It was a pleasure to present at the Open Innovation in Pharmaceutical R&D conference last week in Amsterdam. What strikes me in conferences like this is the diversity of ways open innovation is manifested. While some seem to criticize that “everything is now open innovation”, I’ve come to appreciate the diversity. To me it isn’t about what it is called, but rather what it accomplishes.
While diversity of approaches exist, it still seems to me that the focus of OI in pharma R&D remains in research, not development. As I outline in my presentation, I believe there is not only a position for OI in development but an essential need to change, and yes, disrupt our business model. Contrary to gut reactions, this is NOT a challenge to the current IP/patent centric model. In fact, it depends on clear IP and the patent foundation coming into clinical development provides a clear platform on which OI can operate. In the same manner, clear commons licensing enables collaborative interaction around public information.
Ours is a strategy of raising all boats and helping transform the industry models of clinical development. We welcome the diversity of ideas and implementation models. For it won’t be one company, one model, or one frame of reference that will change our current, well-entrenched business model. It will be through creative, collaborative efforts that new models for development emerge. This is why we think of our work as a series of experiments or projects. Have ideas and an interest in working with us? Drop us a note and let’s figure out how we can be complementary. The patient is waiting.
Once again ~240 innovation leaders gathered for the 3rd Sage Congress in San Francisco. I’ve been fortunate to attend all 3 congresses and found this one to be the most engaging and inspiring. I agree with Xconomy’s post on Sage moving from thinking to doing, yet I found myself wanting more.
The 2 days together at Sage Congress is always full of energy and incredibly interesting people. This congress brought in a more diverse set of speakers including an evening of Unplugged where 19 people gave passionate 6 minute inspiring stories. By far, the most moving stories were personal stories where patients lives were impacted and changed.
Here are my top 10 reflections on the Congress.
10. There are a lot of willing people – the challenge and opportunity is servant leadership for collaborative progress. Thanks, Stephen.
9. We need to stop chasing the same things and truly innovate on the margins. Thanks again, Aled.
8. Time away from the office among like-yet-diverse-minded colleagues is refreshing.
7. Don’t stereotype or limit the crowd. Just take a look at Adrien Treuille’s presentation on crowdsourcing science for proof.
Most of what we see for open innovation (OI) in pharmaceutical R&D lies in research, often under the rubrique of “pre-competitive”. While pre-competitive open innovation such as Lilly’s OIDD program is valid, I believe there is also a case and need for OI in the “competitive” landscape of clinical development. (It’s all competitive in some manner.)
On 26 April, I will share my insights and case for bringing OI to the “D” of R&D. My presentation is entitled Accelerating Clinical Development through Open Innovation and will help kickoff the 2-day Fleming Groupe’s Open Innovation in Pharmaceutical R&D conference. I’m also looking forward to chairing the opening session and connecting with fellow European innovation leaders.
Our Clinical Open Innovation is founded on the belief that drug development processes must improve, and that open innovation methods can be used to make clinical development better and faster. It is not a question of should we, but rather how can we work together to “raise all boats” and transform the clinical development processes for the industry. Our program is focused on clearly licensed Commons, webified data and motivated people, in order to turn on a generative knowledge system for clinical development knowledge. For more details, check out our whitepaper and explore our first tool, Clinical Collections.
Please find the slide deck shared below, and I look forward to your feedback.
Jerry Matczak is the Community Manager for the Lilly Clinical Open Innovation Team, responsible for connecting people to the team’s efforts. He has a BA in English & Philosophy from Allegheny College and a MS degree in Information Science from the University of Pittsburgh.
His IT experience at Eli Lilly combined with a variety of sales, marketing and technology roles in startup and consulting environments provide a diverse set of experiences that help him join people & technology. Jerry is equal part translator, sense-maker, community-builder and networker, with a common-sense understanding of technology and people.
You have degrees in English and Philosophy as well as Information Science. What ties those together?
In high school my friends and I did a lot of reading, talking and thinking – you know, solving the world’s problems in the basement. We had a strong bent towards the arts, humanities and academia, and, to some degree, a bit of disregard for business and the “real world.” So, I got my English and Philosophy degree and entered the workforce. I worked multiple jobs in bars and restaurants, department stores, on a sound crew for Pittsburgh’s Department of Parks and Recreation, and for the University of Pittsburgh.
Then, I met some people enrolled in Pitt’s Information Science program. The program had a technology and information foundation, but required cognitive science and humanities credits to get in. I got interested, applied, and was accepted. I learned about technology and computer science, but more importantly I became attuned to the people aspect of information management. I started to see how information affects lives.