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 managers  alliance  partners  alliance manager  partnerships  ecosystem  partner  The Rhythm of Business  Strategic Alliance Magazine  Jan Twombly  Eli Lilly and Company  governance  IoT  partnership  biopharma  NetApp  Vantage Partners  2015 ASAP Global Alliance Summit  ASAP BioPharma Conference  Cisco  Healthcare  strategy  innovation  collaborations  C-Suite  Digital Transformation 

Change as a Constant: A Timely Session Planned for the ASAP BioPharma Conference

Posted By Geena B. Richards and Cynthia B. Hanson, Tuesday, October 23, 2018

Managing cycles of change is a session theme certain to unpack a profusion of thought-provoking ideas at the 2018 ASAP BioPharma Conference “Creating Valuable and Innovative Partnerships by Driving the Alliance Mindset,” September 24-26 at the Hyatt Regency Boston in Boston, Massachusetts USA. When change is afoot, alliance managers must learn how to quickly shift, dance, adapt, and evolve to keep pace in today’s meteoric biopharma partnering climate. How do alliance managers maintain an alliance mindset while negotiating fast-paced strategic changes, organizational shifts, and the introduction of new leadership? In a buzz of constant change, how do teams continue to listen to future needs? These are just a few of the challenges that will be addressed in the session “Leading Alliance Management amidst Shifting Corporate Strategy,” moderated by Andy Eibling, CSAP, senior partner at Forty86 Consulting Group. He will bring four panelists together to tackle this topic along with audience participation: Nick Dunscombe, vice president of business & commercial development at Astellas Pharma Europe; Mojgan Hossein-Nia, vice president, head of the R&D partnership office, Takeda; Steve Twait, CSAP, vice president alliance and integration management at AstraZeneca; Lucinda Warren, vice president business development, neuroscience, Johnson & Johnson Innovation/Janssen Business Development. Eibling recently provided a brief preview of some of the focal points the panelists plan to discuss.

What were some of the themes of this session?
Three of the four panelists have undergone significant changes in their careers. The fourth went through big organizational shifts not too long ago and has had multiple jobs within the organization. As the moderator, I will let them paint their own portrait and tell their own story and then go into targeted questions. We will discuss a lot of the problems associated with transitioning and how the panelists have solved them. We plan to stay within the alliance mindset and talk about how to ensure that the right mindset is in place as your alliance goes through strategic changes or as you are introduced into a new organization. Those changes could be an organizational shift from centralized to decentralized or a move to organize by therapeutic area to business unit. Changes to alliances, such as asset divestitures, will be covered. We will talk a little bit about tools and technology and how they are being used to learn and share expertise. As we talk about changes in strategies, we will get into metrics and how you can leverage them to ensure that you stay true to the alliances and their objectives. What metrics are companies incorporating to measure not just alliance health, but collaboration value? Another topic is how to design a Center of Excellence. This group has lots of expertise and different types of experiences.

What are some of the biggest challenges pharma alliance managers face today when dealing with corporate restructuring, both internally and externally?
That’s one of the themes we will address. As your organization shifts, by business unit or a move to a decentralized structure, what impact does that have? How does that change impact how your team performs? Constant change is the norm today as corporations strive to deliver much-needed innovative therapies to patients, increase revenues, and provide shareholder value. All the change we are talking about could be interpreted as ecosystem change for lasting solutions. The answers need to be flexible, not only relating to what you are going through now but predicting the next change as the pendulum swings. When the bowl of asset divestment wanes, what’s next? And do you have the right skills for the coming changes? What are the trends in non-traditional partnerships? Is the alliance language the same in the collaboration lifecycle?

What about adapting to changes in company culture? Will you be discussing these types of changes as well?
We are going to make sure to incorporate questions from the audience, and I wouldn’t be surprised if that comes up as a question. Nick Dunscombe, one of the panelists, just moved from a British to a Japanese company with a strong presence in the United States. He moved from alliance management at AstraZeneca to Astellas. Corporate culture might be something he could address. How do you apply what you know, what you learn, and how you shift? He will discuss best practices and the differences in the companies. Also, how do you adapt and how do you do it differently? What things worked in the past?

For more discussion of critical biopharma partnering topics and conference coverage, check out the Q2 and Q3 2018 issues of Strategic Alliance Magazine and the August 2018 issue of eSAM Plus.

Tags:  2018 ASAP BioPharma Conference  alliance manager  alliance mindset  Andy Eibling  Astellas  AstraZeneca  corporate culture  corporate restructuring  Johnson & Johnson Innovation  Lucinda Warren  Mojgan Hossein-Nia  Nick Dunscombe  non-traditional partnerships  Steve Twait  strategic challenges  Takeda 

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 

‘You Give Me a Buck, and We Give You Back Three’: Pharma Partnering Leaders Discuss Roles—and the Value of Alliance Management

Posted By Genevieve Fraser, Friday, April 13, 2018
Updated: Wednesday, April 11, 2018

The evolving roles of alliance executives—and capturing the value of the alliance function—were among the many topics that emerged as during the Tuesday, March 27 leadership panel discussion, “Driving Alliance Excellence into the Future,” moderated by Andy Eibling, CSAP, former Covance vice president of alliances, at the ASAP 2018 Global Alliance Summit, “Propelling Partnering for the On-Demand World: New Perspectives + Proven Practices for Collaborative Business,” March 26-28, 2018. Fort Lauderdale, Florida, USA.

 

Pharma executives joining Eibling for the discussion included Casey Capparelli, global product general manager in oncology at Amgen; Nancy Griffin, CA-AM, vice president and head of alliance management, global business development & licensing at Novartis; Mark Noguchi, vice president and global head, alliances and asset management, at Roche; and David S. Thompson, CA-AM, chief alliance officer, Eli Lilly and Company. (Editor’s Note: See the forthcoming April 2018 edition of eSAM Plus for more coverage of this fascinating leadership discussion.)

 

When Eibling threw out the topic of alliance management’s role in acquisitions, mergers, and divestments, and business development and licensing, he noted, “You need to differentiate between a stop and start in terms of divestments. Divestments can be ongoing. Someone in the group manages the ongoing process.”

 

Capparelli: In Amgen that holds true for small acquisitions, but large complex acquisitions need to be managed separately.

 

Thompson: You need to look to someone else to run a large acquisition.

 

Eibling: There’s lots happening in the pharma world today, but will it continue?

 

Thompson: There are more and more partnerships. The trend grows and grows. Today each alliance manager is involved with 20 to 30 alliances. How do you manage ever increasing volume? It’s hard to predict if something will come to fruition.

 

Eibling: Let’s look at the role of the alliance manager, and how it has shifted between project management and alliance management. Alliance management and project management need to be connected at the hip and carve out space through the partnership management team. There are three roles in a partnership management team. The question is who drives those team meetings? Who is accountable? Does the project manager manage the success of the alliance?

 

Thompson: Most M&A integration gets done in 100 days. The work looks the same except it’s compressed. It takes 100 days to swallow an alliance. It’s at a pace you need in an M&A.

 

Capparelli: Deal making is a transactional approach, but building trust generates respect.

 

Griffin: You build an operating model in the core so that you build consistent capabilities.

 

Noguchi: The Roche alliance group is modeled after Lilly. The skill set is there but compressed.

 

Eibling: There’s a shift between deal makers and an alliance manager with a partner. No one understands the dynamics as well as an alliance manager. With ever expanding projects, it’s the alliance manager who understands motivations and how to construct the alliance and M&A deal.

“Let’s look at value,” Eibling said, wrapping up the panel discussion. “How do you capture the value of alliance management? How do you define value?” he asked Thompson.

“Alliances are not efficient but effective,” Thompson asserted.

 

“Fear is a great motivator,” he continued. “I’ve seen too many alliances go out of existence. They focused on relationship management but didn’t expand beyond that to the legal and business risk. That contributed to their demise. They didn’t feel valued in the organization. So, in times of hardship, they’re an easy target to eliminate,” he explained.

 

“We saw it happening and so became open about our model. We measure continuation. We are adjudicated by leadership. It’s valuable to talk about your own contributions. You get the [internal] client you’re supporting to agree based on what they think—what they value or don’t value. Is this a risk reduction or efficiency game? You build to be efficient but it’s the face-to-face that often counts.  As for monetizing the value of alliance management, it’s simple. You give me a buck, and we give you back three.”

Tags:  acquisitions  alliance management  alliance manager  Amgen  Andy Eibling  Casey Capparelli  David S. Thompson  Eli Lilly and Company  leadership  M&A  M&A integration  Mark Noguchi  Nancy Griffin  Novartis  partner  partnerships  Pharma executives  project manager  Roche 

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 

How Contract White Space Becomes the Gray Area of a Deal (Part Three)

Posted By Genevieve Fraser, Tuesday, October 31, 2017
Updated: Saturday, October 28, 2017

Panelists were discussing the very different worlds of deal making vs. alliance management when ASAP Media left off in Part Two of our coverage of “Reading Between the Lines: Living in Contract White Space” explored the “gray area” between contract signing and actual implementation on day two of the 2017 ASAP BioPharma Conference September 13-15 in Cambridge, Mass. USA. The presenters were Christine Carberry, CSAP, chief operating officer at Keryx Biopharmaceuticals, Andy Eibling, CSAP, vice president of alliance management at Covance, the drug development business of LabCorp, and Brian O'Shaughnessy, a partner at Dinsmore & Shohl and president and chair of the board of LES, the Licensing Executives Society (USA and Canada), which focuses on licensing and commercial transactions involving intellectual property (IP) rights. Now the panel is discussing the handoff from deal to alliance management implementation of the partnership.

 

How does effective handoff happen?

  •  Knowledge transfer.
  •  Art meets science.
  •  The deal leader needs to have significant EI, emotional intelligence.
  •  Sometimes working through difficulty can be bonding.
  •  You don’t want everybody involved in every step, but you need an effective handoff. Bring in the alliance early on and as things wrap up, so the knowledge transfer occurs. Make a note of potential problem areas.

O'Shaughnessy: “There are problems with getting a person to read the contract. He tells me ‘he trusts me,’ but this is HIS business. He needs to bear down and read the terms. Too often a client signs off on details but has never read the contract. That’s when you need to document the visits and confirm the statements he made. Granted, this is difficult to do diplomatically. Frankly, if the boss isn’t going to read the contract, the boss isn’t going to read the contract.”

 

Carberry: “The executive sponsor, whoever that person is, needs to take ownership of it. What will this mean in a year’s portfolio? Is this a big deal or small? If this is a primary revenue driver, you will pay greater attention.”

 

“In terms of anticipating problems, a lot has to do with how you get started. Building a relationship in the beginning is helpful when things get contentious. Everyone should state what they consider to be successful and what concerns them, so everyone has an understanding. Whatever the ‘noise is in your head,’ get it out on the table. Think about having everyone come up with an evaluation of the project, then share it. In the end, the value may be the same, but they used totally different assumptions to get there. Also, set up an easy achievement to drive momentum.”

 

“Remember, people who created the deal are not the ones who implement it. It’s important to reset it with the people involved with the process. You need to get the teams together to discuss process and reinterpret the contract based on what each believes is the deal.”

 

O'Shaughnessy: “The third phase is when the respective implementers and deal makers get together to see if there are fundamental differences. Deal maker drafters will hear the implementers out. Feedback is critical. Don’t drag the last contract out as a basis to begin; instead, examine hot buttons. Sometimes you discover ‘the last time we did this we got burned,’ so seek to avoid it again.”

 

Takeaways:

  •  Success means: parties up-front agree on a set of values.
  • Nothing was agreed to ‘til everything was agreed.
  • Look at everything in development, then made sure it sticks—is held together.
  •  Put details into a ledger.
  •  Teams work through areas as they come up and acknowledge that processes happen within companies so they can move on with negotiated details working in parallel.
  •  Autonomy is a good thing. If lawyers create a massive structure, the results may be too bureaucratic. Flexibility is needed to reflect variables that crop up.

How can we apply previous experiences to future deal negotiations?

According to the audience, there’s a need for “common learning,” sharing it back. You need to discuss what could have been done differently and, in the end, retain some collective understanding, such as capturing what is of value and problem areas.

Tags:  ”First patient  alliance management  alliances  Andy Eibling  Brian O'Shaughnessy  change agent  Christine Carberry  compromise  contract  Covance  Dinsmore & Shohl  due diligence  emotional intelligence  first visit”  governance  Implementation  Keryx Biopharmaceuticals  Licensing Executives Society 

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 

How Contract White Space Becomes the Gray Area of a Deal (Part Two)

Posted By Genevieve Fraser, Monday, October 30, 2017
Updated: Saturday, October 28, 2017

This picks up where ASAP Media left off in Part One of our coverage of “Reading Between the Lines: Living in Contract White Space” explored the “gray area” between contract signing and actual implementation on day two of the 2017 ASAP BioPharma Conference September 13-15 in Cambridge, Mass. USA. The presenters were Christine Carberry, CSAP, chief operating officer at Keryx Biopharmaceuticals, Andy Eibling, CSAP, vice president of alliance management at Covance, the drug development business of LabCorp, and Brian O'Shaughnessy, a partner at Dinsmore & Shohl and president and chair of the board of LES, the Licensing Executives Society (USA and Canada), which focuses on licensing and commercial transactions involving intellectual property (IP) rights.

All presenters agreed that in general no one talks about when things go wrong. People focus on success. But change agents happen. People need to think more about likely situations that arise, about what can change. According to Carberry, biopharma negotiations offer special problems when teams spend 80 percent on work related issues and 20 percent on the exit. The exit can be what’s tricky.

“How should you run an alliance?” Eibling asked, shifting the focus of the discussion. “There’s a boilerplate we’d like to follow vs. figuring out what happens when everything blows up. Think of audit provisions; once you pull the trigger, everyone shifts into distrust mode.”

He reminded them that governments impose transparency and accounting, a carefully defined system of disclosures so the process is established. But it’s your responsibility to address issues early on, before they become an issue. 

“Trust is everything in an alliance. Trust is key,” Eibling stated. “Some think controls run in the face of trust, but it’s the opposite. The process helps establish trust building. If you have trust, you can more easily get to benchmarks. My motto is ‘no deal without a meal.’ Sit down over lunch with your counterpart to build trust.”

 

Shifting focus once again, Eibling questioned what’s missing from agreements. “External communications need to be on-going. ‘What’s material and what’s missing’ is what’s needed when everything blows up. The question is, what can be done during the deal making process to improve success?”

O'Shaughnessy: “Licensing is a full contact sport and needs the full team—lawyers, tax experts, scientists, business folks. Speaking from a LES prospective, they don’t appreciate the growing field of alliance management, so there’s not an effort to bring alliance into the deal process. They need to understand that an alliance team can analyze the details to see problem areas.”

“I had no idea what went on after the deal was signed.”

“Too often, LES views alliance management as a hindrance, as the folks who throw up roadblocks. Alliance management needs to stay in the background and define simple defining principles: This is how we work—from cultural differences to operating principles. When in the grey space, the alliance team will make it work, will look to principles to get through the grey area.”

Eibling: The alliance will shepherd the process, but the alliance needs to remain in the background and let others negotiate. The alliance folks tell them to finish the deal and then we’ll focus on governance, commitments etc. Meanwhile, they need to remain vigilant to see what was contentious, to remain alert to problem areas.

This interaction continues in Part Three of ASAP Media’s coverage of the 2017 ASAP BioPharma Conference session, Reading between the Lines: Living in Contract White Space.”

Tags:  ”First patient  alliance management  alliances  Andy Eibling  Brian O'Shaughnessy  change agent  Christine Carberry  compromise  contract  Covance  Dinsmore & Shohl  due diligence  first visit”  governance  Implementation  Keryx Biopharmaceuticals  Licensing Executives Society 

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 

How Contract White Space Becomes the Gray Area of a Deal (Part One)

Posted By Genevieve Fraser, Friday, October 27, 2017
Updated: Thursday, October 26, 2017

There’s a place—a twilight zone— that exists between the high “expectations of a deal well struck and the hard reality of implementation. “Reading Between the Lines: Living in Contract White Space” explored that “gray area” on day two of the 2017 ASAP BioPharma Conference September 13-15 in Cambridge, Mass. USA. The presenters were Christine Carberry, CSAP, chief operating officer at Keryx Biopharmaceuticals, Andy Eibling, CSAP, vice president of alliance management at Covance, the drug development business of LabCorp, and Brian O'Shaughnessy, a partner at Dinsmore & Shohl and president and chair of the board of LES, the Licensing Executives Society (USA and Canada), which focuses on licensing and commercial transactions involving intellectual property (IP) rights.

O'Shaughnessy cut right to the chase. “Typically, the problem is that people negotiating the deal are talking the same lingo. You need to look at common deal terms that cause collaborations to falter. Too often short shrift is given to definitions, to defining terms. Spelling out definitions doesn’t seem important because you and the others know what you mean. But contracts need to be written so non-experts understand. Spend time writing definitions in plain, simple terms. For example, technology patent and patent applications are two different things.”

 

“Three months from the signing of the contract, you will not be living in the world you had envisioned,” Christine Carberry added. “When you are caught up in the excitement of creating the deal, it’s natural to avoid looking at inherent risks. The likelihood is that X drug may not move to blockbuster status. Then, how do you navigate? How do you avoid having the reality of the situation, the reality you must deal with, keep from pulling people apart?”

 

“There areas often missing that are not even gray space—with nothing there to give guidance,” Andy Eibling began, throwing it out to the audience. “Name some areas in a contract that cause issues. What are your pet peeves?” Responses included:

  • Milestones based on study initiation (When does a study really start?)
  • “First patient, first visit” doesn’t mean what most thinks it means.
  • Every single compromise is going to come back—because the people who work on the contract were not part of the compromise.
  • Implementation time is not realistic. The contract states six months, but WE KNOW it takes nine months.
  • There are definitions within definitions. Check to see if the contract is still in alignment.
  • Due diligence—Best efforts—Clear process is needed for dispute resolution. The idea that you will just specify “arbitration” doesn’t cut it. You need to set up a process.

 Carberry rattled off a few scenarios: You couldn’t come to agreement, so you punted. Even worse, you know going into a contract, tension exists, so you opt not to deal with it. And, it’s contentious because you know it’s likely to happen!

 

“You can come up with complicated solutions that sound great—but how to execute it is the issue. It’s important that alliance people are brought in early to assist with ironing out conflicts,” she emphasized.

 

Let LES, the Licensing Executives Society draft the front end and the company draft how it will work, O'Shaughnessy suggested. “How do we prevent this and that from becoming a problem—such as scheduling meetings? And there’s always a risk of shifting provisions. Business people like to say, ‘that’s all legal stuff. Let the lawyers figure it out.’ But what they figure out might not align with the business model. If I absorb more risk, I need more attention.”

Tags:  ”First patient  alliance management  alliances  Andy Eibling  Brian O'Shaughnessy  Christine Carberry  compromise  contract  Covance  Dinsmore & Shohl  due diligence  first visit”  Implementation  Keryx Biopharmaceuticals  Licensing Executives Society 

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 
Page 1 of 2
1  |  2
For more information email us at info@strategic-alliances.org or call +1-781-562-1630