Comments on: Forget the Shortcuts: Creating a Truly Innovative Biotech Culture http://www.xconomy.com/seattle/2009/07/27/forget-the-shortcuts-creating-a-truly-innovative-biotech-culture/ Business + Technology in the Exponential Economy Sat, 11 Feb 2012 03:54:18 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4 By: Stewart Lyman http://www.xconomy.com/seattle/2009/07/27/forget-the-shortcuts-creating-a-truly-innovative-biotech-culture/comment-page-1/#comment-87782 Stewart Lyman Tue, 20 Oct 2009 15:47:27 +0000 http://www.xconomy.com/?p=35110#comment-87782 Sorry I didn't make this clearer. My point in this case was indeed not focused on innovation but branding and marketing. Yes, changing the products to say they are made by Genentech instead of Roche illustrates that the company wants to be associated more favorably with the biotech world and especially Genentech, which has a reputation for a highly innovative culture and products. This was something done for public consumption. But I doubt that the public at large paid any attention to Roche's switch from PhRMA to BIO, or was aware of the move of scientists from the East Coast to the West. Roche may not be successful in remaking their culture, but from where I am watching it appears they recognize the need to change their research programs internally, and are at least hopeful that they can get the Genentech "magic" to rub off on the other parts of the company. Sometimes adopting the trappings of a successful culture can help to drive a change in that direction. Time will tell if they are successful or not. Sorry I didn’t make this clearer. My point in this case was indeed not focused on innovation but branding and marketing. Yes, changing the products to say they are made by Genentech instead of Roche illustrates that the company wants to be associated more favorably with the biotech world and especially Genentech, which has a reputation for a highly innovative culture and products. This was something done for public consumption. But I doubt that the public at large paid any attention to Roche’s switch from PhRMA to BIO, or was aware of the move of scientists from the East Coast to the West. Roche may not be successful in remaking their culture, but from where I am watching it appears they recognize the need to change their research programs internally, and are at least hopeful that they can get the Genentech “magic” to rub off on the other parts of the company. Sometimes adopting the trappings of a successful culture can help to drive a change in that direction. Time will tell if they are successful or not.

]]> By: CMCguy http://www.xconomy.com/seattle/2009/07/27/forget-the-shortcuts-creating-a-truly-innovative-biotech-culture/comment-page-1/#comment-87776 CMCguy Tue, 20 Oct 2009 15:00:52 +0000 http://www.xconomy.com/?p=35110#comment-87776 Stewart I don't understand the point of your follow-up comment on this re-branding name choice. I think this all has little if anything to do with Innovation but more so I see likely as a "clever" Marketing strategy to disassociate from public/political negatively viewed "Big Pharma" label to a more favorably perceived "Biotech" business. Roche may adopt some Genentech ways, particularly for certain areas (namely Biologics), but at its core doubtful will really change much. Stewart I don’t understand the point of your follow-up comment on this re-branding name choice. I think this all has little if anything to do with Innovation but more so I see likely as a “clever” Marketing strategy to disassociate from public/political negatively viewed “Big Pharma” label to a more favorably perceived “Biotech” business. Roche may adopt some Genentech ways, particularly for certain areas (namely Biologics), but at its core doubtful will really change much.

]]> By: Stewart Lyman http://www.xconomy.com/seattle/2009/07/27/forget-the-shortcuts-creating-a-truly-innovative-biotech-culture/comment-page-1/#comment-87730 Stewart Lyman Mon, 19 Oct 2009 22:16:37 +0000 http://www.xconomy.com/?p=35110#comment-87730 To further illustrate the conversion of Roche into Genentech, it was announced in mid October that the Genentech brand will replace the Roche brand on all drugs that are sold in the United States. This includes small molecules, Roche's bread and butter for many, many years. To further illustrate the conversion of Roche into Genentech, it was announced in mid October that the Genentech brand will replace the Roche brand on all drugs that are sold in the United States. This includes small molecules, Roche’s bread and butter for many, many years.

]]> By: CMCguy http://www.xconomy.com/seattle/2009/07/27/forget-the-shortcuts-creating-a-truly-innovative-biotech-culture/comment-page-1/#comment-72602 CMCguy Wed, 29 Jul 2009 20:53:46 +0000 http://www.xconomy.com/?p=35110#comment-72602 You make many good points and especially agree with the getting the right mix of people as crucial. With that in mind there have been much failure in biotechs where good innovative science did not translate to satisfactory outcomes during development or achieve sufficient financial backing because did not bring on people with correct expertise to guide or support required growth. Often the "old organizations" overtly resists the changes, new functions or knowledgeable newcomers that are necessary in such an evolution to an actual company, not a research lab. A group of bench workers tend to know little about what development is and even less about finances. Although I do think big pharma has largely lost its way in recent decades, because as suggested seems to be much less science driven/lead (also more blockbuster blinded), I think there is a core of highly skilled and expert personnel that exists at most places who could be innovative and better enable the drug development activities You make many good points and especially agree with the getting the right mix of people as crucial. With that in mind there have been much failure in biotechs where good innovative science did not translate to satisfactory outcomes during development or achieve sufficient financial backing because did not bring on people with correct expertise to guide or support required growth. Often the “old organizations” overtly resists the changes, new functions or knowledgeable newcomers that are necessary in such an evolution to an actual company, not a research lab. A group of bench workers tend to know little about what development is and even less about finances.

Although I do think big pharma has largely lost its way in recent decades, because as suggested seems to be much less science driven/lead (also more blockbuster blinded), I think there is a core of highly skilled and expert personnel that exists at most places who could be innovative and better enable the drug development activities

]]> By: I Am Biotech: Discover. Share. Discuss. http://www.xconomy.com/seattle/2009/07/27/forget-the-shortcuts-creating-a-truly-innovative-biotech-culture/comment-page-1/#comment-72396 I Am Biotech: Discover. Share. Discuss. Tue, 28 Jul 2009 15:32:10 +0000 http://www.xconomy.com/?p=35110#comment-72396 [...] CREATING A TRULY INNOVATIVE BIOTECH CULTURE – Stewart Lyman wrote a very interesting article for Xconomy. He has been watching the acquisition of Genentech by Roche very closely, and has been pleasantly [...] [...] CREATING A TRULY INNOVATIVE BIOTECH CULTURE – Stewart Lyman wrote a very interesting article for Xconomy. He has been watching the acquisition of Genentech by Roche very closely, and has been pleasantly [...]

]]>