AI or Die: Can Pharma Outrun Its Own Resistance to Digital Evolution?

A Reflection on Siloed Success and Resistance to Change

In my previous article, I explored how siloed optimization in Pharma R&D during the 1990s dramatically reduced drug failures linked to pharmacokinetics (see bar chart above). While this approach worked then, Michael Schorpp made good comments highlighting a modern paradox: Why do leaders cling to siloed practices when the future demands collaboration and digital transformation? More critically, why is “doing the right thing” so rarely rewarded in corporate careers?

This question strikes at the heart of organizational inertia, especially in industries like Pharma, where the stakes (and timelines) are extraordinarily high.

The Altruism vs. Advancement Dilemma

Michael’s quip, “altruistic thinking will very rarely end up in an executive position,” is both cynical and uncomfortably accurate. In my own career, I’ve witnessed leaders ascend by mastering the art of “managing up”: prioritizing narratives that please superiors over addressing glaring inefficiencies. Teams begged to sunset dead-end projects or rethink bloated data platforms with no ROI, yet leaders doubled down. Why?

Short-term incentives. These managers hit quarterly targets, avoided rocking the boat, and advanced smoothly. Their success wasn’t tied to long-term sustainability but to maintaining the status quo. As one colleague quipped, “No one gets promoted for preventing a crisis that hasn’t happened yet.”

This mirrors Kodak and Nokia’s downfalls: executives clung to film and flip phones to protect legacy revenue streams, even as disruption loomed. The “right thing” (innovation) clashed with short-term metrics (profit margins).

Why Pharma’s Digital Transformation Feels Like Pushing a Boulder Uphill

Pharma faces a similar inflection point. TechBio startups now compress discovery and pre-clinical timelines from 5-6 years down to 18 months using AI and data-driven approaches. Yet, in traditional Pharma, resistance persists:

• “AI is just hype” skeptics cite cherry-picked studies to dismiss its potential.
• Siloed kingdoms guard data, processes, and budgets, fearing obsolescence.
• Senior leaders nearing retirement ask, “Why change a ‘winning’ formula now?”

The result? A cultural chasm between grassroots innovators and C-suites. Digital champions at lower levels battle inertia, while leaders who could drive change often lack incentives to do so.

The Kodak Paradox in Pharma: Lessons Unlearned?

Kodak’s fatal error wasn’t ignoring digital photography—it was prioritizing short-term film profits over long-term survival. Pharma risks repeating this if leaders equate today’s success with tomorrow’s relevance. Consider:

• 罗氏公司 's $2.5B digital transformation required merging four departments into one, upending legacy structures.
• Grassroots initiatives often die without executive air cover, as mid-level managers prioritize “safe” projects.

The problem isn’t awareness—it’s alignment. When KPIs and bonuses reward siloed outputs (e.g., “deliver Phase X on time”) over cross-functional collaboration or AI readiness, progress stalls.

FOMO as a Catalyst: The Unlikely Hero of Change

Michael’s insight about FOMO (Fear of Missing Out) offers a pragmatic path forward. Departments that invested early in data quality are now reaping AI dividends, creating envy among peers. Leaders who “did their homework” are lauded, triggering a chain reaction:

1. Success stories create peer pressure.
2. Ambitious managers chase the spotlight, driving adoption to secure promotions.
3. Laggards face existential FOMO, fearing irrelevance in a digital-first future.

This isn’t altruism—it’s career calculus. But it works.

The CEO’s Role: Aligning Incentives with Transformation

For systemic change, leadership must come from the top:

1. CEO-driven vision: Embed digital transformation into corporate strategy, as Roche did.
2. Reinvent KPIs: Reward collaboration, data sharing, and AI adoption—not just pipeline milestones.
3. Protect grassroots efforts: Shield innovators from siloed leaders who stifle change.

Without structural incentives, even well-intentioned employees hit walls.

Conclusion: Rewriting the Rules of Corporate “Success”

The clash between short-term careerism and long-term innovation isn’t unique to Pharma—but the industry’s slow burn (10+ year pipelines) makes it uniquely vulnerable. To avoid Kodak’s fate, we must:

• Celebrate leaders who prioritize sustainability over quick wins.
• Use FOMO as a tool, not a dirty word, to accelerate change.
• Align incentives at all levels to make “doing the right thing” the smartest career move.

As Michael aptly noted, altruism alone won’t dismantle silos—but ambition, envy, and a CEO-mandated roadmap just might.

What’s your take? Have you seen FOMO drive change in your organization—or watched “managing up” eclipse meaningful transformation? Let’s discuss.