Pharmaceutical Executive
A look at how pharma and biotech interim management has evolved in the last 20 years.
The late 1990s saw the emergence of interim management onto the life sciences stage- then a novel approach to help solve a wide-ranging set of scenarios where not having the right people, when and where you needed them, was no longer an acceptable excuse for failure.
Almost 20 years on, what we see today is a genuine success story-a concept that has grown into a widespread and well-accepted way of doing business. The explanation is simple: the product delivers at a cost and an ease of acquisition that is acceptable to the marketplace.
The life sciences sector has continued to change at an exhilarating pace. Not surprisingly, interim management has similarly had to evolve.
The biotech community-with its greater focus on milestones, investor pressures and shorter decision-making processes-was the early adopter of the interim solution. It wasn’t too long, however, before pharma caught up. Competitor pressure was the driving force, with speed of drug development and timely regulatory submissions increasing in importance if companies were to retain or achieve marketplace advantage.
In the early days, interim management was essentially positioned as a solution for unexpected situations. The sudden departure of a key member of staff, slower-than-anticipated recruitment of a permanent employee, maternity leave, a surprise problem or opportunity that needed addressing urgently. Today, those situations remain as valid as ever, but what we also see is the use of interim management as a genuine strategic option. As business plans are developed, smart management asks itself how best to resource the competencies that will be necessary to deliver. Planning ahead with the intention to appoint top-quality interims when you actually need them is now commonplace.
What about interim managers themselves? Quite simply, there are significantly more of them, and they get better and younger every year. Twenty years ago, very few individuals called themselves an interim manager. What you had were experienced executives, most of whom had retired from big pharma and who weren’t happy doing nothing. Most of them didn’t see themselves as interim managers aiming to have portfolio careers.
Over the years, as the use of interim management grew, so did its appeal as a career to quality professionals, who saw an opportunity to put to good use the skills and experience they already possessed. Being an interim manager in a life sciences company allowed them to make a visible contribution to its growth and development. Variety kept them fresh for the next challenge and an overall feeling of being more in charge of their own lives felt good. A decision to become an interim manager is now without doubt a genuine career choice.
There are two features of interim assignments where there has been significant change:
The use of interim management has grown into a proven and successful approach to a wide range of scenarios that life science companies of all sizes will occasionally find themselves facing. Ongoing change within the sector is inevitable, but one can be sure that there are highly qualified interim managers out there who will have helped other companies face similar situations.
Geoff Newman is the Founder and Managing Director of Interea International, a provider of interim management to the UK and international life sciences sector. He can be reached at gn@interea.co.uk
What Every Pharma CEO Should Know About Unlocking the Potential of Scientific Data
December 11th 2024When integrated into pharmaceutical enterprises, scientific data has the potential to drive organizational growth and innovation. Mikael Hagstroem, CEO at leading laboratory informatics provider LabVantage Solutions, discusses how technology partners add significant value to pharmaceutical R&D, in addition to manufacturing quality.
Key Findings of the NIAGARA and HIMALAYA Trials
November 8th 2024In this episode of the Pharmaceutical Executive podcast, Shubh Goel, head of immuno-oncology, gastrointestinal tumors, US oncology business unit, AstraZeneca, discusses the findings of the NIAGARA trial in bladder cancer and the significance of the five-year overall survival data from the HIMALAYA trial, particularly the long-term efficacy of the STRIDE regimen for unresectable liver cancer.