A Culture of Creativity

I recently rewatched one of my favorite TED Talks that was recorded back in 2006 by the late Sir Ken Robinson, an educator, author and speaker, titled “Do Schools Kill Creativity?” It’s entertaining, insightful and worth twenty minutes of your time if you have not seen it. He speaks about the importance of creativity and how it should be every bit as important as literacy in education (and in life) and a critically needed skill for the future.

Sir Ken humorously cites examples of creativity in children (before we educate it out of them) and observes that, in part, children are creative because they are willing to be wrong. He points out that one will never do anything truly creative or original if one is not willing to be wrong. He goes on to say that our education system, organizations, and companies are built around the premise that being wrong is one of the worst things you can be. In Sir Ken’s view and mine, that’s a problem.

Beyond Artistic Creativity

Other than my family, virtually no one who knows me would likely describe me as “creative” – and I am certainly not if we consider a traditional definition of artistic creativity. I can’t paint, draw, craft, dance, or sing – and no one should ever have to experience that last one for sure. However, if we think of creativity in a broader sense, which can be defined as “use of the imagination or original ideas,” that is an area that deserves some further thought and I believe a critical attribute for companies, management teams and anyone who wants or needs to innovate.

In my view, the imperative to be creative in business is more critical than ever – and that is certainly true in the life sciences, where innovation underlies everything we do. Despite that need, there are segments of the biopharma industry that struggle with embracing creativity and thus innovation. It seems almost accepted as dogma that many large pharmaceutical companies are not particularly good at innovation, and I would have to admit that experience bears that out to a degree. But why?

I think Sir Ken touched on one of the reasons. If you want to pursue creativity and innovation – you need to be willing to be wrong. Often in larger organizations, the organizational pressure and motivation is not focused on being right, but rather on not being wrong. As a result, taking a creative leap, whether it be on science or a deal structure or something else, is a larger political and career risk than doing nothing or only pursuing ideas and pathways that are known rather than something perceived as unconventional, unusual or risky. Those dynamics are further complicated by the fact in many large companies (and perhaps large pharma in particular), leadership is constantly shifting and so support for something creative or innovative may evaporate as leadership changes – which seems to happen with startling regularity in some larger biopharma organizations.

Creativity in Business Development?

Since the start of the year, I have observed a significant number of large pharma senior leadership doing interviews and posting articles talking about their desires to explore business development and do “creative” deals. It seems to be the latest strategic messaging across the large pharma landscape. Yet, despite all the talk, the deals that are getting done, which are mostly M&A, are largely standard deals with nothing unique or innovative about them. So, are large pharma companies really willing and able to be creative?? If so, which ones?

We believe that this is a critically important question – at least for innovative companies with broad platform technologies that need to be leveraged. At Poseida, we have been more successful than most in our sector at creative deal making. In the last five years we have done transactions with four of the top 20 pharma companies, and each transaction has been somewhat unique. As the financial markets for biotech have been and continue to be challenging, that agility and creativity has allowed us to survive (and even prosper) while many of our peers continue to struggle.

Strategy + Creativity = Innovation in Business and Beyond

Poseida’s strategy is based on utilizing partnerships and collaborations to allow us to develop more of our technology in more therapeutic areas for more patient populations with unmet needs. We feel passionate about staying creative to drive innovation in business dealings. We continually evaluate and consider partnerships and collaborations that are novel and creative as well as value-generating for both sides. To be successful on that path, we must remain committed to finding the right partners that are willing to join us in thinking outside the box in both evaluating and structuring deals as well as pursuing novel science.

Fortunately, at Poseida we are doing well in the midst of tough industry dynamics – especially for the cell and gene therapy subsectors of biotech. We have both the discipline to explore many conversations and the benefit of being able to take the time needed to make sure we are striking the right relationships with the right partners. We know it takes time to find the right partner and the right structure for any given collaboration. If the fit, the vision, the teams or the terms are not right – we are comfortable walking away. We also know that sometimes things change or evolve, and a relationship may end – and that’s OK as well. To paraphrase Sir Ken, “We are willing to be wrong if it is the cost for being creative and innovative.” All our stakeholders deserve that commitment from us.

If you are excited or driven by the marriage of strategy, creativity and innovation, follow us, join us or partner with us on our journey. We have a wealth of technology and opportunity before us to creatively discover and develop better treatment options for cancer, rare diseases and beyond – and patients are waiting.

#strategy #creativity #innovation

?

?