academic institutions and industry: bridging the gap

6
Editorial 10.1517/17460441.3.4.369 © 2008 Informa UK Ltd ISSN 1746-0441 369 Academic institutions and industry: bridging the gap Karl G Hofbauer University of Basel, Biozentrum/Pharmazentrum, Klingelbergstrasse 50-70, CH 4056 Basel, Switzerland Academic institutions and industry are separate entities but strongly depend on each other. As innovation is their common interest, the exchange of scientific information and of highly qualified scientists is essential for their success. However, there are serious obstacles for the mobility of scientists between academic institutions and industry. These institutions have different goals and objectives that determine the working conditions. In the present article, several terms describing the characteristics of work in either institu- tion are presented and discussed. Whereas academic life seems to proceed in circles around a topic of interest, life in industry may be best described by vectors that can rapidly change size and direction. Scientists moving between academic institutions and industry need a high degree of flexibility to adapt to the different environments. Keywords: drug development, drug discovery, pharmaceutical industry, translational research, university Expert Opin. Drug Discov. (2008) 3(4):369-373 1. Introduction This article provides some personal views of life in academic institutions and industry that are derived from my experience at two different universities and in a pharmaceutical company. I have spent my entire professional life in preclinical research. When I am talking about university, this means to me research in a faculty of natural sciences or medicine. When I am talking about industry, it means preclinical drug discovery in a large pharmaceutical company. I will limit the scope of this article to the exchange of scientists between academic institu- tions and industry. Personally I have crossed this border twice and spent an almost equal number of years on either side. I hope that my reflections may help other scientists to find out whether and when they should move between academic institutions and industry, two entities that are quite different but closely linked to each other. Those readers who would like to learn more about general academic institutions–industry issues are directed to references [1-5], and those who are interested in other scientists’ personal experience will find more information in references [6-9]. Those who prefer a comprehensive analysis of the topic by a working group of the European Commission may consult reference [10]. 2. The gap: common interests but separate entities Academic institutions and industry are separate entities but share two resources that are essential for their success – people and science. Although academic institutions and industry will keep a distance, people can move from one side to the other and science is continually exchanged. Both institutions need qualified personnel, that is, well-trained scientists and technical staff, to achieve their goals. The spectrum of qualifications may be different in industry and academic 1. Introduction 2. The gap: common interests but separate entities 3. Bridging the gap: science and people 4. Expert opinion Expert Opin. Drug Discov. Downloaded from informahealthcare.com by RMIT University on 10/01/13 For personal use only.

Upload: karl-g

Post on 18-Dec-2016

212 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Editorial

10.1517/17460441.3.4.369 © 2008 Informa UK Ltd ISSN 1746-0441 369

Academic institutions and industry: bridging the gap Karl G Hofbauer University of Basel, Biozentrum/Pharmazentrum, Klingelbergstrasse 50-70, CH 4056 Basel, Switzerland

Academic institutions and industry are separate entities but strongly depend on each other. As innovation is their common interest, the exchange of scientific information and of highly qualified scientists is essential for their success. However, there are serious obstacles for the mobility of scientists between academic institutions and industry. These institutions have different goals and objectives that determine the working conditions. In the present article, several terms describing the characteristics of work in either institu-tion are presented and discussed. Whereas academic life seems to proceed in circles around a topic of interest, life in industry may be best described by vectors that can rapidly change size and direction. Scientists moving between academic institutions and industry need a high degree of flexibility to adapt to the different environments.

Keywords: drug development , drug discovery , pharmaceutical industry , translational research , university

Expert Opin. Drug Discov. (2008) 3(4):369-373

1. Introduction

This article provides some personal views of life in academic institutions and industry that are derived from my experience at two different universities and in a pharmaceutical company. I have spent my entire professional life in preclinical research. When I am talking about university, this means to me research in a faculty of natural sciences or medicine. When I am talking about industry, it means preclinical drug discovery in a large pharmaceutical company. I will limit the scope of this article to the exchange of scientists between academic institu-tions and industry. Personally I have crossed this border twice and spent an almost equal number of years on either side. I hope that my reflections may help other scientists to find out whether and when they should move between academic institutions and industry, two entities that are quite different but closely linked to each other.

Those readers who would like to learn more about general academic institutions–industry issues are directed to references [1-5] , and those who are interested in other scientists’ personal experience will find more information in references [6-9] . Those who prefer a comprehensive analysis of the topic by a working group of the European Commission may consult reference [10] .

2. The gap: common interests but separate entities

Academic institutions and industry are separate entities but share two resources that are essential for their success – people and science. Although academic institutions and industry will keep a distance, people can move from one side to the other and science is continually exchanged. Both institutions need qualified personnel, that is, well-trained scientists and technical staff, to achieve their goals. The spectrum of qualifications may be different in industry and academic

1. Introduction

2. The gap: common interests

but separate entities

3. Bridging the gap: science

and people

4. Expert opinion

Exp

ert O

pin.

Dru

g D

isco

v. D

ownl

oade

d fr

om in

form

ahea

lthca

re.c

om b

y R

MIT

Uni

vers

ity o

n 10

/01/

13Fo

r pe

rson

al u

se o

nly.

Academic institutions and industry: bridging the gap

370 Expert Opin. Drug Discov. (2008) 3(4)

institutions, but the success of both depends on the dedication, performance, and scientific integrity of people.

However, there are clear differences in the way these resources are used in either institution. In order to contrast objectives and working conditions in academic institutions and industry, I have chosen six sets of paired terms to paint a ‘black and white’ picture ( Figure 1 ). In reality, the differences between academic institutions and industry are rather ‘shades of gray’ and there are exceptions for any of my statements.

2.1 Differences in output and timing Research in academic institutions is driven by scientific concepts. Methods are selected or developed to fit the specific purpose of the experiments. Publications in journals with a high impact factor and presentations at prestigious meetings are the output of successful academic research. By contrast, drug discovery and development in industry are processes that are driven by the goal to obtain intellectual property (e.g., patents) or a marketable product. All available modern technologies are used for this purpose. Sometimes, it is the evolution of new technologies that pushes research in a certain direction because the technological progress itself offers new business opportunities and competitive advantages.

Daily life in academic institutions is usually not dictated by tight deadlines. Grant applications create pressure and uncertainty, but once this challenge has successfully been met, time passes much more quietly in academic institutions than in industry. In an industrial environment, deadlines are common and time pressure is a permanent challenge. Most academic institutions offer a stable environment for relatively long periods without abrupt changes in organiza-tional or administrative matters. Structures change when people change. The converse is true in industry – people change when structures change. Reorganizations happen

in industry at an increasing rate mainly because companies respond to commercial demands by streamlining internal processes or with mergers and acquisitions. Managing, or simply surviving, change is therefore a continuous challenge for scientists in industry.

2.2 Differences in attitudes and approaches While the individual scientist – in particular, an established academic investigator – is the key figure in academic institutions, the team is the core unit in industry because well-coordinated efforts of numerous people are needed to achieve their complex tasks. Personal scientific interest is driving the work of independent academic investigators and they are able to set their own priorities. Teams in industry have to formulate their objectives according to the company strategy. As enormous resources are necessary for successful drug discovery and development, team leaders and research managers in industry are much more influential in terms of resources and personnel than most academics. However, the price they pay for their power is the loss of independence.

Research in academic institutions is usually based on observations that are made during the course of experimental studies. New ideas are needed for the interpretation of these findings and the formulation of hypotheses. The questions raised in academic studies are usually open and both positive and negative results are acceptable and will lead to revised hypotheses and new experiments. In industry, efforts are often spent to solve problems that arise unexpectedly during the course of a project. Likewise, market forces such as new business opportunities can change the priorities in a program or even lead to its termination. Competitors’ activities always need to be taken into consideration and sometimes dictate the direction of a project. Preclinical and clinical studies in the pharmaceutical industry usually have a ‘predicted’ or expected outcome. If a different result is obtained, the study has failed.

Figure 1 . Academic institutions versus industry paired terms.

Output

Academic institutions Industry

Organization

Academic institutions Industry

Attitude

Academic institutions Industry

Concepts

Methods

Publications

Processes

Technologies

Patents/Products

Scientific leadership

Peer review

Recognition

Hierarchy

Performance evaluation

Incentives

Scientific interest

Individual priorities

Independence

Company strategy

Team objectives

Influence

Timing

Academic institutions Industry

Environment

Academic institutions Industry

Approach

Academic institutions Industry

Long intervals

Quiet periods

Stability

Short deadlines

Time pressure

Change

Local

Position

Focus

Global

Career

Complexity

Observations

Ideas

Open questions

Problems

Opportunities

Expected outcome

Exp

ert O

pin.

Dru

g D

isco

v. D

ownl

oade

d fr

om in

form

ahea

lthca

re.c

om b

y R

MIT

Uni

vers

ity o

n 10

/01/

13Fo

r pe

rson

al u

se o

nly.

Hofbauer

Expert Opin. Drug Discov. (2008) 3(4) 371

2.3 Differences in organization and environment Successful academic leaders derive their authority from scientific excellence. In industry, the hierarchical structures provide an institutional support for leadership. In academic institutions peer review is the main principle to evaluate scientific accomplishments, whereas in industry elaborate systems of performance evaluation prevail. For an academic scientist, recognition by his peers is the most important reward, whereas appreciation of achievements in industry is usually expressed in the form of a financial incentive or a promotion.

Both academic institutions and industry have an inter-national perspective. However, academic institutions have a strong local affiliation while large companies are a priori globally organized. In academic institutions, a tenured position is usually the ultimate career goal because it pro-vides the secure basis for a long-term investment in science. In industry, successful careers often consist of many steps leading gradually upwards. Positions are rarely held for too long periods because an ever-changing environment requires flexibility and frequent reorientation. Academic research is usually focused and therefore often shows more depth and detail. Despite the fact that collaborations, also on an inter-national basis, are becoming more common in academic institutions, individuals usually take the lead. By contrast, drug discovery and development are highly complex activities and require a multidisciplinary approach.

3. Bridging the gap: science and people

How can academic institutions and industry exchange their resources despite all the differences mentioned above? As far as science is concerned, the access to information is not a problem for industry. The scientific literature can be easily screened, scientific meetings are usually open to delegates from all institutions, and many academic consultants are willing to offer their advice when asked by industry. By con-trast, there are serious limitations for information flow from industry to academic institutions. Secrecy is probably the

Figure 2 . Work fl ow in academic institutions (circles) and industry (vectors) along a time axis of several years.

IndustryAcademic institutions

Time

most important hurdle and is usually related to the need for patent protection. This may sometimes delay the publication of scientific results to the point that nobody is anymore interested to publish because the project has reached an end. Furthermore, presentations by industry to the public or the media are often very formal and so polished that the recipients may suspect a partial or even biased message behind.

The flow of people between academic institutions and industry is mainly unidirectional. Students receive their education and training at universities and other academic institutions. The decision to leave academic institutions means for most of them a lifelong stay in industry. Only a minority of scientists move back to academic institutions. Some of them leave industry because they found out that working in an industrial environment was not what they had expected or exceeds what they are willing or able to tolerate. Others leave because they were from the outset only waiting for an attractive opportunity to return to academic institutions. In rare instances scientists leave industry when they feel that the experience they had acquired during a successful career in drug discovery and development could be optimally applied in an academic setting.

Why do people so rarely move from industry to academic institutions? Who should consider such a move? What are the advantages and what are the problems? When should such a move be made? What are the personal or scientific prerequisites? How will the academic environment react to the newcomer? It is evident that such a change is not for everyone at any time. It is easier to move from industry to academic institutions at a younger age but it may be more valuable for the academic institution if an experienced scientist takes such a step. It is also easier for people with a broad technical orientation to change than for scientists who have worked on a highly specialized research topic. Chemists, biochemists, and molecular biologists are generally more versatile than physiologists who have invested many years in building sophisticated animal models of specific diseases. Moreover, a move between industry and academic institutions should not be performed too frequently – research is a long-term investment in either of these institutions and a continuous track record of publications during a career in industry or academic institutions is a prerequisite for moving between these institutions.

All these questions need considerate and balanced answers and it is hardly possible to give general advice. However, some of these points can be illustrated by a simplified picture of work flow in academic institutions and industry that takes account of another variable – time.

3.1 Work fl ow in academic institutions and industry Time is a limited resource that is used in academic institutions and industry in different ways. In academic institutions, the passage of time is hardly noticed because academic work is moving in circles around a topic of interest ( Figure 2 ). Ideas will turn into experiments, experiments will provide results,

Exp

ert O

pin.

Dru

g D

isco

v. D

ownl

oade

d fr

om in

form

ahea

lthca

re.c

om b

y R

MIT

Uni

vers

ity o

n 10

/01/

13Fo

r pe

rson

al u

se o

nly.

Academic institutions and industry: bridging the gap

372 Expert Opin. Drug Discov. (2008) 3(4)

these results will be used for publications, and so on. New students will be taken on board and well-trained postdoctoral fellows will be leaving. The circles will keep turning as long as the central topic remains scientifically interesting and academic investigators identify themselves with it.

By contrast, projects in industry are moving along vectors. For any activity of noticeable size, the topic, objectives, deadlines, and funding are defined before it is allowed to start. There are vectors with different color, direction, length, and width. As time goes by, a vector may get thinner due to lack of support or hit a wall after a negative management decision. New vectors are constantly appearing, and some of them may be moving at the same speed and with the same energy as the original ones but now point in a different and sometimes even the opposite direction because a new strategy has been implemented. Only in rare cases will a vector keep moving in the same direction, grow as it goes along, and finally hit exactly the point it was aiming at from the beginning – this could mean that a drug with blockbuster potential has successfully reached the market.

3.2 Interactions between academic institutions and industry If it is assumed that academic institutions and industry are moving in different patterns, how can there ever be a soft transition? If academic institutions and industry come close but move in opposite directions, conflicts rather than fruitful relationships arise. For example, academic institutions may feel that industry chose a target only because of financial interests or industry may believe that academic institutions have unrealistic aspirations. This is a good opportunity to move for those who feel frustrated in either institution.

There are times when industry and academic institutions come close and move in the same direction; for example, when a new molecule from an academic institution turns into an interesting target for drug discovery or when a compound from industry can be used for basic research in an academic institution. This is the opportunity to move for those who want to push things further than they could if they stayed in their institution.

Finally, it is possible that an industrial vector originates from a circular academic movement; for example, when a

start-up company emerges from an academic institution. This is the opportunity to move for those who have entrepreneurial talents.

One of the most important academic institutions–industry interactions is the field of translational research ( Figure 3 ). Many new drug targets originate in academic institutions and sometimes are also validated there. If these targets are taken up by a pharmaceutical company, the circle movement of academic research is followed by the vector movement of industry which consists of the different phases of preclinical and clinical develop-ment. After a drug has been finally introduced into the market, it remains the subject of research at university clinics and again enters the circular movement of academic institutions.

4. Expert opinion

Academic institutions and industry are two separate entities but have common interests and shared values. Thus, they strongly depend on each other but will most probably never merge. For this reason, the exchange of science and people is the only way for continuous cross-fertilization. On the one hand, scientists with knowledge and experience in drug discovery could strongly stimulate translational medicine in academic institutions. The public wants to see return on investment, and industry teaches people how to tackle this demanding goal. The presence of more scientists with basic management skills in academic institutions could lead to a more efficient use of resources – finances and personnel – and thereby improve scientific productivity. This does not mean to enforce industry standards in academic institutions. On the contrary, it is important that universities remain independent and free to choose their research topics. However, academic investigators should be able to recognize when their results may become interesting for institutions specialized in applied research.

On the other hand, industry is dependent on a constant inflow of new talents and ideas. Innovation is the fuel for long-term commercial success and only well-trained and motivated staff can perform innovative research. The rapid progress in natural sciences and medicine has generated

Figure 3 . Translational research along a time axis of several years is a sequence of periods dominated by contributions from academic institutions (circles) or industry (vectors).

Basicresearch

Clinicalresearch

Drugdiscovery

Drugdevelopment

Marketingphase

Academic institutions Industry Academic institutions

Time

Exp

ert O

pin.

Dru

g D

isco

v. D

ownl

oade

d fr

om in

form

ahea

lthca

re.c

om b

y R

MIT

Uni

vers

ity o

n 10

/01/

13Fo

r pe

rson

al u

se o

nly.

Hofbauer

Expert Opin. Drug Discov. (2008) 3(4) 373

Bibliography Papers of special note have been highlighted as either of interest (•) or of considerable interest (••) to readers.

1. Vagelos PR. Innovation and industry-academia interactions: where confl icts arise and measures to avoid them. Cleve Clin J Med 2007 ; 74 (Suppl 2): S12 -3

2. Wilan KH. Opening up the ivory tower. Cell 2007 ; 129 : 847 -50

3. Brunetti ND, De Gennaro L, Pellegrino PL, Di Biase M. Industry or academia: who leads the research in medicine? Eur J Intern Med 2007 ; 18 : 3 -5

4. Fluckiger SL. Industry’s challenge to academia: changing the bench to bedside paradigm. Exp Biol Med 2006 ; 231 : 1257 -61

5. Brockway LM, Furcht LT. Confl icts of interest in biomedical research – the FASEB guidelines. FASEB J 2006 ; 20 : 2435 -8

6. Love TW. Transition from academia to industry: a personal account. Exp Biol Med 2006 ; 231 : 1682 -4

7. Fetzer J. The merits of an industrial career in contrast to one in academia. Anal Bioanal Chem 2003 ; 377 : 381 -2

8. Horton B. Universities encourage industrialists to come back to their roots. Nature 2000 ; 404 : 793 -4

9. Bonetta L. On the move from academia to industry. J Neurosci 2007 ; 27 : ii -iv

10. European Commission. Mobility of researchers between academia and industry. Twelve practical recommendations.

EUR 22573, 2006. Available from: http://ec.europa.eu/eracareers/mobility_of_researchers_light.pdf (Last accessed 19 February 2008 )

•• A careful analysis of the present situation with valuable suggestions for future developments.

a strong demand for specialists in all disciplines. Whether or not future research in drug discovery will be located at small start-ups and spin-offs or remain in large companies, knowledgeable scientists who see not only their area of scientific interest but also the whole complexity of a disease are needed to produce new drugs.

Experience and knowledge are a capital that is in demand on either side of the academic institutions–industry divide. Moving between academic institutions and industry provides

an opportunity to learn and at the same time to contribute. People and science are the most important resources that need to be exchanged – this exchange is most efficient when they actually move together.

Declaration of interest

The author states no conflict of interest and has received no payment in preparation of this manuscript.

Affi liation Karl G Hofbauer MD Professor for Applied Pharmacology University of Basel, Biozentrum/Pharmazentrum, Klingelbergstrasse 50-70, CH 4056 Basel, Switzerland Tel: +41 61 267 1645 ; Fax: +41 61 267 2208 ; E-mail: [email protected]

Exp

ert O

pin.

Dru

g D

isco

v. D

ownl

oade

d fr

om in

form

ahea

lthca

re.c

om b

y R

MIT

Uni

vers

ity o

n 10

/01/

13Fo

r pe

rson

al u

se o

nly.

Exp

ert O

pin.

Dru

g D

isco

v. D

ownl

oade

d fr

om in

form

ahea

lthca

re.c

om b

y R

MIT

Uni

vers

ity o

n 10

/01/

13Fo

r pe

rson

al u

se o

nly.