Fuld & Company's Competitive Intelligence Blog

In this second part of our interview with Wayne Rosenkrans, who ran strategic gaming activities for AstraZeneca for nearly a decade and is now VP Consulting for Fuld & Company, we examine what factors contribute to successful strategic gaming for Big Pharma – or any of Healthcare’s players.
Gaming success factors:
LF: Which healthcare companies or organizations have used strategic gaming successfully to anticipate competitive threats?
WR: Most companies in the industry have, at one point or another, successfully used strategic gaming.  Is there one that has consistently used it for maximum effect? Probably not.
LF: What factors underlie successful strategic gaming at a major pharmaceutical company?
WR:  They might include (1) A company whose culture is “outward looking,” not inwardly focused; (2) One with a long-term view; (3) Management support for authentic strategic vision—not just  buzz words); (4) Interest and belief in the power of competitive intelligence, both individual and organizational.
LF: Can you describe mistakes you have witnessed healthcare companies typically make when running war games or scenario analysis events?
WR: There are a few things which stand out

• Poor or inappropriate timing. Usually way to late for the game to have an actual impact on strategy.  Once the phase III supertanker is underway is not the time to run an exercise.
• Ignoring or rationalizing the outcome of the game, a form of corporate denial
• Not including the right teams for the game to truly test strategy – the biggest variable on a strategy may well not be a competitor company, but rather a government agency or payor organization
• Not allowing enough time for proper preparation for the exercise (goes along with the second bullet point), and trying to short-cut the process to meet a time-line.
• Insisting on developing best/worst/most likely scenarios for a scenario exercise.  If you can actually meaningfully predict those, why are you having the exercise?  Scenarios are to explore the plausible boundaries of the future which by definition are unknowable.

LF: Why does war gaming or strategy gaming remain an important tool in a company’s decision-making arsenal
WR: Done properly, with steps taken to minimize institutional bias, meaningful elicitation of the best thinking in the company, and receptive leadership to strategic change, there are no better ways to market proof and future proof organizational strategies.  Most of the rest of strategy arsenal is really geared toward monitoring and understanding the current situation, and hence really act in support of the gaming exercises.
Wayne A. Rosenkrans – Biography
In addition to spearheading the strategic gaming activity for Fuld & Company, Wayne is a Distinguished Fellow at the Center for Biomedical Innovation at MIT working on healthcare strategy and policy issues related to science and medicine.  He is also Chairman, President and a member of the board of directors of the Personalized Medicine Coalition, a Washington DC based organization working with government and other agencies on evolving healthcare policy for Personalized Healthcare, and Chief Applications Officer for SciTech Strategies focusing on scientific competency and capacity development for academia and industry.  He is a former Director of External Relations for the Personalized Healthcare Team and Evidence-based Medicine (EBM) as part of External Medical Relations at AstraZeneca where he had responsibility for long-range external relations strategy and policy development.  He has presented at numerous forums on aspects of personalized healthcare, evidence-based medicine, new development paradigms, and strategy development.  He holds an S.B. in Biology from MIT, a Ph.D. in Cell and Molecular Biology from Boston Univ., and received post-doctoral training in Cancer and Radiation Biology at the Univ. of Rochester.  Wayne lives in Malvern, PA, is married with two college-age children, and enjoys teaching martial arts (Tang Soo Do), restoring antique/classic Fords, and aviation history.

Fuld & Company Announces Appointment of MIT Fellow to Head Pharmaceutical Team’s Strategic Gaming and Consulting Services

CAMBRIDGE, Mass., Dec 16, 2008 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ — Fuld & Company today announced that Wayne Rosenkrans, Ph.D., will join the Company as vice president consulting, specializing in strategic gaming for the pharmaceutical and healthcare industries.

“We are excited to have Dr. Rosenkrans join the Fuld team,” said Leonard Fuld, president. “His extensive accomplishment in the global pharmaceutical industry; government and academia — coupled with his involvement on the cutting edge of personalized medicine — makes him an extraordinary asset for our clients.”

Fuld & Company’s Pharmaceuticals Practice provides all levels of competitive support from research to consulting. The firm has serviced over 100 biotech, pharmaceutical and diagnostics/device companies for training, custom research, and systems consulting needs. Fuld assesses new product progress from early-stage development to product launch, technology partnerships between biotech and big pharma, as well as changing global technologies, regulations, and markets. The firm has researched over 60 different therapeutic categories worldwide.

Rosenkrans is a Distinguished Fellow at the Center for Biomedical Innovation at MIT working on healthcare strategy and policy issues related to science and medicine. He is also Chairman, President and a member of the board of directors of the Personalized Medicine Coalition, a Washington DC-based organization working with government and other agencies on evolving healthcare policy for Personalized Healthcare. He is also Chief Applications Officer for SciTech Strategies, focusing on scientific competency and capacity development for academia and industry.

Previously, Rosenkrans served as Director of External Relations for the Personalized Healthcare Team and Evidence-based Medicine (EBM) at AstraZeneca where he had responsibility for long-range external relations strategy and policy development. He has presented at numerous forums on aspects of personalized healthcare, evidence-based medicine, new development paradigms, and strategy development.

Rosenkrans holds an S.B. in Biology from MIT, a Ph.D. in Cell and Molecular Biology from Boston University, and received post-doctoral training in Cancer and Radiation Biology at the University of Rochester.

Fuld & Company, based in Cambridge, Mass., with offices in London, is the world’s preeminent research and consulting firm in the field of competitive intelligence. Founded by Leonard Fuld, a pioneer and recognized leading authority in the field, Fuld & Company is a full-service competitive intelligence firm, providing research and analysis, strategic gaming, intelligence process consulting, and training to help clients understand the external competitive environment. The firm’s mission is to help clients improve their performance by making better decisions through the application of solid intelligence on their markets and competitors. Additional information can be found at: www.fuld.com.

Dear Colleague:

Fuld & Company is proud to announce the appointment of Wayne Rosenkrans, currently a Distinguished Fellow at the Center for Biomedical Innovation at MIT, as its head of strategic gaming for the healthcare industry. Wayne brings over two decades of experience in war gaming and scenario analysis for leading pharmaceutical firms, as well as healthcare and government organizations.  We invite you to read a question-and-answer interview with Wayne where he outlines some of the unprecedented challenges pharmaceutical and biotech firms will be facing in the years ahead.
Product launches or failures, industry mergers, disruptions caused by a shaky economy or a particular competitive move are all reasons to play out alternatives through a strategy game. Please contact me or Cindy Gerber Tomlinson (cgtomlinson@fuld.com) if you have any questions.  In the meantime, we hope will find Wayne’s interview enlightening.
Sincerely,

Leonard M. Fuld
President

Wayne A. Rosenkrans – Biography
In addition to spearheading the strategic gaming activity for Fuld & Company, Wayne is a Distinguished Fellow at the Center for Biomedical Innovation at MIT working on healthcare strategy and policy issues related to science and medicine.  He is also Chairman, President and a member of the board of directors of the Personalized Medicine Coalition, a Washington DC based organization working with government and other agencies on evolving healthcare policy for Personalized Healthcare, and Chief Applications Officer for SciTech Strategies focusing on scientific competency and capacity development for academia and industry.  He is a former Director of External Relations for the Personalized Healthcare Team and Evidence-based Medicine (EBM) as part of External Medical Relations at AstraZeneca where he had responsibility for long-range external relations strategy and policy development.  He has presented at numerous forums on aspects of personalized healthcare, evidence-based medicine, new development paradigms, and strategy development.  He holds an S.B. in Biology from MIT, a Ph.D. in Cell and Molecular Biology from Boston Univ., and received post-doctoral training in Cancer and Radiation Biology at the Univ. of Rochester.  Wayne lives in Malvern, PA, is married with two college-age children, and enjoys teaching martial arts (Tang Soo Do), restoring antique/classic Fords, and aviation history.

Part one of a two-part interview
BIG PHARMA AND PLANNING FOR THE NEW ADMINISTRATION

LF: You are currently working with MIT’s Center for Biomedical Innovation — as well as working with Georgetown University and Federal government agencies on future healthcare policy.

 Over the next decade, do you see a glacial shift in healthcare coverage or one that is more incremental?  How can Big Pharma and the biotech industries prepare for whichever scenario becomes reality?

WR: We are primed today for a dramatic change to the healthcare system, which will come either from pre-emptive change in how care is delivered . . . or an equally dramatic collapse of the system. 

Big Pharma and the biotechs, need totally new business models for how they do therapeutic development and how they go-to-market.  I believe we’re witnessing today the accelerating implosion of the pharma industry as more and more companies find that the old levers they used to pull to solve the industry’s issues no longer work.

• Blockbuster or one-size-fits-all mentality;
• Low-risk R&D relying on incremental innovation that doesn’t create medically meaningful differentiation;
• Relying on  marketing muscle to create product differentiation, in the absence of clinical data;
• Utilizing sales reps to add share;
• Basically, viewing healthcare as a “market good” rather than a social good;
• Adversarial relationships with payors;
None of these are working currently; yet the pharma industry hasn’t taken meaningful steps to create new effective ones, hence the accelerating implosion

Strategic gaming is a low-risk, relatively low cost way to “stress test” new approaches, to bring together academics, industry, payor and government representatives and explore new rules and possible outcomes in this new era. 

LF: Government agencies worldwide can be either catalyst or barriers to competition. Are there foreign agencies and markets that are bellwethers for more global trends in the healthcare industry? How can these be identified?
WR: Here, again, is where “gaming” past scenarios, and utilizing these “simulators” to look at the present and near term scenarios can be invaluable.

The US market is the outlier globally in its healthcare system.  Other countries manage their health costs through various measures, with differing degrees of intervention ranging from Germany (more draconian than most) , to the United Kingdom and Commonwealth countries with their national health services and effectiveness assessment organizations.

It is almost a certainty that the United States will adopt  some form of national health coverage and assessment organization—supported with a constantly evolving alliance of industry and government entities.  Assessing that alliance, for the benefit of all of the players, will probably best be accomplished through periodic “gaming” reviews.  .
As flawed as they may be, I would look to the UK, along with Canada and Australia as the “canaries in the mine” for tomorrow.

INDUSTRY DISRUPTION – A STEADY VARIABLE
LF: For economic and other reasons, disruptions seem to plague every major industry over the last few months.

What are some of the short-term, as well as long-term disruptions you see for the pharmaceutical and healthcare industry overall?

WR: Barring major scientific innovations, or any major public policy changes, disruptions will be a key part of the industry’s environment. Of course, drug pricing, aggressive marketing, and the lack of coverage for millions of Americans will continue to be significant issues.

What is clear is that the value of healthcare (quality vs. expended/resources) has become a key forward looking issue.

If the industry can’t demonstrate with data that they are delivering higher value, either through higher quality, or reduced cost, or both, they won’t succeed in the future – promising product pipelines, or not. 

Healthcare costs continue to increase at double digit rates, while the quality of the healthcare delivered continues to fall.  If value is quality over cost, then value is falling at an even greater rate. 

Yes, there is superb care available in the US today at places like Cleveland Clinic, Mayo Clinic, etc, but the overall standard of care in this country ranks only 37th worldwide and some 55% of care delivered is inappropriate (overuse, underuse, or misuse).

New approaches are needed here—focused and candid discussions between industry, payors, patient representatives and government have proven to a major platform for moving this discussion forward.

LF:  What are some of the key questions these forums should consider?

WR:
• What works best – comparative clinical effectiveness per resource expended
• For whom – meaningful segmentation of patient populations to increase the benefit of therapy
• Under what circumstances – real world clinical data, not necessarily the sterile world of the randomized clinical trail

Real data from real patients in real care situations are needed to best answer these questions.  The system (if there is one, which is debatable) is neither configured today to generate this data–nor participants incented properly to use it.