Tag: innovation

Food for Thought: In Search of Faster Cures

Last month, The Wharton School of the University of Pennsilvania dedicated a special edition of their prestigious Knowledge@Wharton newsletter to the biopharmaceutical industry. Most importantly, the authors dealt with the pressing question how the industry may continue to develop innovative drugs – and get them approved faster.

Summarizing the current challenges, the report states that “no one doubts that the drug industry’s traditional model for developing new cures is badly broken. Fewer exciting new medicines are reaching patients these days, even as spending on research and development has risen and blockbuster drugs that have long been the backbone of pharmaceutical profits have lost their patent protection. A widening gap divides the discovery of promising new laboratory compounds from the ability to turn them into innovative therapies. A similar gap separates recent scientific gains in understanding genes from the creation of new drugs that use this knowledge to fight disease.”

The report tackles key elements of the ongoing transformation of the biopharmaceutical industry, ranging from novel drug development approaches such as personalized medicine, open-source research, pricing policies, and the latest efforts at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to speed up regulatory processes. One of the most conclusive observations is that partnering and strategic alliances are becoming more important than ever to meet the requirements of the changing pharma industry. However, despite identifying the crucial pieces of the puzzle, it remains to be seen how both established and new biopharmaceutical companies can cope with the challenges of a transforming industry.

Food for Thought: The Challenges of Investing in Science-Based Innovation

What are the rules of investing in science-based innovation? How much long-term thinking does it take to get through tightened markets and economic downturns? These questions are at the core of Vicki L. Sato´s research, who is a Professor of Management Practice in the Technology and Operations Management unit at Harvard Business School. In addition, she is also an advisor to Atlas Venture´s life sciences team.

In her view, smart science-based businesses regard today´s economic difficulties as an opportunity to boost their research and innovation for long-term competitive advantage. However, she cautions, different situations require different business decisions and investing in R&D is not always the key to success. The right approach, Sato argues, is to evaluate innovation management challenges from various  perspectives, such as corporate strategy, organizational design, decision-making, and resource allocation. This is even more important as key investment metrics, which are  measuring a company´s past and current financial performance, will not suffice as a stand-alone parameter in determining future success. Even though this is not a new observation and Sato admits that “the rules haven´t been written yet in this field of study”, the faculty research focuses on best practices and cases studies and may therefore come up with insightful and valuable concepts on investing in science-based businesses. We are looking forward to any future updates!

Source: Harvard Business School Working Knowledge, June 1, 2009. Author: Julia Hanna

Food for Thought: Are We Really the Prey? Nanotechnology as Science and Science Fiction

In his 2002 novel Prey, Michael Crichton develops a scary scenario about the impact of “molecular manufacturing”, i.e. the convergence of nanotechnology, biotechnology, and information & communication technologies. The concept focuses on the risks of self-replicating, so-called  “nanoscale assemblers” and was originally published by scientists K. Eric Drexler (former co-founder of the Foresight Institute) and Richard Feynman. Criticized and challenged by fellow scientists such as Nobel Prize winner Richard Smalley, the concept of molecular manufacturing nevertheless reflects society´s fear of novel, unknown technologies – specifically, the fear of losing control over some seemingly overwhelming artificial power.

In their paper “Are We Really the Prey? Nanotechnology as Science and Science Fiction“, Australian scientists Diana M. Bowman, Graeme A. Hodge, and Peter Binks have analyzed the impact, chances and risks of the molecular manufacturing concept. Calling not only for improving the regulatory framework on novel technologies such as nanotechnology, their key conclusion is that “unwillingness to engage in public dialogue is a consumer and citizen backlash waiting to happen, as was experienced with biotechnology. Current real developments in nanotechnology offer exciting opportunities to advance the human condition; however, implausible ideas framed by some scientists only serve to influence the creative talents of science fiction writers, like Crichton, who then prey on the public’s lack of knowledge of the current boundaries of nanotechnology for entertainment’s sake.”

Consequently, the advancement of innovative products does not only call for more adequate regulatory conditions, but also – and most importantly – for the willingness and proactivity of both the scientific community and innovation-driven companies to increasingly address and interact with the general public. As it has turned out, the acceptance of innovative technologies by the public may be the crucial key to success or failure.

Source:  “Are We Really the Prey? Nanotechnology as Science and Science Fiction”, by Diana M. Bowman, Graeme A. Hodge and Peter Binks, Bulletin of Science Technology Society 2007; 27; 435. An online version of the paper is available here

1 2