Business
Figure 1 Annual NME/NTB drugs approved, and the number of NDA/BLA filings by the US FDA, on a calendar year basis
platform and determine its limitations as well as realistic and practical applications; v) Plateau of productivity: benefits of the technology/platform are demonstrated and it becomes stable evolving through further improved generations. Pharmaceutical scientists and management were
often caught up in the throes of the THC. There were significant pressures to adopt such hyped technologies in order to remain competitive with other pharmaceutical companies. The problems were compounded by the psychological factor of not missing the one technology that may affect that paradigm shift that everyone was seeking. Paradoxically, there was also the possibility that a promising new technology/platform could be pre- maturely abandoned if it was in the ‘Trough of dis- illusionment’ stage. In either scenario it was criti- cally important that the decision process of adop- tion and/or abandonment of the technology was predicated on objective assessment of whether it met the tactical and strategic needs of the scientific, clinical and management teams. Hence, it was vitally important for any pharmaceutical manage- ment team to be acutely aware of the THC and its potential impact on acquiring any TTP. Other factors that were poorly understood and
usually ignored were the Technology Assimilation4 and Technology Innovation Adoption (TIA) S-Curves5. The assimilation of technologies is determined by a simple set of criteria. Initially, teams experiment with the technology/platform, in a classic ‘kicking the tyres’ type scenario. Subsequently, the technology/platform is assessed for its efficiency and convenience factors followed by its effectiveness in carrying out a task or pro-
Drug Discovery World Fall 2018
ducing quality data output. Ultimately, the technol- ogy/platform is assimilated into constant use if it provides an unprecedented opportunity to carry out ‘previously unthinkable’ experiments or insight into solving a complex set of problems. In the case of the TIA S-Curve, it has been described previous- ly in detail elsewhere5. It is initially characterised by a very small number of innovators (1-3% of adopters), who over a period of time (typically years) invent and champion the technology/plat- form. Depending on a variety of factors, additional cohorts of individuals will ultimately adopt the technology/platform and they include early adopters (~13-15%), opinion leaders, early (30- 35%) and late majority (30-35%) adopters and the laggards (12-16%)5. Assessing the status of a tech- nology/platform and where it is on the adoption curve is not a trivial matter. For example, the tele- vision was invented in 1926, but it was not until the 1960s, 40 years later, that the laggards finally adopted this now ubiquitous technology. Often the cycle of technology/platform adoption can take decades for successful technologies/platforms to reach levels of widespread acceptance, and in the majority of cases a technology/platform is ulti- mately abandoned. It is clear that the evaluation and valuation of
technologies/platforms was not a simple process. Many factors had to be considered including the status of the technology/platform in the Technology Development, THC as well as the Technology Assimilation and TIC S-Curves. Scientists and man- agers had to make pressure-ladened decisions about the implementation and adoption of technologies/ platforms at various levels of maturity in an often
35
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
