together.
00:12:04:26 Remember that we talked about it's necessary to have
00:12:08:13 a lot of collaboration between very deep functional experts
00:12:11:11 in order to achieve business goals.
00:12:13:23 So sometimes it can be helpful
00:12:16:03 to formalize those structures.
00:12:21:12 If you do formalize these frameworks, it helps to increase
00:12:25:06 communication, clarification of boundaries,
00:12:28:04 agreement on tasks, who's gonna do what,
00:12:30:13 the cross-functional view of the team,
00:12:32:09 and inclusion and transparency.
00:12:33:20 Everybody knows what they're supposed
00:12:34:26 to be doing and how to work together.
00:12:39:07 And it decreases misunderstanding, duplication of efforts
00:12:42:17 which can be very costly in terms
00:12:44:14 of time and effort and just energy,
00:12:46:22 and poorly consulted decisions.
00:12:48:12 You want to make sure that all the pieces
00:12:52:03 are moving correctly together.
00:12:54:29 One framework that we use a lot
00:12:57:07 and I've seen used elsewhere, is the RACI framework.
00:13:00:02 And RACI stands for Responsible,
00:13:01:23 Accountable, Consulted, and Informed.
00:13:06:01 So responsible means, who will be doing the task?
00:13:09:11 Who is assigned to work on that task?
00:13:11:23 So for our NASH example, this might be the market researcher
00:13:16:13 who is assigned for designing and executing
00:13:18:10 the market research study among physicians to find out
00:13:21:00 how much use is this drug going to get.
00:13:22:29 Or it might be the clinician who's assigned to calculate
00:13:27:12 the clinical trial enrollment rates in order to determine
00:13:31:25 how long the thing will take to get to the launch phase.
00:13:36:03 And again, it's really important
00:13:38:00 to define who's responsible for what,
00:13:40:04 because it's absolutely crucial
00:13:41:14 that you don't duplicate efforts.
00:13:42:26 There's enough work to be going around,
00:13:44:15 so it's very important to say, okay, who is doing what?
00:13:48:12 Accountable, this is sort of violently phrased,
00:13:51:13 but who's head will roll if this goes wrong?
00:13:53:09 Who has the authority to make a decision?
00:13:55:12 In our NASH example, there might be,
00:13:59:00 for the in-licensing work, there might be a deal team head
00:14:01:13 who's gonna work with the market research expert,
00:14:05:05 the clinical or therapeutic expert,
00:14:07:07 the regulatory expert, the scientific expert
00:14:09:07 and pull together all of those view points
00:14:13:05 to create the overall recommendation to the VP.
00:14:17:23 Conversely, the accountable person could be the VP
00:14:20:13 who's making the recommendation to the board,
00:14:22:09 or the board who's releasing
00:14:25:03 the funds to do the in-licensing.
00:14:26:22 So again, there's many different ways
00:14:29:13 to be accountable, but it's good to define
00:14:31:06 accountability at all of those levels.
00:14:33:15 Again, because that person is in charge.
00:14:37:02 Consulted is someone who can tell you more about the task
00:14:40:28 or any other stakeholders who've already been identified.
00:14:43:24 So again, in our NASH example,
00:14:46:08 if you're building an epidemiology model,
00:14:48:10 there might be an internal expert in epidemiology
00:14:50:11 who can help pressure test your methodology.
00:14:53:17 Similarly, there might be a deep therapeutic expert
00:14:56:29 who has information about NASH that would be good to consult
00:15:00:11 to help inform your market research study.
00:15:04:07 Lastly, informed is anyone whose work depends on this task
00:15:07:26 or who has to be kept updated about the progress.
00:15:10:26 So generally for in-licensing deals,
00:15:13:02 they tend to be a bit secretive,
00:15:14:07 so you're not gonna have a big informed list
00:15:16:02 while the project is going on.
00:15:17:26 But if the project is given the greenlight
00:15:19:18 and the pipeline drug is gonna be brought into the company,
00:15:22:18 obviously there's gonna be a bunch of people
00:15:24:06 who need to know about it:
00:15:25:03 The scientists who are gonna continue the research on it,
00:15:27:26 clinicians who are going to be running the clinical trials,
00:15:30:09 the pipeline marketing team who might start
00:15:34:04 doing some conference work to sort of look at
00:15:36:18 how we're gonna talk about this drug in the future.
00:15:39:17 Okay, next we're gonna be talking about influence.
00:15:43:06 I have been told that being influential
00:15:46:15 might be a little bit controversial
00:15:47:26 because is it being manipulative?
00:15:49:11 And I wanna tell you that being influential
00:15:52:23 is not the same thing as being manipulative.
00:15:54:18 I'd like to define it in a business context.
00:15:56:14 It's, yes, the power to influence
00:15:57:28 other people's thinking or decisions.
00:15:59:24 But a positive way to think about it
00:16:01:12 is using tools to surface good thinking.
00:16:04:24 So you're gonna make a really important decision
00:16:07:24 that could cost the company ...
00:16:10:19 In-licensing this drug is gonna cost the company
00:16:12:22 a lot of money, there's a lot of risk.
00:16:14:18 It could be great for patients,
00:16:15:29 it could turn out not good for patients.
00:16:17:20 This is a really important decision
00:16:19:28 that you're helping the company to make.
00:16:22:07 And you need to surface the best thinking
00:16:24:15 in all forms to make sure that the company
00:16:26:04 is well advised to make a good decision.
00:16:29:04 So two things to think about:
00:16:30:10 Presentation matters.
00:16:32:20 You can know your stuff more than anybody else in the room,
00:16:36:21 but if you can't communicate in a succinct
00:16:39:12 and influential way, then you're not gonna be
00:16:43:00 as successful as someone who can.
00:16:45:00 Another thing is that, inevitably when your trying
00:16:49:04 to influence a room to think through an idea,
00:16:53:06 you're gonna disagree with someone.
00:16:55:11 It is never a good idea to tell somebody
00:16:57:03 that they're stupid or wrong.
00:17:00:01 I do find that in an academic setting,
00:17:03:22 this sort of conflict around interpretation of data
00:17:06:07 can get really robust.
00:17:08:05 And I can get very robust when I'm arguing with someone.
00:17:11:20 But I've found that softening that
00:17:14:20 and asking questions rather than contradicting
00:17:16:22 has been much more effective since
00:17:18:19 I've moved into the business world.
00:17:22:00 Okay, so key commonalities of good influencing behavior.
00:17:25:12 Always assume positive intent,
00:17:27:02 even if the other person is being combative.
00:17:28:29 Let's say you're arguing with me over something,
00:17:31:09 always assume that I have positive intent, right?
00:17:34:00 Attempt to find a common goal.
00:17:35:17 The common goal could be, in our NASH example,
00:17:39:13 we really want to make sure this presentation
00:17:41:12 to the VP goes well so the company can make a good decision
00:17:45:03 about whether or not to in-license Drug X.
00:17:48:09 If we are having an argument, it's good to ask questions.
00:17:51:23 Approach with curiosity rather than judgment.
00:17:54:21 Sometimes people have good reasons
00:17:56:12 for thinking the way they think.
00:17:58:14 And if you ask questions, they're gonna both feel
00:18:01:20 engaged to resolve the conflict with you
00:18:04:26 and also potentially surface something
00:18:06:21 that might change what you think, which is always useful.
00:18:09:24 The last thing is to appropriately signal ambiguity.
00:18:12:11 Someone who walks in there and says,
00:18:14:20 this is the way it is, my way or the highway,
00:18:19:26 it's not necessarily ...
00:18:23:09 it's not gonna give you very much credibility.
00:18:27:04 So an example of a conflict:
00:18:29:14 When the RACI isn't enough, when you have
00:18:31:10 all of your roles and responsibilities defined,
00:18:33:05 but you have a little conflict because you have six weeks
00:18:35:06 until the big NASH presentation to the VP.
00:18:37:22 Your clinical colleagues need four weeks to estimate
00:18:39:25 launch timelines and develop a clinical profile for Drug X.
00:18:43:08 You need four weeks to run market research
00:18:45:13 for the clinical profile and develop a revenue forecast.
00:18:48:21 What do you do?
00:18:49:25 Well obviously you have to influence your colleagues,
00:18:52:04 because you don't have eight weeks, you only have six weeks.
00:18:54:24 And you're gonna have to figure this out together
00:18:57:09 and come to that presentation on week six
00:19:01:20 with a great presentation that helps inform the decision.
00:19:05:10 So again, you gotta influence.
00:19:07:19 Always assume positive intent,
00:19:09:06 your clinical colleague is not out to get you,
00:19:11:17 and your clinical colleague does not want you
00:19:13:16 working all nights and weekends while they take it easy.
00:19:17:06 You have to attempt to find a common goal.
00:19:18:27 An easy one is we both want this presentation to go well.
00:19:21:03 Most people want to look good at work.
00:19:23:01 And then there's always the higher business purpose
00:19:24:24 of helping the company make a good decision,
00:19:26:17 helping patients.
00:19:30:10 Ask questions.
00:19:31:24 Again, approach with curiosity rather than judgment.
00:19:35:01 What part is most time consuming for you?
00:19:37:09 And appropriately signal ambiguity.
00:19:39:28 This takes four weeks, but perhaps we can
00:19:41:25 front-load work and get it down to three.
00:19:43:15 It's tough, but doable.
00:19:45:00 And if you both signal that your willing to give,
00:19:47:02 then you can hopefully come to a compromise
00:19:50:05 that works for everybody.
00:19:55:21 One thing I wanted to put in here is talking
00:19:57:12 a little bit about style and ways to be influential.
00:20:00:14 I think sometimes we scientists believe
00:20:04:05 that the business world is full of extroverts
00:20:06:29 and the science world is full of introverts.
00:20:10:24 In my time in business, I found that people
00:20:12:20 can be influential and effective
00:20:14:14 regardless of introversion and extroversion.
00:20:17:03 I would find that the skill that you really need
00:20:19:03 is not necessarily being able to talk,
00:20:21:21 to persuade, to be a fast talker,
00:20:23:13 although persuasion is helpful,
00:20:25:18 but the real crux of it is listening.
00:20:28:05 You need to figure out where the other person is coming for.
00:20:30:14 And that is gonna be the foundation
00:20:32:29 and the key for being influential.
00:20:36:12 It helps you to tailor your message to the concerns
00:20:38:25 or the style of the person your trying to influence.
00:20:41:19 So again, this is not about introversion or extroversion.
00:20:44:04 It's about being able to listen and be attuned
00:20:47:27 to whoever else is in the room.
00:20:52:26 Okay, we're moving on now to feedback.
00:20:55:10 What's the purpose of feedback in a business context?
00:20:58:16 It can improve working relationships
00:21:00:05 and drive teams to perform better.
00:21:01:24 And again, because you're working
00:21:02:28 with these people day in and day out,
00:21:04:08 your relationships with them are really crucial.
00:21:09:22 Okay, here's one tool that I found really helpful
00:21:12:14 for giving and receiving feedback.
00:21:13:26 We just call it SBR.
00:21:17:03 Let's say that you met with the VP,
00:21:19:28 and the presentation didn't go very well.
00:21:22:02 He asked some questions and you actually didn't know
00:21:24:06 why you had chosen the two to 3% for the epidemiology
00:21:27:19 for the prevalence of the disease.
00:21:32:03 Your manager or colleague might give feedback like,
00:21:35:14 there's this meeting where we needed to influence the CEO,
00:21:37:16 I noticed you weren't prepared
00:21:38:19 to answer that question about the epidemiology,
00:21:40:24 and the CEO didn't feel informed.
00:21:43:00 That is so much better than,
00:21:44:15 you were terrible at that meeting.
00:21:46:15 There's nothing that a person can do with this feedback.
00:21:49:18 It's not actionable.
00:21:51:01 So again, really linking the behavior to the results
00:21:55:12 and saying, okay well next time
00:21:58:13 I'm gonna prepare differently.
00:21:59:21 I'm gonna make sure that I know
00:22:01:19 several more layers of that onion so I'm really ready
00:22:04:04 to advise the business to make a good decision.
00:22:07:14 I will say that not everybody is great
00:22:10:11 at using this type of framework and kind of
00:22:12:23 taking a little bit of the passion out of it.
00:22:14:25 If you don't receive feedback this way,
00:22:16:20 if you're working with someone who's just not good
00:22:18:22 at giving you good feedback, reframe it yourself.
00:22:21:12 Try to make it SBR.
00:22:23:00 And that way you're gonna be able
00:22:24:20 to coach yourself to get better over time.
00:22:28:05 Some resources you might want to consider
00:22:30:01 are the "Strategy4Scientists" podcast,
00:22:32:18 and then there are a couple of books
00:22:33:18 on communication and influencing that I found helpful,
00:22:36:22 including "Crucial Conversations"
00:22:38:16 and one called "Non-Violent Communication."
00:22:41:23 And just a reminder,
00:22:42:18 the skills you need to collaborate well
00:22:44:06 are active listening and good intent negotiation.
00:22:50:05 So okay, by now you should be able to
00:22:52:29 identify effective business communication etiquette,
00:22:55:26 define structures for working together,
00:22:58:04 explain ways you can be effectively influential,
00:23:01:10 and understand the purpose of feedback
00:23:03:00 in a business context.
00:23:05:00 Thank you so much, and I hope that this will be useful
00:23:07:09 for you as you go forward in your career journey.

Videos in this Talk
  • Part 1: Biopharma and Academic Collaborations
    Part 1: Biopharma and Academic Collaborations
    Audience:
    • Researcher
    • Educators of Adv. Undergrad / Grad
  • Part 2: On Being Collaborative and Influential
    Part 2: On Being Collaborative and Influential
    Audience:
    • Researcher
    • Educators of Adv. Undergrad / Grad
Speakers: Jessica Tashker, Girish Aakalu
Total Duration: 0:39:29
Recorded: February 2017
All Talks in Professional Development
Share

Talk Overview

This module presents an overview of how scientific enterprises engage in collaborations. Participants will learn the nuts and bolts of what each side seeks to achieve, and the partnering process for Academic-Biopharma collaborations. Participants will also learn the soft skills needed to collaborate successfully in the video "On Being Collaborative and Influential".

Speaker Bio

Jessica Tashker

Jessica Tashker

Associate Director in the Market Analysis and Strategy group at Genentech. Jessica has 10+ years experience in the biotech and pharmaceutical industry. Currently in her role, she helps the company to make informed, data-driven decisions on market strategy. Prior to Genentech she worked at the Institute for OneWorld Health, a non-profit pharmaceutical company, focusing on… Continue Reading

Girish Aakalu

Girish Aakalu

Vice President and Head of Global Scientific Affairs & Scientific Intelligence at Ipsen. Continue Reading

Playlist: Business Concepts for Scientists Course

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *