Life Science Strategic Partnering Bottlenecks & Mitigations
The hot topic that’s heightened in the past couple of years for many teams across early biotech, techbio, and medtech platforms is the optimization of cash runways (and ideally valuation of asset(s)/organization).
The typical corporate business development approach includes de-risking portfolios through strategic investment partners/co-development collaborations or monetizing non-strategic assets (out-license/divestments), among others.
The common challenge for many lies in the cycle time of navigating to and closing target counterparts. Small teams driving pioneering & emerging technologies ( or cases where there’s a wide range of future possibilities), are often bandwidth constrained and consumed in ‘flying & building a plane’.
During which, organizations begin to question their degree of collective progress in what may feel like deal funnels in limbo (if any deals/too many), and/or an underlying sense of being ‘behind’ in strategic alignment, in a less (what seems) ad-hoc ‘direction’.
Observations (from buy & sell-side) over 20 years in working with teams to mobilize partnering efforts or undervalued assets, the following are top 3 consistently common bottlenecks in life science business development initiatives and their mitigations. (subject to specific assets/organization)
Strategic Partnering & De-Risking Initiatives |
3 Common Bottlenecks & Mitigations
(for assets/organizations with less clearly defined markets, eg. Pioneering & Emerging Technologies)
Common Bottleneck #1: Goldilocks Limbo - Managing risk by
‘Boiling the Ocean’ and casting a broad net (dilution of focus of small teams, with limited traction in any given direction) or
‘Analysis Paralysis’ decision-making limbo
Mitigation: Internal/External Process with objectives:
Prioritize Team/Resources on activities with greatest strategic impact/ value and likelihood of deal (manage dilution of focus)
Sustain timely strategic momentum with Decision-Tree/Stage Gates over a trajectory with approximate targeted outcome timeframe (ie. bus dev coxswain tool, both internally/externally)
Leverage decision science frameworks to align internal & external Interdisciplinary/Matrix Team leadership (ie. Herd cats, align vectors, etc)
For internal stage gates, find a way that works within your leadership structure to balance SME heuristics with data analytics – similar in spirit to works of Daniel Kahneman, Nobel Laureate behavioral economist/decision-making expert, author of “ Thinking, Fast and Slow”.
(side note: good Daniel Kahneman podcast interview
Common Bottleneck #2 : Cliff Note or Kitchen Sink “Positioning” Managing risk with
Catch-all broad deck and/or data room – leaving your target to discern what is valuable to them.
Catch-all mass distribution of limited information
Many key target partners/investors likely see A LOT of presentations/1-pagers – leaving your partner to do your homework has potential to limit degree of engagement and/or valuation and drag out timelines (and subsequently decrease likelihood of engagement). The easier you can make your target counterpart’s job in shepherding your deal through their stage gates, the smoother the discussions.
Mitigation: Craft Targeted Value Propositions with streamlined Data Rooms:
Strategically align with target partner’s business model pain points/interests and desired impact, in THEIR language/terminology, whenever relevant (If you’re in Techbio/Medtech targeting Pharma, when applicable leverage Pharma & Patient relevant terminology.) - similar to SEO, take investor/partner’s/buyer’s persona.
Leverage polished visuals to your advantage, over eyecharts to your disadvantage.
Common Bottleneck #3 : Limited Engagement of Relevant Decision Makers/Stakeholders
Mitigation: Establish Counterpart Champion and ‘Why Now’ Positioning
Prioritize and maintain momentum with decision-making champions with an aligned sense of Urgency on both sides of deal
Leverage social proof (influencers/mavens/KOLs or other advocates) of your assets, as appropriate.
Decent progress can be made with two of the three in place, ideally you’ll have all three.
For example, if there’s secured key stakeholders/champions (eg. CEOs of both orgs) with an aligned sense of urgency around a solid value proposition, a formal process may be less critical, (yet still important). With the right process and a solid value proposition, there’s greater chance of finding your way to the right stakeholders.
Business development progress is not necessarily indicative of your asset(s)’ inherent value - sometimes it’s simply a matter of the right packaging (business relevant & engaging value proposition/vision) of the scientific merit of your program/asset with WD40 (process & focused momentum, right stakeholders with aligned timelines) to mobilize your internal/external discussions.
