- Email: [email protected]
Challenges faced by the pharmaceutical industry: training graduates for employment in pharmaceutical R&D
European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 12 (2001) 353–359 www.elsevier.nl / locate / ejps
Commentary
Challenges faced by the pharmaceutical industry: training graduates for employment in pharmaceutical R&D q K. George Mooney Pfizer Global Research & Development, Groton Laboratories, Eastern Point Road 8118 /01, Groton, CT 06340, USA Received 5 January 2001; accepted 7 January 2001
Abstract There is a shortfall between output from universities and demand by the pharmaceutical and health care industries for science and engineering graduates able to rapidly contribute to success in the business environment. Against a changing infrastructure of pharmaceutical research, the development of new chemical entities by major companies accounts for a high proportion of R&D expenditure. Allocation of staff is divided fairly evenly between discovery, non-clinical and clinical research activities and in all categories the new sciences are likely to be used extensively. In dealing with the shortfall the challenge comes from balancing education in basic science with training in the emerging areas of science and technology. There is a need for a ‘partnership’ that includes not only industry and academia but also government, since these three bodies have both synergistic and diverging interests in scientific education. On the education-training continuum, industry should recognise what it most values from academia and provide as much input and support as possible. At the same time universities must question their ability to fulfil their traditional educational role in the face of current rates of adoption of new sciences and technology. While disciplinary excellence remains vital for PhD students, multi-disciplinary programmes are becoming increasingly important to enable graduates to function effectively in the modern, globalised pharmaceutical industry. 2001 Published by Elsevier Science B.V. Keywords: Pharmaceutical sciences; Education; Training; Pharmaceutical Industry; Recruitment
1. Introduction There is no doubt that pharmaceuticals and the associated health care science sectors have been areas of significant growth over the past two decades. This growth has driven the demand for science and engineering graduates who need to be increasingly creative, are good problem solvers, can work in multi-disciplinary teams and are well motivated to rapidly contribute to the success of their science in the business environment. Despite this rather attractive scenario there are several major challenges. Some of these clearly fall into the academic and government policy domain and others into the industrial, strategic investment domain but an increasing number must be approached more on a partnership basis than in the past. Whilst focussing on the challenges from an industrial point of view, a number of themes will q
Paper based on Dr Mooney’s presentation to CMR International / EUFEPS Workshop 22 May 2000. Prepared by: Brenda Mullinger, Wordpower Projects, Larches, Shipbourne, Kent TN11 9PL.
be discussed in this paper against a backdrop of defining the ‘partnership’ between academia, industry and government (Fig. 1). Within that partnership there are synergistic and diverging interests in scientific education.
2. The changing face of pharmaceutical R&D Over the past 15–20 years there has been a marked change in the infrastructure of pharmaceutical research overall. Major pharmaceutical companies no longer account for 85-90% of the area (Fig. 2); contract research organisations (CROs), biotechnology companies and those involved in drug delivery have all increased. In addition, there are now specialist technology providers in all areas, from the discovery environment to drug delivery. This evolution is certain to continue; its impact on academia is as yet undefined. As an example of how our industry looks today, a profile of the UK pharmaceutical industry in 1998 confirms a mix of small, medium and large companies (Fig. 3.)
0928-0987 / 01 / $ – see front matter 2001 Published by Elsevier Science B.V. PII: S0928-0987( 01 )00098-7
354
K.G. Mooney / European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 12 (2001) 353 – 359
Fig. 1. Aspects of educational challenges in science.
Fig. 2. Changing face of pharmaceutical R&D in industry.
Further investigation, however, reveals that just 10 of the companies accounted for 66% of the total R&D expenditure in the UK (Halliday et al., 1999), a pattern that is likely to be similar in the rest of Europe and the US. Major pharmaceutical companies seek a lot of external contracting; in recent years UK commercial contracting has increased both in real terms and, also, relative to the global situation (Fig. 4). By contrast, from a UK perspec-
tive, ‘contracts’ with academia (including sponsored basic research) have declined from 6.4% to 4.5% of the external R&D expenditure between 1998 and 2000; the same is probably true for the global environment. This raises the question as to whether commercial aspects of contracting are in some way detracting from what, in the past, was typically done in academia. The clinical sciences dominate R&D investment both in
Fig. 3. Total UK R&D expenditure (inc. capital) per company in 1998.
K.G. Mooney / European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 12 (2001) 353 – 359
355
Fig. 4. UK / Global proportion of R&D external expenditure spend on commercial and academic contracts.
the UK and globally; discovery and non-clinical research, where most of the pharmaceutical scientists reside, receive a lower proportion of the mean R&D spend (Fig. 5). Despite this, the allocation of staff within the UK industry is fairly evenly divided between these three categories and in each category there is a demand for both specialists and generalists (Fig. 6). The primary focus of investment remains the development of new chemical entities (54% of mean R&D spend); biotech research (predominantly new chemical entities) accounts for a further 22% with the remainder being devoted to line extensions or drug delivery systems. In all categories the new sciences (combinatorial chemistry, pharmacoepidemiology etc) are likely to be used extensively to yield benefit; the challenge is to determine how student supply might keep up with demand.
3. The skills shortages In the assessment of future training needs for PhD graduates for European pharmaceutical companies, the Committee on Industrial Relations of EUFEPS (1999) indicated that the newest scientific areas have the highest demand for graduates and the lowest output from academia (Fig. 7). This outcome is largely to be expected as, inevitably, there are relatively few people in any new area. The high demand for graduates with in-silico and mathematical-computational skills offers a real opportunity for academia as it is a relatively inexpensive area in which to invest. A more surprising outcome from this survey was the perceived shortfall in available graduates in some estab-
Fig. 5. UK / global R&D expenditure in 1998 by area.
356
K.G. Mooney / European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 12 (2001) 353 – 359
Fig. 6. Staff allocation in UK R&D 1998.
lished disciplines and in those with in vivo pharmacology skills, always considered a strong area particularly in the UK, and probably in Europe. Potential reasons for such shortfalls include the costs of laboratories and equipment and, more particularly, the impact of legislation (Fig. 8). Whereas industry has the resources to cope with this, that is not always the case in universities. Clearly, this problem warrants government attention. The attractiveness of science to students, the image of the pharmaceutical industry and lack of qualified staff to teach on PhD programmes are all areas to which the industry can contribute.
4. Education versus training The balance between education in basic science and training in emerging areas of science and technology underlies the perceived gap in the supply of appropriately
Fig. 8. Potential reasons for the academic shortfall in output.
skilled PhD graduates. Whereas education provides the basis on which the recipient can continually question the status quo, training does almost the opposite by focussing
Fig. 7. Industry’s view of future PhD areas where there is a potential lack of qualified personnel.
K.G. Mooney / European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 12 (2001) 353 – 359
357
Fig. 9. Key philosophical questions.
on the currently accepted state of knowledge. For academia to concentrate on education and industry on training is a commonly held view but one open to debate. Another philosophical question revolves around the ‘adoption’ rates of new sciences. A comparison of pharmacokinetics, which emerged as a discipline in the 1960s, and the more recent pharmacogenomics, for example, reveals a much faster ‘take up’ and application of the newer science (Fig. 9). The implications of this for academia are enormous, giving rise to a number of key questions from industry: • Is academia able to provide its traditional role with the new rates of adoption of new science and technology? • What does industry value most from academia on the education-training continuum? • Where does academia see itself? • How can more multidisciplinary courses and academic programmes be created? • Why and how do academics teach the basis of scientific thought and argument?
• How can teamwork be built into a PhD/ MSc project? • What is ‘best practice’ in establishing effective academic-industrial links? The answers to many of these questions provide the keys to competitiveness for the industry.
5. Industry’s role in training and development There is much that industry can do, and is doing, within the ‘partnership’ to foster the development of appropriately skilled graduates (Fig. 10). For example, a course in process chemistry at Liverpool University, set up by R&D chemists from Pfizer, has not only been successful in producing really good students but also has given a much broader insight to those chemists. The new entrant to industry requires not just ‘hard’ skills but a number of ‘softer’ skills, particularly the ability to work in teams (Fig. 11). For the PhD graduate, initially there is almost an automatic focus on scientific leadership
Fig. 10. What could industry do better?
358
K.G. Mooney / European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 12 (2001) 353 – 359
Fig. 11. Key qualities required by industry.
but very soon they are required to develop practical, tactical and strategic roles if they are to further their career (Fig. 12). The competency model that is being applied is the balance between knowledge, skill, experience and behaviour. As this is constantly used within industry to evaluate staff, academia could do much to introduce these concepts into PhD programmes.
• Academia / industry will have to develop a more synergistic relationship. • Government funding should be prioritised, taking industry’s needs into account. • While disciplinary excellence is vital, multi-disciplinary programmes are going to be increasingly important. Finally, the concluding words of Prof. Borchardt (Borchardt, 1997) are turning out to be very prophetic:
6. Conclusions In defining the partnership between industry, academia and government a number of issues should be borne in mind. • Critical skills shortfalls are seen in the pharmaceutical industry. • The structure of the industry’s R&D has changed dramatically.
‘‘I would like to encourage all those involved in graduate programs in pharmaceutical sciences to address the following question: Is our graduate program training students to function effectively in the new, highly integrated and globalised pharmaceutical industry? If the answer is no, I challenge them to develop activities and /or experiences for their students that will better prepare them for this environment’’.
Fig. 12. Developing the individual’s strengths.
K.G. Mooney / European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 12 (2001) 353 – 359
References Halliday, R.G., Drasdo, A.L. and McAuslane, J.A.N. 1999. Profile of the pharmaceutical industry from 1998 to 2000, R&D expenditure and staffing. CMR International. EUFEPS. 1999. An assessment of the future training needs for PhD
359
graduates for European pharmaceutical companies. A report from the Committee on Industrial Relations (CIR) of EUFEPS. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 7, iii-v. Borchardt, R.T., 1997. Are graduate programs training pharmaceutical scientists to function effectively in the new, highly integrated and globalized pharmaceutical industry? Pharm. Res. 14 (5), 554–555.
Commentary
Challenges faced by the pharmaceutical industry: training graduates for employment in pharmaceutical R&D q K. George Mooney Pfizer Global Research & Development, Groton Laboratories, Eastern Point Road 8118 /01, Groton, CT 06340, USA Received 5 January 2001; accepted 7 January 2001
Abstract There is a shortfall between output from universities and demand by the pharmaceutical and health care industries for science and engineering graduates able to rapidly contribute to success in the business environment. Against a changing infrastructure of pharmaceutical research, the development of new chemical entities by major companies accounts for a high proportion of R&D expenditure. Allocation of staff is divided fairly evenly between discovery, non-clinical and clinical research activities and in all categories the new sciences are likely to be used extensively. In dealing with the shortfall the challenge comes from balancing education in basic science with training in the emerging areas of science and technology. There is a need for a ‘partnership’ that includes not only industry and academia but also government, since these three bodies have both synergistic and diverging interests in scientific education. On the education-training continuum, industry should recognise what it most values from academia and provide as much input and support as possible. At the same time universities must question their ability to fulfil their traditional educational role in the face of current rates of adoption of new sciences and technology. While disciplinary excellence remains vital for PhD students, multi-disciplinary programmes are becoming increasingly important to enable graduates to function effectively in the modern, globalised pharmaceutical industry. 2001 Published by Elsevier Science B.V. Keywords: Pharmaceutical sciences; Education; Training; Pharmaceutical Industry; Recruitment
1. Introduction There is no doubt that pharmaceuticals and the associated health care science sectors have been areas of significant growth over the past two decades. This growth has driven the demand for science and engineering graduates who need to be increasingly creative, are good problem solvers, can work in multi-disciplinary teams and are well motivated to rapidly contribute to the success of their science in the business environment. Despite this rather attractive scenario there are several major challenges. Some of these clearly fall into the academic and government policy domain and others into the industrial, strategic investment domain but an increasing number must be approached more on a partnership basis than in the past. Whilst focussing on the challenges from an industrial point of view, a number of themes will q
Paper based on Dr Mooney’s presentation to CMR International / EUFEPS Workshop 22 May 2000. Prepared by: Brenda Mullinger, Wordpower Projects, Larches, Shipbourne, Kent TN11 9PL.
be discussed in this paper against a backdrop of defining the ‘partnership’ between academia, industry and government (Fig. 1). Within that partnership there are synergistic and diverging interests in scientific education.
2. The changing face of pharmaceutical R&D Over the past 15–20 years there has been a marked change in the infrastructure of pharmaceutical research overall. Major pharmaceutical companies no longer account for 85-90% of the area (Fig. 2); contract research organisations (CROs), biotechnology companies and those involved in drug delivery have all increased. In addition, there are now specialist technology providers in all areas, from the discovery environment to drug delivery. This evolution is certain to continue; its impact on academia is as yet undefined. As an example of how our industry looks today, a profile of the UK pharmaceutical industry in 1998 confirms a mix of small, medium and large companies (Fig. 3.)
0928-0987 / 01 / $ – see front matter 2001 Published by Elsevier Science B.V. PII: S0928-0987( 01 )00098-7
354
K.G. Mooney / European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 12 (2001) 353 – 359
Fig. 1. Aspects of educational challenges in science.
Fig. 2. Changing face of pharmaceutical R&D in industry.
Further investigation, however, reveals that just 10 of the companies accounted for 66% of the total R&D expenditure in the UK (Halliday et al., 1999), a pattern that is likely to be similar in the rest of Europe and the US. Major pharmaceutical companies seek a lot of external contracting; in recent years UK commercial contracting has increased both in real terms and, also, relative to the global situation (Fig. 4). By contrast, from a UK perspec-
tive, ‘contracts’ with academia (including sponsored basic research) have declined from 6.4% to 4.5% of the external R&D expenditure between 1998 and 2000; the same is probably true for the global environment. This raises the question as to whether commercial aspects of contracting are in some way detracting from what, in the past, was typically done in academia. The clinical sciences dominate R&D investment both in
Fig. 3. Total UK R&D expenditure (inc. capital) per company in 1998.
K.G. Mooney / European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 12 (2001) 353 – 359
355
Fig. 4. UK / Global proportion of R&D external expenditure spend on commercial and academic contracts.
the UK and globally; discovery and non-clinical research, where most of the pharmaceutical scientists reside, receive a lower proportion of the mean R&D spend (Fig. 5). Despite this, the allocation of staff within the UK industry is fairly evenly divided between these three categories and in each category there is a demand for both specialists and generalists (Fig. 6). The primary focus of investment remains the development of new chemical entities (54% of mean R&D spend); biotech research (predominantly new chemical entities) accounts for a further 22% with the remainder being devoted to line extensions or drug delivery systems. In all categories the new sciences (combinatorial chemistry, pharmacoepidemiology etc) are likely to be used extensively to yield benefit; the challenge is to determine how student supply might keep up with demand.
3. The skills shortages In the assessment of future training needs for PhD graduates for European pharmaceutical companies, the Committee on Industrial Relations of EUFEPS (1999) indicated that the newest scientific areas have the highest demand for graduates and the lowest output from academia (Fig. 7). This outcome is largely to be expected as, inevitably, there are relatively few people in any new area. The high demand for graduates with in-silico and mathematical-computational skills offers a real opportunity for academia as it is a relatively inexpensive area in which to invest. A more surprising outcome from this survey was the perceived shortfall in available graduates in some estab-
Fig. 5. UK / global R&D expenditure in 1998 by area.
356
K.G. Mooney / European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 12 (2001) 353 – 359
Fig. 6. Staff allocation in UK R&D 1998.
lished disciplines and in those with in vivo pharmacology skills, always considered a strong area particularly in the UK, and probably in Europe. Potential reasons for such shortfalls include the costs of laboratories and equipment and, more particularly, the impact of legislation (Fig. 8). Whereas industry has the resources to cope with this, that is not always the case in universities. Clearly, this problem warrants government attention. The attractiveness of science to students, the image of the pharmaceutical industry and lack of qualified staff to teach on PhD programmes are all areas to which the industry can contribute.
4. Education versus training The balance between education in basic science and training in emerging areas of science and technology underlies the perceived gap in the supply of appropriately
Fig. 8. Potential reasons for the academic shortfall in output.
skilled PhD graduates. Whereas education provides the basis on which the recipient can continually question the status quo, training does almost the opposite by focussing
Fig. 7. Industry’s view of future PhD areas where there is a potential lack of qualified personnel.
K.G. Mooney / European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 12 (2001) 353 – 359
357
Fig. 9. Key philosophical questions.
on the currently accepted state of knowledge. For academia to concentrate on education and industry on training is a commonly held view but one open to debate. Another philosophical question revolves around the ‘adoption’ rates of new sciences. A comparison of pharmacokinetics, which emerged as a discipline in the 1960s, and the more recent pharmacogenomics, for example, reveals a much faster ‘take up’ and application of the newer science (Fig. 9). The implications of this for academia are enormous, giving rise to a number of key questions from industry: • Is academia able to provide its traditional role with the new rates of adoption of new science and technology? • What does industry value most from academia on the education-training continuum? • Where does academia see itself? • How can more multidisciplinary courses and academic programmes be created? • Why and how do academics teach the basis of scientific thought and argument?
• How can teamwork be built into a PhD/ MSc project? • What is ‘best practice’ in establishing effective academic-industrial links? The answers to many of these questions provide the keys to competitiveness for the industry.
5. Industry’s role in training and development There is much that industry can do, and is doing, within the ‘partnership’ to foster the development of appropriately skilled graduates (Fig. 10). For example, a course in process chemistry at Liverpool University, set up by R&D chemists from Pfizer, has not only been successful in producing really good students but also has given a much broader insight to those chemists. The new entrant to industry requires not just ‘hard’ skills but a number of ‘softer’ skills, particularly the ability to work in teams (Fig. 11). For the PhD graduate, initially there is almost an automatic focus on scientific leadership
Fig. 10. What could industry do better?
358
K.G. Mooney / European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 12 (2001) 353 – 359
Fig. 11. Key qualities required by industry.
but very soon they are required to develop practical, tactical and strategic roles if they are to further their career (Fig. 12). The competency model that is being applied is the balance between knowledge, skill, experience and behaviour. As this is constantly used within industry to evaluate staff, academia could do much to introduce these concepts into PhD programmes.
• Academia / industry will have to develop a more synergistic relationship. • Government funding should be prioritised, taking industry’s needs into account. • While disciplinary excellence is vital, multi-disciplinary programmes are going to be increasingly important. Finally, the concluding words of Prof. Borchardt (Borchardt, 1997) are turning out to be very prophetic:
6. Conclusions In defining the partnership between industry, academia and government a number of issues should be borne in mind. • Critical skills shortfalls are seen in the pharmaceutical industry. • The structure of the industry’s R&D has changed dramatically.
‘‘I would like to encourage all those involved in graduate programs in pharmaceutical sciences to address the following question: Is our graduate program training students to function effectively in the new, highly integrated and globalised pharmaceutical industry? If the answer is no, I challenge them to develop activities and /or experiences for their students that will better prepare them for this environment’’.
Fig. 12. Developing the individual’s strengths.
K.G. Mooney / European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 12 (2001) 353 – 359
References Halliday, R.G., Drasdo, A.L. and McAuslane, J.A.N. 1999. Profile of the pharmaceutical industry from 1998 to 2000, R&D expenditure and staffing. CMR International. EUFEPS. 1999. An assessment of the future training needs for PhD
359
graduates for European pharmaceutical companies. A report from the Committee on Industrial Relations (CIR) of EUFEPS. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 7, iii-v. Borchardt, R.T., 1997. Are graduate programs training pharmaceutical scientists to function effectively in the new, highly integrated and globalized pharmaceutical industry? Pharm. Res. 14 (5), 554–555.