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  alliance managers  partners  alliance manager  partner  partnerships  ecosystem  The Rhythm of Business  governance  Jan Twombly  partnership  Strategic Alliance Magazine  Eli Lilly and Company  IoT  Vantage Partners  biopharma  Healthcare  NetApp  2015 ASAP Global Alliance Summit  ASAP BioPharma Conference  Cisco  IBM  strategy  Christine Carberry  digital transformation  innovation 

Summit Panel Discusses ‘Herding Your Lawyers’—How to Turn Attorneys into Collaborators Using New Tools and Tricks of the Trade

Posted By Cynthia B. Hanson, Tuesday, March 27, 2018

At the 2018 Global Alliance Summit, attorney Bill Kleinman, a partner at Haynes & Boone, LLP, leads an intriguingly titled panel discussion on “Herding Your Lawyers: Turning Negotiators into Collaborators.” Law schools prepare lawyers as zero-sum negotiatorsnot collaborators, Kleinman asserts. But when alliance professionals can turn their attorneys into collaborators, it benefits their partnerships. Kleinman’s panel includes two seasoned alliance managers to help him demonstrate approaches, techniques, and tools for negotiating collaboration: Nancy Breiman, CSAP, director, global alliances at IBM, and Bernie Hannon, CSAP, strategic alliance director, Citrix.  The panel plans to use interactive tools for negotiating a strategic alliance to prepare for a mock negotiation between a municipal lighting supplier and an artificial intelligence company for smart cities lighting. For the March 2018 edition of eSAM Plus and for this blog post, I had the pleasure of interviewing all three session leaders about their insightful session before the 2018 Summit, whose theme is “Propelling Partnering for the On-Demand World: New Perspectives + Prov­en Practices for Collaborative Business” and will be held March 26-28 in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, USA. The following article continues the conversation that begins in eSAM Plus.   

How can these techniques and tools be applied in multi-party collaborations?

Bill Kleinman: I’ve set up the tools for a two-party alliance, but I have used them in multi-party alliances. I have used them in five- and six-party alliances.

Nancy Breiman: Using these tools, even if it’s only with two parties, has incredible value. But I have tried to work in partnerships where there are multiple parties involved, and no one has figured that out yet. It’s very challenging on multiple fronts. Where I’d like to test the waters on this is with IBM’s blockchain ecosystem strategy. With blockchain technology, you have to have multiple parties in the ecosystem. It’s the nature of the beast.

Kleinman: Multiple parties are exponentially harder. But one of the tools we look at, which we call alliance swim lanes, permits as many partner lanes as we want.

Breiman: But then you will have five sets of KPIs, five sets of IPs, etcetera, to deal with.

Kleinman: It’s definitely a multiplier.

Hannon: The more complexity, the more need for structure. What Bill is proposing here for a two-party agreement is all the more critical when it involves multiple parties. It speaks to the need to come up with something that is structured and allows for the same discovery and results when multiple parties are involved. That is so much harder to achieve without tools. I wouldn’t even attempt to do a multi-party collaboration without tools like this.

What are some of the other collaboration challenges this session will address?

Breiman: There is no way to separate the legal construct and thinking from the alliance construct. A good alliance manager will have both party’s needs top-of-mind. You need to represent your own company while being sensitive to the needs of other partners. The legal team needs to be part of the team up front and part of the collaboration process. I don’t think they are separated.

Hannon: If you can avoid some of the trial-and-error aspect of the maturation process, you are going to be in a better position to produce better partnerships sooner.

Breiman: Bernie and I together have a lot of years of alliance management under our belts. For new people, its hard to bring them into the business because its one of those roles where maturity, seniority, and experience are needed. New alliance managers without a lot of world experience can avoid a lot of the pitfalls using these tools.

How do you apply these techniques and tools in your alliance management positions?

Kleinman: I’ve probably been using these tools over the last 10 years, and they have developed over time. They are based on things that I have come up with and read about in literature.

Hannon: I am just learning about this process in this engagement with Bill and Nancy. I have a very forward-looking view of this. A lot of the negotiations I’ve been involved with until now were done the old-fashioned way. Things have changed enough in these industries that we need to find new outcomes. Partnerships tend to be more enduring when founded on objectives and outcomes that are perhaps more mutually desirable than in the past.

The views represented by Nancy Breiman and Bernie Hannon are their own and do not necessarily reflect their company’s perspectives. For more information on this and other Summit sessions, go to http://asapsummit.org/.

Tags:  alliance  alliance professionals  Bernie Hannon  Bill Kleinman  Citrix  Collaborators  Haynes & Boone  IBM  Lawyers  Nancy Breiman  Negotiators  partnerships  techniques  tools 

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 

‘Design in Pencil’ as You Integrate Change into the Design Thinking Process (Part One): BioPharma Partnering Execs Explore How to ‘Get Smart Quickly’ and ‘Change as Needed’

Posted By Genevieve Fraser, Tuesday, September 13, 2016

Participants packed the “Using Design Thinking to Drive Speed, Innovation, and Alignment in Partnering” workshop at the Sept. 7-9, 2016 ASAP BioPharma Conference in Boston, diving into the 90-minute session to gain insight into design thinking as an innovative strategy that can be applied to alliance management.

Though design as a way of thinking in the sciences was explored as early as the late 1960s, the approach was expanded on by Rolf Faste at Stanford University in the 1980s and 90s. Design thinking was adapted for business purposes by Faste's Stanford colleague, David M. Kelley, who in 1991 founded IDEO, which focuses on a human-centered approach to innovative, problem-solving solutions.

Led by ASAP board member Jan Twombly, CSAP, and her partner at The Rhythm of Business, Bentley University professor, Jeff Shuman, Ph.D., CSAP, the interactive session drew from IDEO as well as an IBM model that can be adapted to help alliance management teams solve problems at the speed and scale today’s corporate world demands. The workshop was designed to provide participants with proven tools and techniques that can immediately be put to use to align operating processes—or to address any complex problem. 

“When you know what you need to learn, you can get smart quickly,” Twombly stated as she explained how the design thinking process defines the problem and then uses the basic framework to arrive at desired customer process and outcomes.  Implementation of the solution always involves the needs of the end user.  However, iteration, the repetition of a process, is key to assessing outcomes and implementing change. And the iterations change as you begin to think smarter, she said. 

“You need to identify assumptions, and then ID info that was derived from that assumption and decide if the assumption was good or bad. But do it in pencil,” Twombly warned the group. “Give yourselves the opportunity to change as needed. Take time out of the process to do this.”

Key points in assessing end user needs and gaining other stakeholders’ inputs:

  • Interview with empathy, put stakeholders at ease, talk to invoke stories, give examples, and be specific.
  • Question statements—repeat back what you’ve heard to arrive at “yes” in an agreement and move forward.
  • Look for inconsistency and for nonverbal cues, such as, hesitation in a voice and areas that need to be worked through.
  • Do not ask leading questions and don’t give them the answers—let them come up with the truth of how they think and feel.
  • Find ways to work so you can be more efficient and effective.

Twombly cautioned that when working in tandem with another group, act as a joint think tank where you both develop a concept and don’t develop competing concepts in isolation and then fight over them. Think of how others might feel if the proposal they worked on, on their own, was roundly rejected. She then asked the participants grouped by tables to develop three questions that need to be asked of team member. 

At this point in the workshop, Shuman began to actively work with the groups. The questions needed to look at “what we’ve experienced that gets at what was wrong with the process.” The purpose of the questions is to generate design strategy from design thinking. Questions developed by the groups included:

  • What is frustrating about the ways we collaborate?
  • What is the value of meetings?
  • What about this process keeps you up at night?
  • What do you think is working about the collaboration?  What isn’t working?
  • How do you feel the meeting is going?  Be candid.
  • What defines a great collaboration meeting?  What does it accomplish?

“Use the questioning process to see what matters and then base your design on it,” Twombly said. “Ask why and how. It’s always good to gather data in pairs. One asks questions and one captures data. Order the answers in a series of needs statements, as in: 

Question: Why do we need more efficient acceleration?

Answer: We need greater efficiency to drive the agenda, to get the product to the customer.

Question:  If that is why, then how do we get there? 

Stay tuned to the ASAP Blog for Part Two of our coverage of Twombly and Shuman’s design thinking workshop, as well as continued blog posts about other informative and provocative sessions that ASAP Media team covered during last week’s 2016 ASAP BioPharma Conference at the Revere Hotel Boston Common. 

Tags:  alliance management  Bentley University  collaboration  customer  David M. Kelley  design thinking  IBM  IDEO  innovative strategy  Jan Twombly  Jeff Shuman  problem-solving solutions  Rolf Faste  stakeholders  Stanford University  The Rhythm of Business 

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 

High Tech, Biopharma, and Academia: The Three-Legged Stool of Many of Today’s Collaborations

Posted By Cynthia B. Hanson, Thursday, September 8, 2016

Cross-industry partnering is on the rise, and a sturdy three-legged stool is fast becoming fundamental furniture in the world of collaboration. The hot topic of collaboration between high tech, biopharma, and academia is on stage Sept. 8 at the ASAP 2016 BioPharma Conference “New Faces, Unexpected Places in Partnering: The Foresight to Lead, the Foundation to Succeed” being held at the Revere Hotel, Boston Common, Boston. In this session, three panelists from diverse backgrounds discuss the trend of “Cross-Industry Partnerships: Managing Alliances between Biopharma and High-Tech Partners”: Chaitanya K. Dahagam, MD, global partner innovation executive at IBM Watson Health, who has managed collaborations for IBM; Rachel Sha, transactions lead, business development & licensing, at Sanofi, who has managed a collaboration with Google; Juliana Leung, director, strategic alliances, Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, who has overseen collaborations with Intel, Google, and IBM. I spoke with session moderator Prakash Purohit, managing partner at Raaya Biopharma Consulting, about the thrust of the panel discussion. 

What is the focus of the panel discussions?

They are giving their perspective on how they approached different issues or aspects of cross-industry alliances, how they resolved their questions and concerns, and their approaches in doing so. They describe the metrics and tools they used to resolve these issues. For example, if you take an alliance between high tech and academic institutions, some of the challenges that might crop up are the alignment of goals. Each institution may have their own set of goals for innovation, licensing, fund raising, and publications. So how do they align these goals, especially with high tech, because they are looking to bring to market in the short term, and how will they manage those alliances? We will discuss IBM’s collaborations with healthcare and biopharma: What kinds of challenges did they find in these alliances with various entities, such as clinicians, patients, technical personnel, and consumers? 

Why is this topic of such interest now in biopharma?

This is a brand new session. Recently there has been a recognition of the benefits of developing these alliances for these industries, because they provide clinicians, patients, and doctors with new tools for managing data and genomic data. Considerable growth in the amount of that data has necessitated building cross-industry partnerships in healthcare and biopharma with companies such as IBM, Google, Oracle, and Microsoft. And because today’s data is digital, high tech companies are developing new tools for data analysis for the healthcare industry. 

Where does academia fit in?

We did an ASAP Webinar in May to address the challenges of academia and biopharma alliances. One reason collaborations with academia are happening more frequently is that the tremendous amount of growth of data through genomic or clinical research has become a daunting challenge for both academia and hospitals. High tech is continuously evolving with new software programs, technology, etc. Those collaborations tend to be short because of the dynamics and changes. Biopharma and bioresearch tend to be long-term collaborations because understanding the mechanisms or functions is complicated. It takes time to understand how processes happen. Human trials tend to take place over a long period, some eight to 10 years to go to market. Academic research can happen in a few years of collaboration or it can involve clinical trials with long processes and numerous stagesoften with government funding. That is another way academic institutions come into the picture. They might be involved in a screening process that can be used to create new sets of molecules. Industry partners can then test a number of compounds using that tool for screening purposes. They can determine what works and provide the results to the biopharma industry. 

Tags:  alliances  analytical tools  biopharma  Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard  Chaitanya Dahagam  collaborations  cross-industry alliances  Google  healthcare  IBM  IBM Watson  Juianna Leung  managing data  Microsoft  Oracle  Prakash Purohit  Rachel Sha  Sanofi 

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 

The World of Design Thinking: How It Informs Rethinking Alliance Management for the New Faces and Places of Biopharma Partnering

Posted By Cynthia B. Hanson, Thursday, September 1, 2016

 “Using Design Thinking to Drive Speed, Innovation, and Alignment in Partnering” is a 90-minute, hands-on workshop offered at the upcoming ASAP BioPharma Conference Sept. 7-9 “New Faces, Unexpected Places in Partnering: The Foresight to Lead, the Foundation to Succeed” at the Revere Hotel Boston Common, Boston. Led by The Rhythm of Business’s President, Jan Twombly, CSAP, and Principal Jeff Shuman, CSAP, PhD., the workshop will be taking common alliance problems and advising participants on how to understand and apply an adaptation of design thinking to solve them. This workshop will introduce several different techniques along with multiple examples. In this brief interview, Jan Twombly provides a primer on design thinking and what participants can expect. 

What is design thinking?
It’s a methodology for solving complex problems that’s particularly useful in unfamiliar settings, such as partnering with multiple partners, non-asset based alliances, and partnering with sectors that run on much faster clock speeds. It started out as something used for product design, but the data-driven, user experience-focused practice has become very popular in broader business applications because it centers on innovation and complex problem solving. We’ve adapted it for partnering practices. It zeros in on the user’s needs, wants, and limitations, and makes sure that you are providing an experience they value. The tools and techniques take a user-centered approach to aligning processes and interests between and among partners, especially among new faces. It hones in on core problems so that alliance managers can really understand what is needed to solve for, and makes sure they identify the key assumptions in the proposed solutions to understand the data to be gathered to determine if it’s working or not working. In an alliance management context, the users are primarily your internal stakeholders and the equivalent at partner companies. 

How is it used in alliance management?
If you tie back to the conference theme, we live in a world where we are partnering with new partners and in a time of intense competition to get to market first. More and more in R&D is getting externalized, and to drive efficiency in all these new alliances, we need to evolve how we manage alliances. We can use design thinking to really rethink alliance processes, and thereby drive the speed, innovation, effectiveness, alignment, and efficiency required today. You can use design thinking to ensure that your alliance processes and the way you go about collaborating are providing stakeholders with the partnering experience they need to achieve alliance objectives, given the complexity of the relationships and the fact that there is a race to get the most desirable assets and align with companies that will achieve your objectives. We have looked at various ways to do that—starting with IDEO, which created the methodology that is now adapted and used by companies such as IBM, Google Ventures, Bayer, GE Healthcare, and Novo Nordisk. We’ve studied how they are utilizing it and have applied it to alliances in a method we call Partner by Design. 

You collaborated on an interesting article in the Summer 2016 issue of Strategic Alliance Magazine entitled “Mastering the Speed, Scale, and Scope of Partnering for the Connected Ecosystems of the Fourth Industrial Revolution.” How does design thinking fit into the fourth industrial revolution?
Basically, where it aligns is the fact that partnering processes and the way we have been going about partnering have to change and reflect the speed of innovation today. Partnering processes must reflect the needs of the always-on customer. As business people, we increasingly expect to have the same experience when engaging with companies such as Google, Amazon, or Nordstrom. These are companies known for delivering a great customer experience. This means that we need to change the way we go about partnering. The new business models are outcomes-based, where no value is realized or captured until the end customers get their value. That changes the rules of partnering. You can’t use the same best practices we’ve been using forever. The fundamentals apply, but the new environment demands reflection and evolution. 

Tags:  alliances  Amazon  Bayer  ecosytems  GE HealthCare  Google  IBM  Indutrial Revolution  Jan Twombly  Jeff Shuman  Nordstrom  partner  Partner by Design  partnering practices  stakeholders  Strategic Alliance Magazine  The Rhythm of Business 

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 

‘If You Are Looking for Answers, You Are in the Wrong Session’: Finding the Value of IoT in the Brave New World of Mega-Multi-Partnering

Posted By Cynthia B. Hanson, Monday, June 27, 2016

Solving the challenge of partnering in the Internet of Things has become a major puzzle for even the most skilled alliance executives. It’s a complex Rubik’s Cube of possibilities with multiple cross-industry, interlinking combinations. 

Take, for example, Joan Meltzer, CSAP, IBM alliance executive for Twitter and former smarter cities go-to-market leader at IBM Analytics, and a 36-year veteran at IBM Corp.; Mary Beth Hall, director of product development for IoT at Verizon, where she has worked for the past 20 years; Tony DeSpirto, CSAP, managing director of strategic accounts at Schneider Electric.  These seasoned alliance leaders manipulated the Rubik’s Cube in a panel discussion moderated by Jan Twombly, CSAP, president of The Rhythm of Business, entitled “Capturing the Value of IoT” at the March 1-4 2016 ASAP Global Alliance Summit“Partnering Everywhere: Expert Leadership for the Ecosystem,” held at the Gaylord National Resort & Convention Center, National Harbor, Maryland. Here are some snippets from their provocative conversation: 

Joan: If you are looking for answers, you are in the wrong session. We are all good at managing our jobs one-on-one. If there is any area that companies can’t do it alone, it’s IoT. It’s very complex. We still need the discipline of alliance management and strategy, and we still need to think value creation and capture to put out the whole value chain—it’s how the partners are going to make money. 

Tony: Schneider Electric is focused on the industrial IoT. We are in the infrastructure of everything. What we are struggling with now is how do we make money in IoT? We see value in data, but it needs to be processed through analytics. How to value the partners you have is part of the equation.  

Mary Beth: Verizon has been a Telecom business for the last 20 years and is now shifting to a technology company. I am managing our ThingSpace platform [designed to simplify the development and launch of IoT applications]. How many people have an Apple watch or app for phone tracking health? That’s one example of how Verizon is making money. Think about a smart sneaker, a sensor in a sneaker that tracks cadence and whether you are hydrated. How do we proliferate that? Is Nike willing to allow us to put partners in their ecosystem that were competitors? Fitbit and MyFitnessPal are allowing potential competitors into that space. We as thought leaders in that space need to adapt to that. How do we do that? There’s not one player at the table any more, there are six or seven, and that is really changing the way we market things. 

Tony: We in this room are unencumbered by that to a certain degree. As alliance managers, we have an ability and obligation to seek out these new business models. Thinking of how we will make money in two or ten years, the ideas are not going to come from executive management. They are going to come from peers in the room. You need to say “yes,” and figure out how it will be done. For most executives, it’s an uncomfortable thing to turn that “yes” into a repeatable model. 

Joan: It’s like sitting at a table with an elevator and escalator company, and working with them together. The elevator manufacturer is about maintenance. With IoT, the elevator can connect with the escalator, and that’s a new revenue stream. The functionality evolves into our revenue stream. 

Mary Beth: We need to put it together for the customer. That is some of the challenge we have seen at Verizon. Partners and customers require treading on new ground for partnership models with the unique needs of customers in mind. For example, there is a winery on the West Coast. They need to be able to fertilize the ground. We are helping provide data for the soil. It’s not a hard thing for us as technologists, but it is for farmers who are not used to be in that data space. And they can in turn sell it to other wineries. 

Tony: How many of your companies have IoT initiatives? Our senior leadership is thinking about how they can make their numbers today, so it’s all the more incumbent upon us to blaze that trail and show them where that value is. The fundamentals of partnering don’t change. It’s still basic blocking and tackling. The people you are talking with might change, and the executive management of a company might need more partnering intelligence. 

Mary Beth: In terms of driving change at Verizon, I am in the product role. When the product was fully ready for customers, we would launch. Now we can’t do that. We’re moving from a command-and-control leadership to a more servant leadership. I’m in the product and new business group, and you’re going to see some cool stuff coming out of Verizon that you haven’t seen before.  

Joan: You need to figure out the whole chain to deliver the solution. We started to see that in the cloud. But there is a gap in the solution where we don’t always have access to the marketplace. 

Mary Beth: Sometimes it’s about looking at a new market in a new way. Putting things together in new ways to get leadership to buy into it. Show them a little bit of what it looks like. 

Jan: The fundamentals of partnering are the same, but how do you keep the same with six to seven partners? How do you make sure everyone is getting the value? 

Tony: The concept doesn’t change. I believe that when you try to get six to seven people to agree, it won’t happen. There will always be someone who will win and lose because of the complexity. When things are tough, I go back to the fundamentals, like let’s get together at least once a quarter. 

Mary Beth: We had to break the barrier between legally what we felt we could do and what the market was asking for. We said “We are going to open everything up, we are breaking down barriers.” We put in governance around the partners in that space, and they are partners that are reselling that service. But the complexity in IoT is still there. We are desperately trying to simplify it. We are not there yet. 

Joan: We are all about repeatability, but you have to have assets that are repeatable. With smart cities, we are able to package things up and periscope it. I expect the same thing to happen with IoT. But you may not be able to resell that solution. I hope next year we will be able to talk about repeatability because none of us can afford to be in an on-and-off business. 

Tony: We need to get our leaders out of the comfort zone. That’s what we get paid for. 

Joan: You need a really solid project manager who will require everyone to come together. Ask what’s hot? Healthcare, the automotive industry, airplanes—anything with asset management is very hot. 

Tony: With the industrial portion of manufacturing, the technology on the factory floor is 30 to 40 years old. That’s slowly opening up. There is money to be made in the data that is involved in manufacturing. That is a data rich environment. 

Mary Beth: Simplify the complexities with your partners, be innovative, and finally, don’t be afraid to go after something you think is there. 

Tags:  2016 ASAP Global Alliance Summit  alliance executive  Alliance Managers  data rich  IBM  innovative  IoT  Jan Twombly  Joan Meltzer  Mary Beth Hall  partnering  Partners  Schneider Electric  The Rhythm of Business  Tony DeSpirto  Verizon 

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 
Page 2 of 3
1  |  2  |  3
For more information email us at info@strategic-alliances.org or call +1-781-562-1630