Closing the loop : improving technology transfer by learning from the past

Abstract

Technology transfer is a significant challenge within the highly regulated pharmaceutical industry. While much focus is put on the logistics and strategy of the process, less attention has been paid to how to change the soft, non-technical aspects of technology transfer program management, even though these cultural, communication, and perception aspects may be just as important for project success. The goal of this study was to provide recommendations on how to change these factors to improve the likelihood of project success for pharmaceutical technology transfers. The work was conducted at Novartis Vaccines and Diagnostics, a large pharmaceutical manufacturer, so the cases studied here were all transfers of complex vaccine processes and products. While the results were intended to be generalizable to intra-firm technology transfers within pharmaceutical companies, some types of possible transfers were not included in this study. The focus of this thesis was on examining different aspects of how companies manage technology transfer projects and correlating these with how successful those projects have been to look for statistically significant relationships. The approach was two-fold: high level surveys and interviews to qualitatively identify commonly seen issues and subsequent effects, followed by a more detailed quantitative survey of individual projects. The results of detailed surveys of individual project found no significant correlations between the studied project management factors and success. Since similar quantitative studies have succeeded in the past, the differences between this study and these previous studies were explored to determine why this particular study did not produce the desired results. Based on the qualitative interview and survey results, the following recommendations were made on how pharmaceutical companies can improve the likelihood of successful technology transfers: 1) increase face-to-face interaction between team members, 2) better align priorities between different functions, sites, and projects, 3) coordinate with corporate senior management to foster collaboration between Research and Technology Development, and 4) fully engage all necessary functions at the start of each project.