Innovation Evolved

Subscribe by Email

Your email:

Sign Up for our Newsletter

Download our Whitepaper

Upcoming Events

May

15-17 IIR Front End of Innovation (Exhibiting and Presenting)
"Divergent Collaboration for Portfolio Optimization" 
Orlando
17-20 AAPOR 67th Annual Conference (Presenting)
Orlando
21 PBIRG Annual General Meeting (Presenting)
With Disruptyx: "Repositioning for Product Success by Leveraging the Power of Your Brand"
Chicago
31 Complimentary Pharmaceutical Webinar
With Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals: "Fueling Collaborative Innovation on a Global Scale – An International Case Study"
Online

June

13-14 CASRO Management Conference (Presenting)
Chicago

July

18-19 Market Research in the Mobile World (Co-Presenting)
"The Future is Now: How New Technologies Are Transforming the Insight Function"
Cincinnati

 

Current Articles | RSS Feed RSS Feed

Idea Generation: A New Approach

  
  
  

We're counting down the Top 10 posts of 2011 on "Innovation Evolved". Originally published July 11, here's #3 on the countdown.

Sasanka4 resized 600 smallAs someone who is passionate about newer approaches to marketing, I was fascinated by The Medici Effect by Frans Johansson. It was most impactful in communicating that: in order to create great ideas, you first need to be able to generate a lot of ideas.

The Medici Effect talks about the creation of great ideas from the “intersection” of traditional ideas that people don’t initially think belong together. In the book, Johansson gives specific examples across categories (i.e. new products, services, companies, foods, etc.) through extensive research and then encourages people to find other intersections that can develop into the next big thing. This is crucial in industries such as pharmaceuticals, where growth has slowed dramatically since the early part of the century.

So how exactly are intersections relevant in life sciences? Intersections can provide new opportunities during a period of slowed growth. Datamonitor reports that there will be huge drop in pharmaceutical sales growth from 7.1% between 2003 and 2009 to just 1.3% in 2015. This is due in part to patent expirations but also more stringent rules and tighter regulations around marketing and drug development. Having worked in the pharmaceutical industry myself, I’ve seen how linear the industry can be in its thinking around marketing and innovation. However, now that the healthcare landscape has changed, the pharmaceutical industry must approach the way it markets and develop drugs differently. Intersections will help foster newer ideas whether it’s in the marketing or R&D process.

Johansson talks about Vertex Pharmaceuticals generating thousands of molecular combinations to ultimately find a few that will provide a breakthrough drug. The strategy seems to be working, as Vertex has developed and commercialized several products including - most recently – a new hepatitis C drug called Incivek.

So how do we get to these breakthrough ideas? Johansson brings in information from the book Cracking Creativity and says: to start, shake your mind from preconceived notions in three steps.

  1. Think about a situation, product, or concept and think about the assumptions associated with that situation
  2. Next, write down those assumptions; then reverse them.
  3. Finally, think about how to make those reversals are meaningful.

There are some examples given in the book, but I thought I would give it a try:

Assumption: Pharmaceutical companies research, develop and market drugs

Reversal: Pharmaceutical companies do not research, develop and market drugs

A meaningful business: Pharmaceutical companies take current in-market drugs and integrate them in lifestyle health programs. They find ways to educate the public by providing live educational seminars on healthy lifestyles, giving guidance to patients on the consequences of drug non-compliance, and educating the public on how healthier life styles can lead to lower overall costs (fewer hospitalizations, lower prescription costs).

Patients/Employers pay a membership fee to attend these seminars and are given discounts/rewards on their health premiums if they adhere to their medication and live healthier lifestyles (measured by BMI, cholesterol, etc.).

How did I do?

The Medici Effect is an eye-opening book that helps us understand: in order to come up with great ideas that can lead to new products and services, we need to be thinking out of the box. Often maps and/or frameworks can provide directional guidance; however they can often restrict the thinking for your next novel idea. Ultimately the question is: are you willing to think differently? If you are, you are on your way to find the next intersection, which could be the next big thing.

So how will you generate, vet, and develop ideas to get to your next product breakthrough?

--Sasanka is a Director of Client Services for Affinnova's Life Sciences clients

Comments

Great review here and some thought provoking questions. I think that pharma is a great platform for the described philosophy, but that idea generation is a powerful exercise in any industry.
Posted @ Monday, July 11, 2011 2:27 PM by Andrew
Nice review of a new framework. I especially liked the example as it shows how we can generate some really interesting ideas and gain insights from simply challenging our assumptions.  
Posted @ Monday, July 11, 2011 4:14 PM by Hemali Patel
Makes sense, great post. Pharma is certainly in need of innovation and their respective reallocation of resources to "emerging markets" is not the long-term cure. Hopefully, they can find approaches like the one discussed to spur the development of more novel products. If they do, everyone serves to benefit - from patients to the industry!
Posted @ Monday, July 11, 2011 4:48 PM by Rob
It sounds like Johansson has some great thoughts on how and where to look for your next big idea. I couldn’t agree more with the notion that ideas having the greatest potential to transform an industry are often found in the most unsuspecting places, often at the periphery of the industry or as Johansson refers to it, at these “intersections” of different disciplines.  
 
I think there are a couple of things here that are critical for any firm looking to position itself at the leading end of the next innovative curve:  
 
1) Having the structure in place within your organization in order to systematize the serendipity that sparks new ideas. Nothing is worse than missing the next big idea because your firm didn’t have the resources in place to develop it.  
 
2) As it was alluded to, I think the most important thing to remember here is that your first idea is hardly ever right. Instead of investing everything in your first idea, it’s important to invest a little in the idea, test the prototype and redirect your efforts. This all becomes an iterative process and allows you to hone what was previously an unpredictable path to success.  
 
 
Here’s a great intro to the book that Johansson gave at the L2 forum last year: 
http://fora.tv/2010/11/05/Frans_Johansson_The_Medici_Effect 
Posted @ Tuesday, July 12, 2011 3:37 AM by Chris Sanders
Not only does this post make sense, but a lead article in the July 11th WSJ confirms it! The article describes a shift from research flops and parched pipelines of “me too drugs” attempting to staunch expiring patents to new innovative research leading to novel drugs focusing on under-treated diseases. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303499204576387423702555648.html?mod=ITP_pageone_0 
Posted @ Tuesday, July 12, 2011 3:40 AM by Alan Kaul
Great post Sasanka, I think that's a really useful exercise to idea generation. Certainly the pharma industry could use an injection of new thinking and the example you give hits at one of the core areas of potential growth for pharam - expanding beyond 1:1 drug sales and into broader health management. I predict a slow (and sometimes painful) transition, but the industry has the resources to make a strong push. Here's hoping that as business models evolve so too does the regulatory environment in which these companies operate - always a hurdle to overcome.
Posted @ Tuesday, July 12, 2011 8:39 AM by Tim MacDonald
"systematize serendipity." Nice idea and even better alliteration.
Posted @ Tuesday, July 12, 2011 9:44 AM by Michael O'Leary MD
Interesting post with a great exchange of ideas. Think this is very relevant to the pharma industry- we are in need innovation!
Posted @ Tuesday, July 12, 2011 5:21 PM by Jennifer Suski
There's no question we need new thinking, but coming from a more political perspective (I'm a federal lobbyist on healthcare and have been since 1994), I'm concerned that even the most basic intuitive information is not getting through to patients. There needs to be a revolution of thinking among patients in America where they take greater control and responsibility for their own overall health and we need to start it at a young age. Too many patients are passive in their consumption of health care services and products and we need breakthroughs - through innovative pharmaceuticals, but also in communications strategies that incentivize patients to take control of their health. I haven't seen that happen yet.
Posted @ Wednesday, July 13, 2011 4:03 PM by Tom Maher
This is a great synopsis of how the marketing and sales landscap has changed in Pharma. I think you can look at this as an example of how we should look at our lives on a daily basis. Be innovative, take caculated risks, be educated, never assume and dont be afraid to think differently. Great Job on this SA
Posted @ Wednesday, July 13, 2011 7:53 PM by Eric Christianson
Tom, 
 
Good points and I fundamentally agree that we need individuals to take more control and accountability in their health. One of the challenges is that, we are often driven and/or expecting immediate results. When people can’t see or feel their blood pressure going up, what’s the immediate incentive to adhere to their medication and/or live a healthier lifestyle?  
 
Another challenge is how do we educate individuals on living healthier lives? What communication/education will resonate with people to “take action”? Is it a particular incentive or disincentive? Is there a particular education statement that needs to conveyed? Is it an insight or emotional benefit that we need to tap into? Whatever it is, it’s worth exploring through the tons of combinations that make up a educational strategy and getting to the right combination of different elements to get people to take control and be more accountable of their health. . . 
 
Best Regards, 
Sasanka 
Posted @ Wednesday, July 13, 2011 8:37 PM by Sasanka Atapattu
Sasanka, excellent and very timely analysis of the problems and hurdles facing the life science industry. I believe that the ideas put forth by Johansson can be applied nicely to pharmaceutical innovation, particularly the notion of challenging existing assumptions.  
 
In fact, I am reminded of the concept of "disruptive innovations" promulgated by Christensen et al., which basically deviates from traditional new product development by creating an entirely new target market, oftentimes a much smaller niche. The way cell phones eroded landlines represents this type of disruption. Translating over to the pharmaceutical/biotech industry, I believe there are several way to push the innovation frontier and disrupt the status quo.  
 
For one, the economic and regulatory climate is mandating a closer evaluation about the cost/benefits of a new product before it will be approved. Gone are the days when me-too ARBs or Statins can enter a market based merely on slight improvements over generic alternatives. It simply is not cost effective in a cost conscious market. Innovation and development programmes focused on pharmacoeconomics will be viewed more favorably from regulatory agencies than those entities based strictly on slight improvements in efficacy or safety.  
 
Another example that comes to mind that similarly shrinks the market, an introduced a disruption, is protein targeted and pharmacogenpmic based innovation. Like Vertex issuing with new drug candidates for Cystic Fibrosis, they are identifying several gene mutations and creating antigorite to specifically target these genes. Such tailored and customized medicines present an ideal disruption because they are guaranteed to work in patients exhibiting those genes; thus, even though the market for the product shrinks based on one's genetic make-up, companies using such strategies would be able to charge a premium since payors and patients would not have to guess whether or not they will respond to the therapy. An exame is how Genentech produces the HER2 diagnostic and provides Hercepin therapy for those patients who express that protein. Again, this limits the market but also creates the new possibility to offer a coupled diagnostic/therapeutic to a smaller demographic at a higher premium. The Oncology market is already doing this, but there is no reason large pharmaceutical companies can't follow suit.  
 
Thanks for the great review! I look forward to more discussion and thoughts on the topic.
Posted @ Wednesday, July 13, 2011 10:25 PM by Mike Palliola
In times like these, when the healthcare industry is undergoing major overhauls, the only appropriate response is to also overhaul the way we approach solutions. I couldn't agree more with the statement that "frameworks can provide directional guidance; however they can often restrict the thinking for your next novel idea." Although the change comes with some risk and uncertainty, it can lead to some fruitful innovations.  
 
Excellent review, Sasanka!
Posted @ Thursday, July 14, 2011 4:03 PM by Mani Kumar, MD
Very insightful and well written, Sasanka. The greatest advances tend to come at the intersection of disparate fields with people who think against the tide. The real challenge is not just dreaming it but executing it. Institutions like Stanford have excelled because they encourage and systematize cross-discipline innovation (BioX project). We are likely to have a paradigm shift in the way we define and approach health within our lifetimes.
Posted @ Friday, July 15, 2011 8:29 AM by Mark Hong, MD
"Think Different" was of course Jobs' mantra for Apple, back when it was trading at $6/share or so. Certainly Pharma could benefit from some "Jobs-like" creativity.
Posted @ Friday, July 15, 2011 11:42 AM by Dawn Bell, PharmD
Great insight on this concept. Currently living the pharma world, I could not agree with you more. Too often we are told to think outside of the box but still told to stay within a specific circumfernce of it. I recently read a book, DRIVE, by Daniel Pink and it discusses why it is important to allow people be creative and how to motivate them to actually want to do this.  
 
Great job.
Posted @ Friday, July 15, 2011 4:36 PM by Jeannette Sanchez-Appel
 
GREAT work Sasanka. Yes, not also every industry but also every life need some kind of innovations or better changes for moving forward. Without them, it expected to stay in the same place. Though in reality it is not staying in the same place, but falls down even from where it was. One more thing. This article doesn't sound like someone's first article, but some expert''s work. If this is your first as said, you are a genius.
Posted @ Saturday, July 16, 2011 8:34 AM by Asanka Rathnayake
Another great book to check out on "thinking differently" is Daniel Pink's a Whole New Mind. It talks about how to tap into Right-Brained thinking as a means to enhance your Left-Brained strategy. There are tons of great exercises in there to help expand your mind and even a section on ideation that he calls Symphony.  
 
At the end of the day, while new ideas are important, it is even more important to be able to quantify, qualify, and objectively rank your great ideas so that they can lead to action and ultimately measurable ROI.
Posted @ Monday, July 18, 2011 1:32 PM by Angela Hill, INCITRIO | creative solutions for global brands
Excellent work Sasanka. The review is concise and well conceived. I like it when anyone challenges our industry to think differently-- All the best, Henry
Posted @ Monday, July 18, 2011 10:12 PM by Henry McCarthy
Being in the midst of the dramatic changes in pharma, this article brings up some great points on how we can approach idea generation to try and bring about the most effective evolution of the industry.
Posted @ Wednesday, July 20, 2011 1:22 PM by Rocco Zullo
Post Comment
Name
 *
Email
 *
Website (optional)
Comment
 *

Allowed tags: <a> link, <b> bold, <i> italics