Business
This may also enable the partnership to deliver increased value in the Impact on R&D Productivity and Access to Capability and Talent categories. l Change internally: Realign how the PPP output is utilised internally (eg, bringing the PPP to the attention of new internal groups) to increase the impact of the investment.
Conclusions and benefits of a structured assessment tool for partnerships
An assessment tool has been developed and used to evaluate major partnership commitments, identify- ing those that are:
l Delivering lower value than expected. In this case, programmes of work have been initiated to understand why value is being lost and changes to the partnerships have been implemented to ensure that the deliverables can be realised in the shortest amount of time.
Of course, it may not be possible to recover fully some partnerships and, in these cases, sponsors can formalise an exit plan based on a well-constructed business case. l Delivering high value. Such partnerships are important, not only because they deliver value direct- ly to the R&D pipeline, but also because they are essential tools to learn from to guide the evolution of partnerships and general partnering behaviours. Partnerships such as Partnership C, that deliver consistent value, and Partnership A, that is consid- ered to improve dramatically over time, will be used as benchmarks in future assessments of the portfolio.
Conclusion With R&D organisations engaging in many part- nerships, it is essential that value creation is identi- fied early, so sponsors can learn from them and evolve their partnering strategy. It is also important that organisations can identify where value is not being realised such that they can take the appro- priate action to either improve performance or redirect sponsorship to alternative partnerships of higher value. As such, the assessment process should be conducted regularly to ensure that the predicted increase in the value delivered from the portfolio of partnerships is realised and to build a long-term understanding of the partnering behav- iours that drive successful collaborations. This assessment tool is adaptable to the needs of differing portfolios through adjustment of the cri- teria and weighting profiles so that they are aligned with the strategic requirements of individ- ual portfolios and organisations. It is also appar-
16
ent that this assessment tool is applicable to other situations where diverse projects have multiple points of impact across R&D, in both academia and industry, and in sectors beyond Pharma. These share common themes with the partnerships described above:
l Benefits change over time. l Value is difficult to estimate precisely. l There is a need to maximise the value of the entire portfolio and make hard choices about future investment.
In summary, this assessment tool provides a mechanism that can:
l Flag easily issues in a portfolio of partnerships and aid the understanding of common factors contributing to success or failure throughout their lifecycle. l Predict the likely value of partnerships both prior to engagement, and when the full return on investment has yet to be realised, and thereby avoid investment in low value ones. l Identify areas for key focus in managing existing partnerships to deliver. l Provide a framework to allow sponsors to con- sider the value of both intangible and tangible deliv- erables when a collaboration is under consideration.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the following for their help with building, testing and implementing this assessment tool: Elaine Irving and Jeff Kipling of Science Environment Development at GSK R&D; Zoe Jones and Ken Fyvie of Life Sciences and Healthcare Practice, PA Consulting Group, and Lyn Scott and Wil Schoenmakers of Technology and Innovation Practice, PA Consulting Group. Additionally, the authors would like to acknowl- edge the contributions of the partnership represen- tatives across GSK R&D who participated in the interviews and data collection exercise.
DDW
Dr David A Pardoe received his PhD in Medicinal and Computational Chemistry from the University of Bristol and has worked in the pharmaceutical industry for more than 20 years. After a research career at GlaxoSmithKline focused on the discov- ery of small molecule drugs for the treatment of neurological and respiratory conditions, he moved into developing and applying new technologies to address drug discovery cycle times using novel microfluidic and computational tools. Dr Pardoe
Drug Discovery World Winter 2010/11
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80