18 minute read
CULTURE: THE SECRET WEAPON OF WINNING CORPORATIONS
Culture:
| by the thrive PArtNershiP GroUP (Glenn Busby, Jon Rogers, and Robert Seguin) AND eNviroNiCs reseArCh (Dr. David Jamieson)
Advertisement
the seCRet weapon oF winning CoRpoRations
A guide to how culture plays a key part in building a high performing team
in the October/November 2015 issue of Biotechnology Focus, the results of an online survey of employees in the Canadian Biotechnology and Life Science sector were published and explored.
The results suggested an industry staffed by generally happy and engaged employees: • Employees rated their company as providing a “strong performance” on all four key aggregate indices: Job Clarity (77 per cent),
Organization Climate (72 per cent), Visionary Leadership (71 per cent), and Recognition & Reward (67 per cent) • The number one thing organizations do well, is empowering employees to do their jobs in the best way they know how. • Employees were most engaged by flexible work schedules, strong leadership from senior management, professional development opportunities, challenging employees with greater responsibility/variety, and rewards for performance
The results, while good news overall, do raise several important questions: 1. In an industry where employees are generally satisfied, how can an individual company truly stand out to become the employer of choice in terms of recruitment, engagement, and retention? 2. How can a company deliver more than great employee engagement; how can it create a strategic culture that is a true
“force multiplier” to improve business results over the long term?
This article will explore what employers can do to define, measure, and lead their desired operating culture in today’s dynamic Canadian biotechnology and life science environment.
People are typically the largest single corporate cost. Historically, this drove waves of costcutting and employee-shedding. While some leaning down was needed, most companies learned that over the long term, you cannot cut your way to growth. Successful leaders realized that certain companies have no obvious technical, structural, or cost advantage, and yet they nonetheless consistently outperformed their peers. These successful companies were driven by people and culture. Culture and employee engagement became the new, sought-after competitive advantages. Unfortunately, the focus on engagement, while important and highly measurable, has led some companies to miss the mark on three key points: 1. Culture should be a strategic choice; 2. Measurement only works if you measure the “right” things; and 3. Actions speak louder than surveys.
In our experience, companies that understand these principles and undertake a carefully planned and executed approach to implementing them, can strengthen their organizational culture to further increase team productivity and sustainably accelerate business performance. In our Thrive Culture process, the path to successfully building a strategic culture has three deceptively simple but actually quite challenging steps:
1. Define
Culture should be a strategic choice.
We view culture as the collection of values, beliefs, and behaviours that collectively define “who we are” and “how we do things around here”. Some suggest that culture is effectively an “accident of history” – something that comes to be over time based on leadership behaviours, personal experiences, etc. At Thrive, our belief is that we are products of our experiences, but effective leaders deliberately and actively plan and shape culture, evolving it over time. Importantly, leaders must avoid the pitfall of attempting to define their organization’s desired culture from only their perspective. Closed door executive team vision and values defining sessions tend to yield wonderful plaques for the wall, but often miss the mark, because they fail to take into account what internal and external stakeholders see, believe, and want. Therefore, the process must include careful stakeholder identification, stakeholder understanding, and structured data review, values definition and selection. “Typically, we engage all stakeholders and work with the executive
table1: Common culture fallacies – the traps many leaders fall into versus the ideal approach
Fallacy
culture just is. It is the accidental sum of history. leadership alone can define culture.
culture and business strategy are separate. Engagement is the goal. IdEal
culture is actively planned and crafted by leadership. Stakeholders, both internal and external, are crucial inputters to the definition process. culture is actively linked to and reinforcing of business strategy. Engagement to the right, strategic culture is key.
team to craft core values/behaviours. This is done through interviews, group discussions, work sessions, measurement tools and processes, and balance checks between global/ local issues and corporate/department differences”, according to Dr. David Jamieson, chief scientist at Environics Research, analytics partner of The Thrive Partnership Group.
Careful planning and defining of culture must also be actively linked to, and reinforcing of, business strategy. Culture cannot exist in a vacuum. The slow-moving, risk averse bureaucratic culture of a large bank would cripple a Silicone Valley start-up. At the same time, that start-up’s free-wheeling, innovative, non-hierarchical, risk-taking culture might bankrupt the large bank. Even within the same industry, companies pursue different strategies, and their cultures should reflect and align to the differences. This is also where employee engagement can be an inadequate measure. Being highly engaged to a strategically wrong and ineffective culture will not drive positive business results. The culmination of this first step is typically a statement of the desired Operating Culture based on 1-3 Core Value drivers to optimize employee engagement and performance, and customer engagement.
2. measure
Measurement only works if you measure the “right” things
Having defined their ideal strategic culture, companies must periodically measure and benchmark how they are performing versus their culture goals. As the saying goes, “you manage what you measure.” At this stage, we would suggest customized measurement. If you have defined a unique culture, you should measure the variable that you defined as important. That is not to say that you cannot also use more generic engagement surveys or similar tools. These can be valuable, particularly as they can often be benchmarked versus other organizations. That said, “We recommend seeking highly tangible and actionable data; taking regular pulse checks on both employee and stakeholder experience and perspective on your specific appropriate Values and Behaviours. This is achieved through the right blend of standard and customized measurement and research tools and includes the input of both internal and external stakeholders”, explains Robert Seguin, partner, Thrive Partnership Group.
3. lead
Actions speak louder than surveys
To optimize their culture, organizations understand they must ensure the behaviours of their leaders and employees are aligned to the stated core values. Influence and results flow from individuals outward; they level and shape values, behaviours and culture, which drives employee and client engagement, which deliver results.
Crucially, many organizations drop the ball at this stage. After measuring where they stand versus their desired culture (or level or employee engagement, etc.), they fail to take a deliberate and planned approach to action. We often see that the best leaders and managers take measurement results to heart, seek to improve, and take action (even if they need to change the least), while the average and worse leaders often do not. In our experience, it is crucial to “develop action plans to optimize performance at the ‘macro-level’ (organizational) and at the individual or ‘micro’ level,” according to Glenn Busby of the Thrive Partnership Group. “In particular, companies need to identify the ‘game changers’; people who are the de-facto key influencers and leaders in the company and often set the tone on culture by nature of their role and/or charisma and personality, and help them see their impact on the culture, good and bad. Then, most importantly, companies must help them adjust their behaviours to make a positive contribution, rather than a contamination, of the desired company culture”. To be successful, this process can require a great deal of coaching and facilitation. That’s because results flow not from theoretical understanding, but from self-awareness and specific, relevant behaviour changes.
Culture change and business results
In our experience, companies following these three steps rigorously have seen results that have been extremely meaningful. Here are two industry leaders who have lead their organizations through the Thrive Culture 3-step process describing their outcomes: • “Culture is a hallmark of Genentech’s corporate strategy. To ensure we maintain our competitive advantage, we are using the
“Thrive Culture” process in our Franchise to augment our internal engagement data to really understand the root causes of our successes and to identify areas where our leaders can make adjustments. We really appreciate the depth of understanding we receive and the practical tools the “Thrive” process provides to help us to better role model the behaviors that have the most impact on employee performance and customer value.” — Warner Biddle, vicepresident and franchise head, Genentech. • “We’ve used the “Thrive Culture” process to help us define, measure and lead the culture we want to have here at Otsuka Canada. Not only has it helped us achieve unsurpassed levels of employee engagement in the Canadian life science industry, but to achieve global best-in-class results”. — Joanie Michel, associate director, human resources, Otsuka
Canada Pharmaceutical Inc.
In a challenging competitive environment, with often limited ability to differentiate, life science leaders should look increasingly to building a strategic “thriving culture” to generate competitive advantage.
To see this story online visit www.biotechnologyfocus.ca/culture-thesecret-weapon-of-winning-corporations/
November 2017
November 6 – 7
new card:Layout 1 1/31/2013 9:09 AM Page 144th EEE-PT WG Meeting United Kingdom Web: http://ilac.org/event/44th-eee-pt-wgmeeting/
November 6 – 8
BIO Europe Berlin, Germany Phone: +49 89 2388 756 0 EmaiL: conferences@ebdgroup.com Web: https://ebdgroup.knect365.com/ bioeurope/about-bio-europe
November 13-14
19th World Congress on Biotechnology Osaka, Japan Phone: 1-650-889-4686 Email: biotechasia@conferencesworld.org Web: https://biotechnologycongress. conferenceseries.com/
SRC101
I wish to receive/continue to receive a complimentary subscription to BIOTECHNOLOGY FOCUS Yes No
Format Preference: print digital both Signature: ____________________________________ Date: ___________________________
Name: _________________________________ Title: ____________________________________
Company: ______________________________
Dept: ___________________________________ Business Address : _______________________________________________________________ City: _____________________________ Prov: __________ Postal Code: ____________________ Telephone: ___________________________ Fax: ______________________________________ E-mail: ________________________________________________________________________
On occasion, BIOTECHNOLOGY FOCUS will send third-party information on products & services related to the lab and life science industries. These may be cancelled at any time. Please check here if you do NOT wish to receive these.
JOB FUNCTION
50 C Level Management 50a Engineer 51b Principal Investigator / Research Scientist 51c Professor / Faculty 53a Group / Project Leader 53b Procurement / Supply Chain 53c R&D Director / Manager 54 Legal / Financial / Administration / Regulatory / Communications 55 Post Doc / PhD Student 58 Professional Services / Consulting 59 Lab Technician / Research Assistant 60 Sales / Marketing 62 IT Management 63 Nurse / Practitioner 64 Pharmacist 65 Physician 99 Other (Specify):
COMPANYs PRIMARY BUSINESS ACTIVITY
50 Academic 50a Biotech Organization 50b Clean Tech organization 50c Contract Research / Manufacturing Organization 50d Diagnostics Organization 50f Food processing / manufacturing 50g Instrument Manufacturer / Distributor 50h Packaging / Distribution 50i Pharmaceutical Organization 50j Professional Services (legal, financial, consulting, recruiting, regulatory, communications) 52 Clinical Research / Hospital 53 Research Institute 55 Government Agency 99 Other (specify):
C86 Buying Influence
A Authorize B Recommend C Specify
C87 Which products are used in your lab?
A Analysis Instruments B Basic Lab Equipment C Chemicals/Biochemicals D Chromatography – Gas E Chromatography – Liquid F Filtration, Water Purification G LIMS H Liquid Handling & Sample Prep I Microscopes, Optics, Cameras J Safety & Hygiene K Spectroscopy L Testing Systems/Equipment M Vacuum Equipment Y None of the Above
C88 Product Development Stage (check all that apply)
A Research/Development B Pilot/Scaleup C Production/Manufacturing D Tech Transfer E Not applicable
C89 Are you building a new lab? Yes No
C90 We have the following enewsletters:
1 Biotechnology Focus eBulletin 2 Laboratory focus eBulletin 3 BioPharma 4 BioMedical
5 Health Care 6 Agri-Food 7 Clean Tech 8 Industry Inte
For a quick response please fax: 905-727-4428 or e-mail: circulation@promotive.net November 13- 14
Pharmaceutical Microbiology East Coast Iselin, NJ Web: https://www.smi-online.co.uk/ pharmaceuticals/northamerica/PharmaceuticalMicrobiology-East-Coast/booknow
November 28-29
Pharmaceutical Serialisation and Traceability 2017 Vienna, Austria Phone: +44 (0)207 036 1300 Email: enquire@iqpc.co.uk Web: https://pharmaserialisation.iqpc. co.uk/?utm_medium=portal&mac=PMIQ_Events_ Title_Listing
November 30 – December 1
Lab-on-a-Chip, Microfluidics & Biosensors Asia Dayuan District, Taiwan Web: https://10times.com/lab-on-chipmicrofluidics-biosensors-asia
december 2017
December 1
2017 Annual Life Sciences Policy Forum Borden Ladner Gervais LLP, Toronto Phone: 416-426-7293 Email: admin@lifesciencesontario.ca Web: http://www.lifesciencesontario.ca/events/ eventsCalendar/PolicyForum2017.php
December 5 -8
Microbiology Havana, Cuba Web: https://10times.com/microbiology-ui
December 7 – 9
20th International Conference on Pharmaceutical Biotechnology Madrid, Spain Email: pharmabiotech@ pharmaceuticalconferences.org Web: http://biotech.pharmaceuticalconferences. com/
December 13- 15
IEEE Life Science Conference Sydney, Australia Web: http://lsc.ieee.org/2017/
January 7-11, 2018
BIO One-on-One Partnering San Francisco, California Web: https://www.bio.org/events/one-on-onepartnering-jpm
THE BEST DESIGNED TRIALS
ARE ADAPTIVE-BY-DESIGN
Good study design includes thoughtful planning and involves bringing subject matter experts, like statisticians, in early. Statisticians can take existing or historic trial data for a particular disease area and create hypothetical scenarios that can inform the shaping of a tighter, better designed trial. Good planning hones each aspect of a trial making it responsive, integrative of candidate data, and improves return on investment. Good design = good data.
So, how do we launch a trial that is good by design?
An approach to clinical trials popularized in the mid-1990’s, the concept of adaptive-bydesign allows for adjustments and modifications during the clinical trial, making the study responsive in real-time, particularly when paired with an eCRF - but that’s for another article.
Adaptive design helps sponsors determine if a therapy is going to fail – and if so, to help it fail early, to shorten timelines and reduce cost. We know that analysis is inextricably tied to the study of design; when you decide on a design, you are largely deciding on the analysis. Bearing this in mind, let’s look at two scenarios that illustrate the benefits of adaptive trial design.
A look at two case studies
In our first example, a biotech company developing a product to treat sexual dysfunction learned through a phase 2 study that the drug was showing high variability among patients due to the timing of medication, and that there was a placebo effect. They also did not have evidence to inform the optimal dose.
Solution: we designed a study that had a placebo run-in phase so that only patients that were placebo non-responders were brought in. Data was collected on different timing of medication from subject matter experts to deduce what timing to recommend in the phase 3 study. Then, stratified patients performed two interim analyses to confirm sample size. Finally, computer models were created under different scenarios to inform decision-making and demonstrate how the sponsor would save a lot of time and money with the adaptive design model.
As an investigator or biotech start-up looking for funding, demonstrating a thoughtful approach to trial design moves the needle in your favour.
In a second example, we incorporated a biomarker into the study design for a cancer treatment. The results after a phase 2 trial indicated there were different endpoints for two different tumour types.
The product seemed to treat the tumours that remained by making them disappear. For the ones resected, the outcome measured was the length of time to recurrence. The biomarker could predict failure in the first line of treatment, allowing researchers to randomize patient selection. The part that I thought was really cool was using adaptive design to address the question of optimal dose.
When this approach is applied to study design, each part of the study informs the next; such that something more is learned about the benefit-risk-value proposition and the unknowns. Safety, efficacy, and biology are lessened to know what your inputs are and what your outputs are likely to be. This predictive aspect also facilitates risk-based monitoring.
Really, the features that can be adapted are almost endless, including eligibility criteria, randomization, treatment regimens, medications that are allowed or disallowed, visit schedules, endpoints and the number of endpoints, and statistical methods.
By its very nature, our industry isn’t able to take three months of data and make a rapid shift - even a seemingly minimal one. Bringing subject matter experts to the table early and in meaningful ways always produces a better trial with optimal, reliable outcomes.
To take a deeper look at how to run trials that are adaptive-by-design and access the McDougall Learning Series, please visit mcdougallscientific.com/whitepapers
John Amrhein is vice-president of McDougall Scientific, a provider of vital statistical strategy, trial design and analytics.
To see this story online visit www.biotechnologyfocus.ca/the-best-designed-trials-are-adaptive-by-design/
| by DeAN FUlForD, vICe-PresIdent of human resourCes ConsultIng, stratford managers CorPoratIon
surveying the biotechnology hr landscape
For employers in every organization, in any sector, having a clear and focused understanding of the factors that drive employee motivation and commitment is pivotal to ensuring business success. Without an indication of what employee’s value from their workplace and employment experience, organizational effort and investment can be misaligned.
Stratford Managers, in collaboration with Biotechnology Focus and supported by BioTalent Canada, has just completed a follow-up study of our 2015 first-of-its-kind employee survey of Canada’s biotechnology industry. We asked 25 questions in an anonymous survey about different aspects of the work environment in biotech and life science workplaces. The goal was to build awareness of employee’s perception of their workplace and identify areas where improvement may promote a better overall experience.
Consistent with our goal in 2015, we wanted to provide a voice to employees in the biotechnology and life science sector, to gather opinions about the business and human resource practices in their organization’s – what is working well, what attributes of those organizations are highly valued, and where practices are not meeting their expectations.
Below are some of the highlights of the survey.
Employers are performing most strongly around job clarity which include defining job roles and responsibilities, and linking employee contribution to organizational success. Specific results indicate: • Employees with greater organization tenure have a stronger perception of this factor, noting an improved awareness of the impact of their individual job to organizational success, and being afforded greater opportunity to use their own judgment when completing their work. • Employees in organizations with less than 100 employees have the strongest perception of this factor, indicating that they have greater access to relevant information for their work, and again have increased awareness of the direct impact of their individual contribution to organization success.
Employers are performing well in the area of organizational climate: aspects of the organization that encourages individual performance. Results indicate: • Employees with 1-5 years’ tenure have the strongest perception of this factor, at the stage in their career where they are still really
‘learning’ their role. Conversely, employees in the 6-15-year tenure range are less positive, indicating a point in their career where they have an increasing expectation of their organizations: more involvement, more feedback, and better tools. • As organization size grows, the performance of this factor decreases. This appears to be driven by perceived organizational constraints on communicating openly and limits on opportunities to contribute toward ongoing improvement.
Employers are performing well around visionary leadership and developing commitment toward achieving the organization’s mandate. We specifically noted that: • Employees in all categories have very strong alignment with the mission of the organization that they belong to and believe that their organization provides value to the communities in which they operate. • Confidence in strategies of senior leadership decreases as organization size increases, inflecting at the 50-employee size.
Employers have the most room to improve in the area of recognition and rewards. Results indicate: • Employees have a weakening perception about their organiza-
tion’s commitment to professional development and recognition practices. • Recognition practices need to evolve. Younger and less tenured employees note that efforts of their organization to recognize their contribution and hard work is not meeting this expectation.
Using the data from 2015 as a baseline, we can see where change has taken place, both in positive and negative directions. Some of the most notable change in individual results across the employee experience factors include: • More than nine out of 10 employees agree that they can decide the best way to get their work accomplished, consistent from 2015 to 2017. • Nearly seven out of 10 employees note that feedback from their manager helps them improve their ability to contribute to work, with there being a slight uptick in all positive response categories in 2017 compared to 2015. • While six out of 10 employees believe that their organization invests in their continuous development, there has been a slight downward movement across all response categories in 2017 compared with 2015. • Leadership strength of senior management has increased in 2017 compared with 2015, with nearly 6 out of 10 employees agreeing with this statement. Our survey found that generally, employees are content with many organizational practices in their organizations. Employees rated the key indices, of Job Clarity, Organization Climate, Visionary Leadership and Recognition and Reward as providing a “string performance” in their sector.
But without question, there remains room to improve. As an example, nearly one-quarter of survey respondents list learning and development as one of their top factors of engagement, yet more than one in four don’t agree that their organization is investing in this area!
To us, one of the most powerful responses from this study is the level of job empowerment described by employees. Having control over the approach to their own work is both a strong driver of employee engagement and a sign of building a change-ready organization.
By continuing emphasis on this attribute, employers will build a critical core capability in their work teams: the ability to proactively adapt to change, and enable improved workforce performance.
To see this story online visit www.biotechnologyfocus.ca/ surveying-the-biotechnology-hr-landscape-2/
Got something to say? Please send your comments/letters to biotechnology_focus@promotive.net
Keep Growing
The BioFlo® 120—easy to use, fl exible, dependable
The straightforward setup and process > Push button Auto Culture modes for control of the BioFlo 120 let you focus microbial and cell culture applications on what is important, your work. > Flexible operation with glass or Designed to seamlessly integrate BioBLU® Single-Use Vessels into your day-to-day operation, the > Scalable expanded working volume BioFlo 120 bioreactor/fermentor range (250 mL–40 L) emphasizes simplicity and ease of > Universal connections for digital and use, with no sacrifi ce on capability. analog sensors
