Search results

Life science innovation is a complex domain of professional work including scientific know-how, regulatory expertise, and commercialization and marketing skills. While the investment in basic life science research has soared over the last decades, resulting in a substantial growth in scientific know-how, the life science industry (and most notably pharmaceutical companies) unfortunately reports a meagre innovative output. In order to counteract waning innovation productivity, new organizational initiatives seek to better bridge and bond existing life science resources. The purpose of this paper is to report a case study of bio venture hub initiative located in a major multinational pharmaceutical company.

Drawing on institutional work literature, an empirical study based on case study methodology demonstrates that new life science collaborations demand both external and internal institutional work to challenge conventional wisdom, making the legal protection of intellectual properties a key factor in the field and that in turn complicates much firm collaborations. Such institutional work questions existing practices and opens up new pathways in life science innovation work.

The bio hub initiative, which in considerable ways breaks with the traditional in-house and new drug development activities located in enclosed R&D departments and in collaboration with clinical research organizations, demands extensive institutional work and political savoir-faire to create legitimacy and operational stability. Not only are there practical, legal, and regulatory issues to handle, but the long-term legitimacy and financial stability of the bio hub initiative demands support from both internal and external significant actors and stakeholders. The external institutional work in turn demands a set of skills in the bio venture hub’s management team, including detailed scientific and regulatory expertise, communicative skills, and the charisma and story-telling capacities to convince and win over sceptics. The internal institutional work, in turn, demands an understanding of extant legal frameworks and fiscal policies, the ability to handle a series of practical and administrative routines (i.e. how to procure the chemicals used in the laboratory work or how to make substance libraries available), and to serve as a “match-maker” between the bio venture hub companies and the experts located at the hosting company.

The case study provides first-hand empirical data from an unique initiative in the pharmaceutical industry to create novel collaborative spaces where small-sized life science companies can take advantage of the mature firm’s expertise and stock of know-how, also benefitting the hosting company as new collaborations unfold and providing a detailed understanding of ongoing life science innovation projects. In this view, all agencies embedded in institutional field (i.e. what has been addressed as “institutional work” – the active work to create, maintain, or disrupt institutions) both to some extent destabilize existing practise and create new practices better aligned with new conditions and relations between relevant and mutually dependent organizations. The empirical study supports the need for incorporating the concept of agency in institutional theory and thus contributes to the literature on institutional work by showing how one of the industries, the pharmaceutical industry, being strongly fortified by intellectual property rights (i.e. a variety of patents), inhibiting the free sharing of scientific and regulatory know-how and expertise, is in fact now being in the process of rethinking the “closed-doors” tradition of the industry. That is, the institutional work conducted in the bio venture hub is indicative of new ideas entering Big Pharma.

Business accelerators have recently received increasing attention as important cogs in business ecosystem development. However, their exact role in the ecosystem is not yet well known, especially outside the IT sector. The purpose of this study is, therefore, twofold: to determine the position of life science accelerators in the business ecosystem and the attributes of support for companies and to identify key features of the life science accelerators that contribute to the change in business ecosystems.

The authors offer an exploratory case study of five life science business accelerators and analyze the main factors affecting the companies and the whole business ecosystem. The authors build upon the scarce literature on business accelerators and consider a new type of accelerator that specializes in life science projects and study its role in the transformation and evolution of the life science industry.

The authors have defined the role and key parameters of life science accelerators that influence the existing business ecosystems: (1) cooperation with other regions and countries, (2) development of entrepreneurial skills among participants of the business accelerators program and (3) a project on demand-based approach.

The key parameters of the life science accelerators allow to concentrate these efforts on the activities that are most demanded by the market. Business accelerators can increase the created value for other program participants.

Passion and interest are the two principal drivers of competitive capitalism, and reconciling the two is conducive to a dynamic and welfare-generating economic system. On the level of the individual, the same categories can be applied to examining, for example, career choices, at times violating propositions regarding rational expectations as some categories of work include lower economic compensation or higher levels of risk than would be attractive to the median job applicant. The purpose of this paper is to examine how venture workers, employees of life, thinly capitalize science ventures, justify their career choices and how they act in order to create economic security for themselves and their families.

The study is based on a qualitative data collection methodology and reports on empirical research material from a study of co-workers at life science start-ups. The sample includes salaried employees working at venture capital-backed start-up companies in the life science sector.

The study indicates that passionate preferences regarding, for example, meaningful work in collaboration with peers, and the ability to participate in the creation of a new venture, have overshadowed the downside risks and the lower level of economic compensation vis-à-vis comparable work. Such findings indicate that deeply meaningful work is a useful analytical category, and that combinations of the favorable market pricing of skills and experiences, as well as state-funded welfare mechanisms, cushioning some of the market risk that employees are exposed to, will provide opportunities for venture labor, i.e. work done at thinly capitalized firms, such as start-ups, per se contributing to a dynamic industry.

The study contributes to the innovation management literature as it examines the key role of salaried venture workers, i.e. workers that do not hold contracts, granting them the right to compensation when venture capital investors make an exit. In addition, the study also discusses the literature on deeply meaningful work, stressing that this is a useful analytical category.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the different assessments of a particular industry and its ability to innovative, renew and prosper, but also to look into the underlying assumptions that are hiding behind the systemic approaches utilized in these assessments. The point of departure is an empirical puzzle: one group of studies presents a rather optimistic view of the Swedish life science industry and its ability to economize on research, policy and industrial investments. Another group of studies presents much a darker view, questioning the capacity of new companies to reach economic endurance, as well as the possibility of keeping the actually successful companies within the country. At a first sight it appears as if the two groups of studies are resting on a common theoretical ground: all seem to depart from a systemic innovation perspective that challenges the idea of an independent business landscape.

The difference between the assessments becomes comprehensible once the authors allow for a variety of systemic approaches in innovation thinking. The authors propose an ideal-typical distinction between two types of system perspectives; those that view technology as entangled in its environment and those that view technology as disentangled from its environment. The authors use the national innovation system (NIS) and the industrial network (IMP) approaches to exemplify the two perspectives.

An implication of the study is that the term “systemic perspective” is very broad and encompassing, something that in turn points to the importance of being clear about what the authors mean with a system, but also with what the theoretical assumptions focus on and abstract away from.

The ideal-typical distinction between two types of system perspectives; those that view technology as entangled in its environment and those that view technology as disentangled from its environment. The authors use the NIS and the IMP approaches to exemplify the two perspectives.

Increasing competition in global markets requires many countries to seek new growth sectors. In addition, the nature of competition is changing. This paper applies the business ecosystem concept and studies San Diego as a spatial health and life sciences ecosystem. The purpose of this paper is to identify issues that should be considered in design of innovation policies and regional industry development.

The research approach is built on a literature review of business ecosystems and spatial innovation. The empirical study is based on semi-structured interviews, observations, and information gathering and verification during field research.

The results include a description of the ecosystem structure and dynamics. This paper demonstrates the bottom-up nature of San Diego’s health and life sciences ecosystem without a dominant lead actor, and presents prerequisites for fostering spatial ecosystems.

A single case may not be able to offer a generalized picture of this topic. However, the study raises several considerations for researchers and decision-makers involved in innovation policy design. Future work should extend the study and involve other spatial and substance contexts to compare findings and to pursue a more generic picture of innovation ecosystems and networks.

This paper demonstrates that applying the concept of business ecosystems to the spatial context provides new insights in terms of dynamic mechanisms and factors contributing to economic growth in a particular location. Understanding how to facilitate the creation of successful spatial ecosystems is in the focal point of innovation policies.

The purpose of this study is to identify the factors that contribute to the successful implementation and management of sustainable innovation in research-intensive sectors such as the life sciences industry.

The study was conducted through a combination of two methods. The first was qualitative interviews of 21 sustainability experts and leaders in the life sciences industry who were responsible for implementing sustainable innovation. They were selected through nonprobabilistic purposive sampling. The second method was thematic content analysis using the MAXQDA software.

The study identified that successful implementation of sustainable innovation in research-intensive firms begins with the alignment of the executive vision for sustainability with the business objectives of the research-intensive firm. Furthermore, implementation of sustainability practices is identified as a function of organizational reconfigurations that facilitate purposeful inflow and outflow of ideas and knowledge between internal firm resources and external stakeholders, anchored by the objectives of the research-intensive firm.

The study explicated factors only within life sciences industry based on qualitative interviews. The study offers scope for cross-sector quantitative evaluation.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is among the first studies to systematically delineate the underlying factors that govern successful implementation of sustainable innovation in research-intensive industries, through integration of the resource-based view and stakeholder theory and thereby provide a framework for research-intensive organizations to implement sustainable innovation practices.

An investigation of the marketing approaches for biomedical science small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and organisations in the United Kingdom (UK) was carried out; the research question is as follows: Should the marketing approaches for biomedical science SMEs change as their product or service moves along the development life cycle?

An online questionnaire was used, which petitioned biomedical science SMEs and organisations in the UK to investigate the marketing tactics or approaches used for the different products and services they offered; the results were analysed by comparing the results to recognised marketing approaches in the literature and by mapping those approaches against the established technology readiness levels (TRLs).

A direct relationship was seen between the status of a product or service in relation to its development life cycle, and therefore the relevant TRL of the product and service, and the appropriate marketing approach for that product or service.

This paper offers a contribution to the literature, in which a theoretical framework is proposed for determining the appropriate marketing approach for biomedical science SMEs by understanding the maturity of the products offered by a company using the established TRL. The theoretical framework maps the TRL against known marketing approaches; this framework should be used as a guide for biomedical science SMEs as a tool to refine and evolve their overall marketing approach as the product portfolio matures along the TRL.

This paper aims to identify inducement and blocking mechanisms which impact the development of the life sciences innovation system in Finland. Innovation system analysis of emerging technologies is important for the design of technology-specific innovation policy measures to promote desirable futures

This exploratory study uses a functional technological innovation system analysis framework designed to identify policy goals for emerging technological fields. The data consist of 33 qualitative face-to-face interviews with senior managers and decision-makers. Best practices are identified from the San Francisco Bay Area and the Finnish life sciences innovation system is analyzed in detail.

The Finnish system has a good capability to perform top-level basic research, but the commercial aspect is largely missing because of the lack of business know-how, small size of the domestic market, networking failures, scarcity of funding and poor public image.

The two regions have different scopes which prevents direct comparisons between them.

This study applies the technological innovation system model to the life sciences industry. It provides new information on the characteristics of the industry and factors affecting its dynamics. The results can be applied for policy design by policy makers.

Convergence in the life sciences and health care industries – the combining of two or more of drugs, diagnostics and devices to create an improved health care product – is leading to new opportunities for business growth and product differentiation. This report aims to examine the issues around convergence, including the drivers, risks and regulatory issues.

This report is based on industry and literature reviews and builds on research carried out by Deloitte Research on the life sciences and health care industry.

The paper finds that technological advances, evolving health care needs and shifting market conditions are creating favourable conditions for convergence. Developing convergent technologies, however, has risks and uncertainties that life sciences companies need to consider along with regulatory issues. Cross‐sector partnerships are becoming more of a necessity and reality for health care firms, who have to be aware of the many operational and ownership issues involved.

Market pressures and opportunities are motivating life sciences firms of all types and sizes to invest in convergence. Convergent technology is transforming cardiovascular care, orthopedic treatment, tissue wound management and other clinical areas by creating solutions that are less invasive, less painful, more patient‐specific, more convenient and sometimes more affordable. Consequently, players from all sectors are entering the competition for R&D assets, setting up new rivalries and alliances.

In mapping the many factors surrounding convergence in the life sciences industry, this report enables firms to evaluate their own opportunities and priorities. It proposes a framework that companies can use to decide which pathway to convergence is best for them.

After a successful transition from a projects-based IT business services company to a platform-driven analytics company, Saama's core leadership team gathered in 2017 to brainstorm the next phase of its growth. The year before, the team had decided to narrow its target market to the life sciences vertical. Saama now had to decide how to execute on this focused strategy by choosing a growth pathway within the life sciences vertical. Saama's leadership team was considering three alternatives: acquiring new customer accounts, developing existing customer accounts, or developing new products by harnessing artificial intelligence (AI) and blockchain technologies. The team had to evaluate these growth pathways in terms of both short- and long-term revenue potential, as well as their potential for sustaining Saama's competitive advantage.