Transcript Neurogen Corporation - BEACON: Biomedical Engineering

NEUROGEN CORPORATION
Alliance Management: View
from the Smaller Side of the Alliance
Thomas A. Pitler, Ph.D.
VP Business Development
Alliances often fail because partners are unable
to work together effectively
Foremost Cause of Alliance Failure
Poor or Damaged
Relationships
Between Firms
Poor Strategy
and Business
Planning
64%
30%
6%
Bad Legal and Financial
Terms and Conditions
Common Causes for Relationship Issues
›Breakdowns in trust
›Missed milestones
›Build-up of negative
›Lack of learning/innovation
partisan perceptions
›Questioning of one
another’s motives
›Festering conflicts
›Project delays
›Dissatisfaction with
partner’s performance
›Unresponsiveness to
›Little joint problem solving
changes in the market place
›Feelings of
›Perception that alliance is
disrespect/coercion
not adding value
“Absent Facts People Make up Stories”
Launching Alliance Relationships: Key
Objectives
Contractual
Commitment
•A clear
understanding of
the negotiated
agreement
•A shared picture
of all parties’
scientific and
business goals for
the arrangement
Relationship
Challenges and
protocols
•A common
understanding of
key challenges
•A set of procedural
agreements that
define the basic
operating
assumptions for
working together
•Collaborative
conflict resolution
methods and
escalation
procedures
•Standard
relationship audit
Alliance Work
plan
•Defining a joint
Enabling Skills
and Mindset
•A common set of
work plan for
scientific and
commercial
activities
experiences and mindset
for effectively working
together
•Clearly understood
relationships through
face-to-face interaction
and fun activities
roles and
responsibilities,
timelines and
priorities
•Building personal
Launching Alliance Relationships: Key
Objectives
Contractual
Commitment
•A clear
understanding of
the negotiated
agreement
•A shared picture
of all parties’
scientific and
business goals for
the arrangement
Relationship
Challenges and
protocols
•A common
understanding of
key challenges
•A set of
procedural
agreements that
define the basic
operating
assumptions for
working together
•Collaborative
conflict resolution
methods and
escalation
procedures
•Standard
relationship audit
Alliance Work
plan
•Defining a joint
Enabling Skills
and Mindset
•A common set of
work plan for
scientific and
commercial
activities
experiences and mindset
for effectively working
together
•Clearly understood
relationships through
face-to-face interaction
and fun activities
roles and
responsibilities,
timelines and
priorities
•Building personal
RACI matrices provide a useful tool to ensure that all
stakeholders are aware of their role in any decision
Responsible:
The individual(s) who performs a task. The doer, responsible for
recommendation, action and implementation.
Accountable:
The individual (s) who is accountable for ensuring alignment with the
overall plans and ensures the quality/ performance/ outcome of the
activity.
Consulted:
The individual(s) who are asked to provide input and/or insight prior to an
action being taken or a recommendation being made.
Informed:
The individual(s) who need to be informed when an action is taken or a
decision is made but does not need to be consulted.
ALLIANCE MANAGEMENT WORKING GROUP
Decision making roles and responsibilities
Decision
Responsible
Financial reporting unanticipated funding
(e.g. FTE #, 3rd party exp.)

Communication of structural
changes to the
organization (e.g.
reorganization which
could materially impact
project)


Filing patents for new
inventions (e.g. timing,
competitive strategy, etc.)

Press releases (e.g.
milestone achieved,
compound failed,
compound progression)


Project
leaders
Accountable


Consulted
JRC
P-Functional
heads




JRC
Committee
Chairs
N-Rep


P-Head of
Licensing
N-CEO
Patent
attorneys

JRC



N- Bus.
Dev.
P-Corp.
Licensing,
Public
Affairs

N-CEO

P- Legal




Informed
N-EMC
PFunctional
heads


Project
team
Finance
P-Corp.
Licensing
N- Bus
Dev

Other party
Patent
dept
Project
leaders


P- Corp.
Licensing
N- Bus Dev
N- EMC
P- Public
Affairs
Project
Leaders
JRC


ROW
N- Board
Relationship Survey: Quantitative Results
Questions
Average Responses
Neurogen
Partner
Operational Metrics
1 - Roles and responsibilities are clearly defined
5.31
4.80
2 - The work plan is well defined
5.31
4.93
3 - We have a clear understanding of what needs to get done and by when
5.08
4.80
4 - We are coordinating effectively across multiple functions, sites and
geographies
5.25
4.47
5 - Decision making is efficient
5.25
4.38
6 - Decision making is effective
5.17
4.79
7 - All necessary information for decision making is communicated from the
project team to the governance committee
5.33
4.75
8 - Decisions are well communicated from the governance committee to the
project team
5.10
4.60
9 - We are focusing our attention on those things that will help us meet our
overall goals
5.17
5.07
10 - We have met all contract and work plan objectives on time
5.30
4.58
11 - We are on track to meet future contract, work plan objectives on time
5.20
4.83
12 - Each party is resourcing the collaboration appropriately for effective
execution of work plan
5.09
4.40
Quantitative Results con’t
Relationship Metrics
14 - We have a positive, successful working relationship
5.58
5.29
15 - We are working together in accordance with operating protocols
5.36
5.00
16 - When we disagree, we discuss and resolve the issue based on relevant, objective
criteria
5.11
4.91
17 - My ideas, input are welcomed and considered by our partner
5.25
5.15
18 - We have access to info, data, updates as needed
4.67
3.85
19 - Information and data are volunteered, shared in open and transparent manner
5.27
4.79
20 - When we have specific questions, we are able to contact and get a timely, appropriate
answer from our direct counterpart(s)
5.27
5.00
21 - Our meetings are a good use of my time - we are clear about purposes, participation
and outcomes
5.18
4.17
Quantitative Question Results – Radar Chart
Neurogen-Partner Alliance Health
Roles
6
5
Communication / Openness
Planning
4
Relationship
Operational
3
2
Conflict Management
Team Coordination
1
0
Relationship Strength
Decision Making
Resources
Neurogen
Partner
Performance Management
Rating Scale
6
Strongly
Agree
5
4
3
2
1
Strongly
Disagree
0
No
Opinion
NEUROGEN CORPORATION
DRUG DISCOVERY
PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT
NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS
PAIN
METABOLIC DISEASES
INFLAMMATION