Summary
To identify the behaviors that distinguish the highest performing drug development teams in a Fortune 100 pharmaceutical company, a comprehensive, multi-method study was conducted to determine the behaviors that most strongly differentiate the performance level of such teams. The results of the study describe the specific behaviors and strategies used more times and in more situations by the top performing teams. These findings suggest a preliminary road map of actions for team members, leaders, and managers in pharmaceutical settings, and perhaps in other industries as well. This paper provides an overview of the business context that necessitated this research, the research methodology, and most importantly the findings and interpretation of the study results. The reader is invited to consider how the outcome of this research might provide benefit for cross-functional teams in other organizations.
See the full content of this document
Extract
What Makes Good Teams Work Better: Research-Based Strategies That Distinguish Top-Performing Cross-Functional Drug Development Teams
The Business Need for High Performance Drug Development Teams
Pharmaceutical development is a highly regulated, lengthy, and complex endeavor taking place against a tough competitive and regulatory environment. While most teams are extremely skilled technically and scientifically, only the top performing teams are able to navigate the compressed deadlines, unforeseen changes of clinical, commercial, and regulatory direction, and inevitable cross-functional conflict. Less effective teams struggle and become stuck in a loop of conflict, rework and fire fighting. This unproductive behavior results in lost time (a particularly precious commodity in this environment), decreased levels of engagement and, ultimately, lost resources and business opportunities.Our business leaders are quite cognizant of the benefits of higher performing teams, and are regularly looking for improvement opportunities. However, although in principle they are interested in becoming more productive, the scientists, physicians, strategic marketers, and engineers who are key members on these teams are frequently skeptical of team performance models and tools that do not seem to fit their work context. With little discretionary time to devote to reflection on their "process",...See the full content of this document
Sponsored links
