My Profile   |   Print Page   |   Contact Us   |   Sign In   |   Register
ASAP Blog
Blog Home All Blogs
Welcome to ASAP Blog, the best place to stay current regarding upcoming events, member companies, the latest trends, and leaders in the industry. Blogs are posted at least once a week; members may subscribe to receive notifications when new blogs are posted by clicking the "Subscribe" link above.

 

Search all posts for:   

 

Top tags: alliance management  alliances  collaboration  partnering  alliance  partner  partners  partnerships  alliance managers  ecosystem  alliance manager  The Rhythm of Business  partnership  Jan Twombly  Vantage Partners  biopharma  Eli Lilly and Company  governance  strategy  Strategic Alliance Magazine  IBM  collaborations  IoT  strategic alliances  ASAP BioPharma Conference  cloud  innovation  Christine Carberry  Cisco  healthcare 

Vice President Joe Biden Talks Up Collaboration with the New ‘Cancer Moonshot’ Initiative

Posted By Cynthia B. Hanson, Wednesday, November 16, 2016

I was flipping through Internet news when I landed on a fascinating Today Show interview by NBC News Reporter Tom Brokaw with outgoing US Vice President Joe Biden and his wife, Dr. Jill Biden, who were discussing their support for the new $1 billion cancer “moonshot” initiative. Fascinating, because it telescoped a radical change from the not-so-distant “war on cancer” to an evolving collaborative approach.

 The interview was additionally interesting because of the impact cancer has had on the lives of Brokow, who is fighting his own battle, and the Bidens, who lost their son to brain cancer. Joe Biden has “an added degree of passion because of what happened to Beau,” Brokaw told NBC News Reporter Lester Holt in a preview. “He’s turned his grief into energy,” and what’s different about this cancer-fighting project is that we now have more information from the human genome project, Brokaw explained.

What Biden is trying to do is “not tip over the tables, … but to get everybody at the table.” It’s not about the destination, Brokaw said, but “all the people that you bring into the process. [Biden] used John F. Kennedy as an example: We’re going to go to the moon, but to get there they needed to get the best engineers, the best scientists, and the best builders—at the same table the oncologists, the researchers, the big pharma people to turn out the drugs, so there is a common core so everybody is operating off the same page.”

In a separate interview with the Today Show’s Matt Lauer, Brokaw clarified the difference between the “war on cancer” and the emerging collaborative moonshot approach: “The war on cancer was against cancer in a kind of generic way. This moonshot is about the many parts of cancer and the research that is going on in many parts. And the big, big challenge is to drop the silos so that everybody is working toward one goal."

Sound familiar? Now let’s cut to the actual interview, which clarified the problem and highlighted the emerging solution: “The immunotherapists did not work with the geneticists. The geneticists were not working with the oncologists,” explained Biden. “Unlike any other time in the treatment of cancer, all these various disciplines are [now] working together. Now we can do a thousand-billion calculations per second.”

Biden lamented the high price of drugs, much as ASAP 2016 BioPharma Conference Keynote Speaker Dr. Sam Nussbaum said, as covered in this blog post:

‘Dr. Sam’ Nussbaum: Healing the US Healthcare System One Politician at a Time

“There’s one particular drug that works very well that came out in 2002. It cost something like $27 [or} $28,000 a year. It’s now $130,000 a year,” Biden pointed out. “Flat screen TV’s started off at $2,000 a screen; now you can buy the same thing for $300. The more people use it, the more the price goes down. Ironically, the more people have used this particular drug, the price has gone up.”

To watch the Brokaw interviews and see how cancer research is evolving to a more collaborative approach, click here.

More Brokaw Interviews

**Image credit Today Show.

Tags:  2016 BioPharma Conference  alliance management  Cancer Moonshot’ Initiative  Collaborative  Dr. Sam Nussbaum  human genome project  Joe Biden  Tom Brokaw  US Healthcare System 

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 

ASAP European Alliance Summit To Provide ‘Extensive Content’ to Expanding Number of Participants

Posted By Cynthia B. Hanson, Wednesday, November 2, 2016

What was just around the corner begins tomorrow, one of Europe’s most advanced educational business opportunities the 2016 ASAP European Alliance Summit. Held at London’s exquisite Royal Garden Hotel near Kensington Gardens, “The New Ecosystem for Partnerships” is being jointly sponsored by the Association of Strategic Alliance Professionals and Thought Leader Global.

The number of attending alliance managers and partnering practitioners is expected to double as compared to last year, providing ample opportunity to network. “This year’s ASAP European Alliance Summit is highly international and diverse with more than 100 participants confirmed so far,” said Ariann Ignati, operations manager at Thought Leader Global, which is known for arranging business media and events for senior management in multinational enterprises. “We have extensive content and presentations from the life sciences, IT, manufacturing, and many other industries,” including energy, smart cities, biopharma, engineering, chemical, and consumer goods.

An international contingent of around 30 progressive business thinkers from more than 15 countries will provide some of the most cutting edge information in their industries during two streams of programming. Presenters will cover the topics of cross-sector alliances, joint ventures, innovation, and ecosystem partnering; discuss in-house case studies; delve into the impact of the cloud, Internet of Things, and digital systems, among other topics. Session topics range from Google’s “An Alliance Built on Culture” to Facebook’s “New Partnership Models in a Digital Landscape,” Siemens Technology to Business’s “Innovation, Disruption and Partnerships within the Startup Ecosystem,” Ipsen’s “Developing an Onboarding Process for Alliances/Partnerships,” Janssen Business Development’s “Making your Alliance Global: Having a Global Approach for Managing Alliances,” and many more. Click here for an expanded list of of session and speaker information.

Sessions will be provided by heads of alliances and joint ventures, corporate partnering experts, and business development specialists, as well as alliance, JV, and partnership departments from companies such as IBM, Bayer, Facebook, Takeda, Philips, Johnson & Johnson, Cisco, Renault Nissan, Google, Deutsche Telekom, Unilever, GE Oil and Gas, Shell, DONG Energy, Sanofi, AstraZeneca, Syngenta, Huawei, Ericsson, Servier Monde, Janssen, Oracle, the Novo Nordisk Haemophilia Foundation, and New Generation Leader.

“It’s a critical time in alliance management as it adapts and grapples with the changing landscape of the emerging multi-industry ecosystem,” said Michael Leonetti, CSAP, president & CEO of ASAP. “This is an opportunity to jump in and hear from some of the biggest movers and shakers in their industries on how their companies are breaking from the pack to collaborate in innovative and adaptive ways as the Internet of Things impacts their partnering.”

Leonetti plans to attend the Summit, opening the event by making himself available to anyone interested in finding out how ASAP membership and best practices can enhance your business practices. Those who arrive early will have the opportunity to take the ASAP Certification of Achievement-Alliance Management (CA-AM) Prep Workshop on Wednesday, Nov. 2.

For more information and an expanded list of offerings, go to: http://www.strategic-alliances.org/?page=eurosummit

Tags:  2017 ASAP European Alliance Summit  alliance  alliance managers  cloud  cross-sector alliances  digital systems  Ecosystem  ecosystem partnering  innovation  Internet of Things  joint ventures  partnering  Partnerships  Thought Leader Global 

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 

Part IV: Stuart and Shawn Compare Notes on How to Build Bridges among Partners though Best Tools and Practices

Posted By Cynthia B. Hanson, Tuesday, October 25, 2016
Updated: Saturday, October 22, 2016

This is our continued coverage of a lively discussion that took place at an ASAP session presenting two valuable alliance management studies on “Applying the Latest Alliance Management Research to Your Partnering Practice” at the 2016 ASAP BioPharma Conference “New Faces, Unexpected Places in Partnering: The Foresight to Lead, the Foundation to Succeed,” which took place at the Revere Hotel in Boston. The session unveiled the landmark ASAP-commissioned 6th State of Alliance study, “The Economics of Alliances, Social Capital, and Alliance Performance,” researched and authored by Dr. Shawn Wilson, DBA, vice president and general manager at Beaulieu Group (see Part I of this blog post). The session also included an insightful presentation by Stuart Kliman, CA-AM, co-founder of Vantage Partners, on his company’s 2015 study “Transcending Organizational Barriers—A Cross-Industry View of Alliance Management Trends and Challenges” (see Part II of this blog post). The presenters then engaged in a conversation about how the two studies dovetail in economic and financial metrics and the ways they can be used to improve company performance (see Part III of this blog post).  

Shawn: It goes back to the ability to build bridges. There are some families in a neighborhood that exert more effort to make community ties. The same thing is true with tools and practicessome are more helpful in building bridges between companies. We need to look at how we are assessing companies and whether we are missing a large mass of information underneath. The full picture needs to be looked at so the bridge you are building can match up to the distance. There was a small business worth billion of dollars, struggling to hit two-to-three percent growth. We looked at social capital, and a little sliver came out that seems trivial, but we employed it into a solution. That little sliver went live two months ago and resulted in 80 percent growth. Social capital might seem small, but it is clearly a force driving firms away or pulling them together.

Stuart:  You need to put in mechanisms to bridge the difference.

Shawn: Sometimes the gap is too big. You need to ask: “Do we actually have the capability?” Building a plane while in the air is not the best strategy.

Stuart: Sometimes we get called in to intervene in an alliance. Someone will call and say we have lost trust. What does that mean? We don’t trust that we are well aligned, have the ability to manage that misalignment, and be able to manage that difference in a significant way. They think of trust as individual relationships.

Shawn: Social capital is not so much the existence of specific ties. It’s more the environment created for them to exist that’s definitely a spider web. There is too much emphasis put on goodwill and trust. Social capital is not these feelings or soft things or upper-level management having strong personal deals. It’s about two firms having multiple connections. It’s about the structural dimensions and the ability to interact. Last in line in social capital are the trust, respect, and goodwill. 

Tags:  alliance management research studies  Alliance Maturity  Dr. Shawn Wilson  Economic Metrics  Social Capital  Stuart Kliman  Vantage Partners 

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 

Part III: Stuart and Shawn’s Economic and Financial Metrics—A Dialogue About Social Capital and Alliance Maturity

Posted By Cynthia B. Hanson, Monday, October 24, 2016
Updated: Saturday, October 22, 2016

ASAP presented first-of-their-kind findings from two alliance management research studies during the packed session  “Applying the Latest Alliance Management Research to Your Partnering Practice” at the 2016 ASAP BioPharma Conference “New Faces, Unexpected Places in Partnering: The Foresight to Lead, the Foundation to Succeed,” which took place at the Revere Hotel in Boston. The session unveiled the landmark ASAP-commissioned 6th State of Alliance study, The Economics of Alliances, Social Capital, and Alliance Performance,” researched and authored by Dr. Shawn Wilson, DBA, vice president and general manager at Beaulieu Group (see Part I of this story posted on September 14).

The session also included an insightful presentation by Stuart Kliman, CA-AM, co-founder of Vantage Partners, on his company’s 2015 study “Transcending Organizational Barriers—A Cross-Industry View of Alliance Management Trends and Challenges” (see Part II of this blog post). The presenters then engaged in a conversation about how the two studies dovetail in economic and financial metrics and the ways they can be used to improve company performance. Following is part of their exchange:

Stuart: I think the two studies are very well connected and say very similar things in different ways. One thing that is interesting is that internal operating models haven’t evolved at the same pace as alliancing activity. In the gaps in the internal operating models, we need to rely on social capital. If you start to think of social capital and operating models, organizations need to grapple with how to enable the building of social capital. It’s not easy to do if organizations put people in dilemmas to make social capital decline. The concern I have about the ASAP study is that the language of social capital sounds too individual skill-based, not “How do we build up organizational capability?” We need to make sure executives don’t misunderstand that language.

Shawn: Social capital is an extremely underused term that is much more than individual ties. It’s been used for relationship building, but it’s really precise with dimensions that are unique and powerful when employed…. You need to take all those things into account to appropriately assess the distance between two firms: Is the social capital strong enough to put them together? How do firms assess maturity?

Stuart: Alliance management maturity is a useful concept, and how social capital fits into the model or how to evolve it. Do we assume the commercialization process is taking place only internally, or through partner relationships? There are various attributes of maturity, and when you measure maturity, you want to define your terms. Assuming you have a complex portfolio of somewhat interdependent relationships, what is your maturity level to manage that kind of social capital? Below the surface activities are really interesting to understand, and how they keep us from delivering specific goals.

Shawn: Alliances are outpacing the ability to properly apply physical techniques and analyze, and it’s important to understand the true distance between two companies. How do firms build social capital? That’s a fantastic question. Consider this analogy: My wife and I located back to the West Coast and moved to a neighborhood with an eclectic group—PhDs, opera signers, government workers. If you’d asked me whom the people were that I’d connect with, it wouldn’t have been these folks. But it turns out the structural dimension of the neighborhood was key—who was out in the front yard every night and what is family to me were much stronger predictors of connections.

Stay tuned for additional coverage of the session “Applying the Latest Alliance Management Research to Your Partnering Practice,” which will continue the lively discussion in Part IV between the presenters on how the two studies connect. You can read more on Vantage’s studies by visiting https://www.vantagepartners.com/Articles.aspx

Tags:  Alliance Management  alliance management research studies  Alliance Maturity  alliances  Dr. Shawn Wilson  Economic Metrics  operating models  Social Capital  structural dimension  Stuart Kliman  Vantage Partners 

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 

Valuable Economic and Financial Metrics to Support Partnering and Revenues, Part II: How Companies Underestimate Alliance Challenges—Especially When Their Operating Model Is the Barrier

Posted By Cynthia B. Hanson, Thursday, October 6, 2016
Updated: Wednesday, October 5, 2016

Alliance management workers and their associated crew members had the opportunity to stock their toolboxes with valuable building instructions at a unique session, “Applying the Latest Alliance Management Research to Your Partnering Practice,” at the ASAP 2016 BioPharma Conference, “New Faces, Unexpected Places in Partnering: The Foresight to Lead, the Foundation to Succeed,” which took place Sept. 7-9 at the Revere Hotel in Boston. The session included a presentation by Stuart Kliman, CA-AM, co-founder of Vantage Partners, on the key findings from Vantage’s 2015 study “Transcending Organizational Barriers—A Cross-Industry View of Alliance Management Trends and Challenges.” The deep dive was part of a two-part presentation that included the findings of Dr. Shawn Wilson, DBA, who introduced an ASAP-commissioned 6th State of Alliance study, “The Economics of Alliances, Social Capital, and Alliance Performance,” which was covered in my previous Part I blog post

“Our findings show that companies are actually doing okay. There aren’t giant failure rates taking place,” observed Stuart Kliman, CA-AM, co-founder of Vantage Partners, during his presentation of Vantage Partners’ latest comprehensive cross-industry study on alliances and alliance management. The 2015 study probes alliance prevalence and success rates through a two-part study methodology that included a 500-respondent survey and practitioner interviews. “ASAP would have been failing if those failure rates hadn’t [improved] over the last several years. Organizations have built up partnering capability, and that has had an impact on success rates.”

Kliman then zeroed in more specifically on the intent of the study: to determine the significance of alliance execution challenges and their consequences; the impact of alliance management maturity on success rates; and potential underlying organizational root causes of alliance execution challenges.

“People still identify alliance execution issues as being the foremost disabler in reaching alliance goals,” he explained of the impetus of the study. “They can identify significant loss of value through poor execution of those issues and spend a lot of time dealing with conflict. Shawn’s iceberg continues to be the underminer of execution.” [Part I of this blog post focuses on Dr. Shawn Wilson’s key findings, which included an “iceberg” analogy of how company issues can be hidden underwater, impacting social capital.]

The purpose of a merger is to eliminate difference, “but alliances are a different ‘berg,” he noted. “Organizations continue to significantly underestimate how challenging they can be. … Internal operating models haven’t evolved in a way consistent with how important alliances are becoming to our strategy.”

Alliance execution was identified in the study as the most frequent cause of alliance failure. Kliman linked that challenge to Wilson’s presentation. “Biopharma companies have internal innovation models, but they don’t spend a lot of time grappling. We actually have organizations involved in partnerships that haven’t evolved over time, so alliance management groups spend a lot of time putting ‘Band-Aids’ on organizations that are regularly undermining execution,” he observed.

He then explained more about the purposes of Vantage’s study:

  • To gain insight into the impact of ineffective management on alliance results
  • Identify new and persistent alliance execution challenges
  • Test hypotheses about the root causes of alliance management challenges

And the key findings of the study…

  • Organizations are increasingly leveraging partnerships to develop relationships for mutual gain, address business challenges, and drive bottom-line results.
  • Some 89 percent of pharma/biopharma respondents consider alliances “very important” or “mission critical.”
  • Some 83 percent of respondents reported having more alliances than five years ago.
  • Some 94 percent of respondents reported effective alliance management substantially increases the likelihood of, or is essential to, successful alliance execution.
  • The respondents reported that 39 percent of alliances fully achieved their objectives, 42 percent partially achieved their objectives, and 19 percent generally failed to achieve their objectives.

When higher maturity and capability grows, there are higher success rates, Kliman concluded. “This is where alliance management groups will lead the way:  One aspect of alliance management groups is to provide direct support to individual alliances and drive the capability. The next big goal is the focus in our second mission: To drive capability with alliances in mind.”

Stay tuned for additional coverage of the session “Applying the Latest Alliance Management Research to Your Partnering Practice,” which will focus on a lively discussion between the presenters and audience participants on how the two studies connect. You can read more on Vantage’s studies by visiting https://www.vantagepartners.com/Articles.aspx

Tags:  6th State of Alliance  alliance execution challenges  alliance execution issues  Alliance Management  alliance prevalence  alliances  biopharma  Dr. Shawn Wilson  management  Stuart Kliman  success rates  Vantage Partners 

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 
Page 42 of 93
 |<   <<   <  37  |  38  |  39  |  40  |  41  |  42  |  43  |  44  |  45  |  46  |  47  >   >>   >| 
For more information email us at info@strategic-alliances.org or call +1-781-562-1630