Does Revamping Big Pharma Make Them More Efficent?
Earlier this month, DrugResearcher.com had an article on revamping at major pharmaceutical companies.
An import part of the article is in the last paragraph. GlaxoSmithkline reorganized their research into seven Centres of Excellence for Drug Discovery years ago and I don’t know that it has increased their overall productivity. It may gets more drugs into development, but the more important issue of making sure the ones that do go into development have the greatest possible probability of success.
I’ve seen this before and I don’t have much faith in these “reorganizations”. Inevitably, these sorts of moves don’t make major contributions to the bottom line and sometimes actually make matters worse. I personally think that the culture and huge bureaucracies are more to blame for the lack of research results. That isn’t to say re-orgs can’t make thing better, that can be. I just think too many times they don’t pay off.
I’ve also said that just moving the bottlenecks of development from one place to another is not the answer. The bottlenecks need to be removed from the system entirely, rather than just moved from place to place without increasing the overall output.
Technorati Tags: GlaxoSmithKline, Roche
Related Posts:
Bookmark it with:
| 
del.icio.us
| 
Digg it
| 
Furl
| 
Simpy
| 
Spurl
| 
My Yahoo!
|
