Drug Information Journal, Vol. 30. pp.

243-256, 1996 0092-8615/%

Printed in the USA. All rights reserved. Copyright 0 1996 Drug Information Association Inc.

SCIENTIFIC COMPETITIVE
INTELLIGENCE IN
R&D DECISION MAKING
THOMASF. KROL,BS, PHARMD
Consultant
JAMESC. COLEMAN,
PHD, MBA
Senior Analyst
J. BRYANT,PHARMD
PATRICK
Manager
Scientific Information and Analysis, Hoechst Marion Roussel, Inc., Kansas City, Missouri

Scientific competitive intelligence (CI) resides in the domain of technical or technol-

ogy competitive intelligence. In the pharmaceutical industry, scientific CI is the pro-
cess of monitoring competitors’ research and product pipelines as well as science and
technology trends. It differsfrom traditional business intelligence in the type of data
analyzed and the expertise of the analysts. Clientsfor scientific CI span a broad cut
across the company. Included are upper management, strategic development groups,
commercial and marketing groups, and research and development (R&D).
The impact that scientific CIcan have on R&D decision making andplanningpro-
cesses is multifactorial and involves many groups throughout a typical R&D organi-
zation. These groups include discovery scientists, discovery research management,
development scientists, development management, regulatory, and others. The role
and impact of scientific CI on these groups within a pharmaceutical company varies
with the need of each group and works best when mutual benefits are shared and
strong relationships are created.

Key Words: Competitive intelligence; Strategic intelligence; Strategy; Competitor;

Decision making

SCIENTIFIC COMPETITIVE intelli- search and product pipelines in addition to

gence is a subcategory of technology or
technical competitive intelligence that is
focused on research and development ac-
tivities (see Figure 1). Scientific CI encom-
passes the monitoring of competitors’ re-
Presented at the DIA Annual Meeting, June 5-7,
1994, Washington, District of Columbia.
Reprint address: Thomas F. Krol, Hoechst Mar-
ion Roussel, Inc., PO Box 9627, Kansas City, MO
64134427.
243
Downloaded from dij.sagepub.com by guest on August 15, 2015
activities and technologies that may affect
a company’s future business. Esposito and
Gilmont note that pharmaceutical compa-
nies will derive their greatest leverage from
intelligence efforts in R&D (1). The pur-
pose of this paper is to review how the dis-
cipline of scientific CI may be used to im-
prove R&D decision making.
The pharmaceutical and biotechnology
industries have undergone major changes
in the last several years and changes
are likely (2,3). Financial analysts esti-
244 Thomas F. Krol, James C . Coleman, and Patrick J . Bryant
TECHNICAL INTELLIGENCE
FIGURE 1. Competitive intelligence.
mate that as the rate of growth of the total
pharmaceutical market decreases, the rate
of restructuring, new business ventures,
and eventual consolidation of the industry
will increase (4). Because of these signifi-
cant changes to health care and the phar-
maceutical industry, the need for opti-
mized decision making will be of critical
importance. In this new environment,
pressure to make the right decisions is in-
creasing and tolerance for mistakes is de-
creasing.
A key component of decision making
involves continuously monitoring two im-
portant factors exterior to the company.
These are:
1 . Advances in science and technology
that may affect the company, and
2. Keeping track of competitors’ activities
that may affect the company.
Continuously monitoring these t w o fac-
tors and estimating how these changes will
affect a company, a group of companies,
or the entire industry is one of the tasks of
the scientific CI unit. In the coming years
the need for scientific CI to fuel good tac-
tical and strategic decision making will in-
crease.
The words “competitive intelligence”
often conjure thoughts of the Central In-
telligence Agency, espionage, and James
Bond-type secretive and unscrupulous
practices depicted in popular movies. In
the business world, competitive intelli-
gence should be practiced within explicit
Downloaded from dij.sagepub.com by guest on August 15, 2015
BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE
legal and ethical guidelines. Competitive
intelligence is not spying. It is obtaining
information that is available in the public
domain and critically analyzing it. Cre-
ativity and persistence will usually provide
what is needed. Bribery, theft, digging
through garbage, trespassing, and other
unscrupulous acts are illegal and are not
necessary to accomplish the needed tasks.
To avoid ethical dilemmas it is highly
recommended that CI groups develop a
code of ethical standards and abide within
the guidelines. I f gray areas occur, the is-
sues should be escalated to senior manage-
ment, if necessary. Table 1 lists the Society
for Competitive Intelligence Profession-
als’ Code of Ethics. (For additional infor-
mation on legal and ethical guidelines the
reader is referred to the Society for Com-
petitive Intelligence Professionals, 1700
Diagonal Road, Suite 520, Alexandria,
VA 223 14. Telephone: 703-739-0696.)
Pharmaceutical and many biotechnol-
ogy companies have unique pipelines of
potential new products at various stages of
development. The pipelines can be divided
into two groups:
1 . Research project pipelines which con-
sist of projects prior to the time a lead
compound is identified and chosen, and
2. Product pipelines which represent prod-
ucts from lead compounds up through
market approval (see Figure 2).
Scientific CI within the pharmaceutical in-
dustry involves identifying research proj-
Scientific Competitive Intelligence in R&D 245

TABLE 1
Code of Ethics
To continually strive to increase respect and recognition for the profession on local, state,
and national levels
To pursue his or her duties with zeal and dilligence while maintaining the highest degree
of professionalism and avoiding all unethical practices
To faithfully adhere to and abide by his or her company’s policies, objectives, and guide-
lines
To comply with all applicable laws
To accurately disclose all relevant information, including identity of the professional and
his or her organization, prior to all interviews
0 To fully respect all requests for confidentiality of information

To promote and encourage full compliance with these ethical standards within his or her
company, with third party contractors, and within the entire profession

ect and product pipelines of other re-
searchers and developers, and assessing
the impact these pipelines may have on the
treatment of a disease and the potential
commercial viability of a company’s own
future products (6). Once this impact is as-
sessed, appropriate strategies can be devel-
oped to increase the likelihood of future
success. After initial assessments have
been conducted, a continuous process to
monitor key findings, assess impact, and
affect strategy development is required.
Competitive intelligence, as a disci-
pline, has been evolving since industrial-
ized nations were formed in the late 1800s
(7). The primary emphasis of CI has tradi-
tionally been on marketplace activities in
business and marketing groups. It has
been practiced in the business and market-
ing environment for an estimated 15 years.
Some of the first publications on CI were
in the late 1960s and early 1970s (8,9). The
landmark book published by Michael Por-
ter in 1980, however, was the true begin-
ning for many companies and has become
an important CI reference (10,ll). CI has
been taught in many business schools for
about 10 years, usually as a component of
strategy, yet controversial areas about the
best way to incorporate CI in each organi-
zation remain (12).
In the last 8-10 years, CI has become a
focus of R&D groups. High technology
industries such as telecommunications,
aerospace, computers, and electronics have
been practicing technology CI the longest.
Only within the last 5-6 years has CI in
R&D become a focus of the pharmaceuti-
cal industry and its role and importance
are increasing.
The model depicted in Figure 3 helps to
define competitive intelligence. The model
illustrates that “data” are available from
multiple sources. Once these data are or-
ganized, they become “information.” This
information resides in commercially avail-
able databases, private/internal databases,
and consultant reports, for example.
Analysis of key information to the point
in which decisions can be made defines “in-
telligence.” In essence, scientific CI should
be the basis for action.
For example, take the pharmacological
classification of angiotensin converting

RESEARCH PIPELINE .
I
PRODUCT PIPELINE
c

LEAD
COMPOUND
FIGURE 2. Sclentiflc competitive intelligence.

Downloaded from dij.sagepub.com by guest on August 15, 2015

246 ThomasF. Krol, James C. Coleman, and Patrick J. Byant
INTELLIGENCE
ANALYZE
ORGANIZE
FIGURE 3. Competitive lntelllgence
model.
enzyme (ACE) inhibitors. Relevant data
are collected from a wide array of sources.
Important data are organized by catego-
ries such as phases of development, chemi-
cal classes, developers, doses, side effects,
and so forth, which convert the data into
information. When this information is an-
alyzed to address key questions and allow
important decisions to be made, such as
whether or not to pursue diabetic ne-
phropathy as a new indication, it becomes
intelligence.
Scientific CI analysts must scrutinize
the technical and competitive data col-
lected because it is an era of information
overload. In general, data come from two
basic sources, published and unpublished.
Within each realm the number of available
sources is numerous. To put things into
perspective, in 1993, 7,900 on-line data-
bases were available and the number of
on-line records had increased to 4.5 bil-
lion, yet it is estimated that one-tenth of
one percent of all information is available
on full-text databases (13).
Both published and unpublished sources
are continually changing and must be eval-
uated for accuracy, completeness, and
timeliness. The CI group must continually
evaluate new sources in order to balance
both budgets and the need for accuracy,
completeness, and timeliness (14). Ex-
amples of some of the published sources
used by a scientific CI group are listed in
Table 2.
The CI model can also be used to differ-
entiate business CZ from scientific CZ. Sci-
entific CI differs from business CI in the
following two important ways:
Downloaded from dij.sagepub.com by guest on August 15, 2015
1. In business CI, the type of data being
organized is business-oriented in na-
ture, and is organized and analyzed to
form business CI; whereas, in scientific
CI the data are scientific in nature or
R&D related, and
2. The educational background and experi-
ence of the analysts who organize, evalu-
ate, and analyze the information is in
business and/or marketing for business
CI and scientific or technical for scien-
tific CI. With scientificCI in the pharma-
ceutical industry the most qualified per-
sons have a strong scientificbackground,
several years of experience in R&D, and
experience in drug development and all
facets of the process.
In reality, overlap exists in many instances
between business CI and scientific CI. The
mix of analysts with each background and
shared analyses with both areas of exper-
tise can create unique benefits.
Good CI analysts of the business or sci-
entific nature are unique individuals. They
have inquisitive and analytical natures.
They are traditionally very outgoing and
are not afraid to ask the hard questions.
Good analysts are creative, tenacious
about getting to the crux of an issue, and,
most importantly, are good communica-
tors, both in receiving and sending appro-
priate messages ( 15).
Scientific CI, while different from tra-
ditional business CI, does share several
important characteristics. First, to be suc-
cessful, the scientific CI effort must be
organized and dedicated. Although this
often indicates a separate person or de-
partment, this need not be the case. For
example, small biotechnology firms with
100 or fewer employees are acutely aware
of advancing technologies and the compe-
tition. Each employee in a small company
knows that hidher livelihood depends on
knowing the competitive arena and in-
forming the appropriate decision makers
of important scientific advances or com-
petitor activity and what it means for their
own product(s). In larger companies the
Scientific Competitive Intelligence in R&D 247

TABLE 2
Examples of Publlshed Sources Used by a
Sclentlflc Competltlve lntelllgence Group

Commercially available databases

Patents and patent literature
Trade and industry journals
Trade and association studies
Newswires
Press releases related to medical and scientific discoveries as well
as companies
Medical and scientific literature
Abstracts from medicallscientificmeetings
Calls for research proposals for grants
Funded research grants
Annual reports
Other competitor publications (eg,prospectus)
Seminar hand-outs from presenters from a competitor
Company magazines
Magazine articles and published interviews
Local magazine articles
Product brochures
10K and other SEC filings
Federal and state court cases
Quarterly reports
Wall Street and other analyst reports
Freedom of Information (FOI)documents
Multi-client technical trend studies
0 Newspapers (especially local to competitor company or institution)

Industry analyst reports

Directories, directories, directories
Help wanted ads
Business school case studies

risk is that everyone thinks somebody else
is doing it, but in actuality few are. Thus,
a need for a dedicated effort in CI exists,
and this is a shared characteristic between
business and scientific CI.
The second shared characteristic be-
tween business and scientific CI is that the
CI effort must be supported by at least one
key senior manager, often referred to as a
champion (16). A third important congru-
ency between business and scientific CI is
that both CI functions not only provide
competitive information and intelligence,
but also gather competitive data and in-
formation from a wide variety of valuable
sources, including associates within the
company. Figure 4 illustrates the informa-
tion flow between the scientific CI func-
tion and its clients. Note that all clients for
scientific CI are also potential sources of
competitive information. Simply increas-
ing awareness of whom the primary com-
petitors are should increase the monitor-
ing efforts on these competitor companies
and/or products company-wide. Good net-
works and communication lines, both in-
ternal and external to the company, are es-
sential to any CI group.
Finally, competitor reports in many or-
ganizations, whether they be business or
scientific in nature, are typically produced
rapidly to meet a deadline such as just
prior to a meeting of executive decision
makers. Too often, it is the mistaken prac-
tice of significant scrambling around done
once a year or perhaps less often. It is the
purpose of the CI function to ensure that
the identification and gathering of com-
petitive information be a continuous pro-
cess and decision makers be informed as
changes occur to competitors or key tech-
nologies. A continuous monitoring and

Downloaded from dij.sagepub.com by guest on August 15, 2015

248 Thomas F. Krol, James C. Coleman, and Patrick J. Bryant

EVELOPMEN
w i d KETlNG
SENIOR
MANAGEMENT

FIGURE 4. Clients for scientific competitive intelligence.

communication effort will eliminate sur- RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

prises and allow for better tactical as well
as strategic decision making.
The clients for scientific CI include any
person, department, or decision making
group in the company that requires this
knowledge for good decision making (17).
See Figure 4. Below is a description of how
scientific CI assists in the decision making
processes in the following four major sub-
groups within R&D:
1. Research,
2. Development,
3. Regulatory, and
4. Project and Product Teams.
Table 3 is a summary table of how
scientific CI may impact these various
groups.
R&D is the foundation of every pharma-
ceutical and biotechnology company. The
source of all new drug products is either
internal or external R&D. It is not only in-
novation, however, but also creativity and
efficiency in processes and project manage-
ment that bring new and innovative prod-
ucts to market before the competitors do.
In the pharmaceutical and biotechnol-
ogy industries, scientific CI is becoming
more important as competition increases.
The cost containment efforts in health
care are challenging and changing the way
pharmaceutical companies perform R&D.
Senior managers are rethinking R&D in-
vestments. Trends such as reduced prod-
uct pipelines in favor of only those with a
high-value potential, streamlined pro-

Downloaded from dij.sagepub.com by guest on August 15, 2015

Scientific Competitive Intelligence in R&D 249

TABLE 3
Summary of Sclentlflc Competltlve lntelllgence Impact
R&D Group Scientific CI Impact

Research Identify similar projects, target, and compounds

0 Identify timing and/or results of similar projects
Potential collaborations (informal or formal)
New targets for drug development
0 Clarification of decision points for compound progression

Disseminate key competitive information and intelligence

to key decision makers
Development Identify critical competitors to pipeline products
Continuously monitor critical competitors
0 Identify unique developmental approaches to reduce

cycle time
Identify developmental hurdles and strategize around
them
0 Assist in design of pivotal trials for differentiation from

competition
Disseminate key competitive information and intelligence
to key decision makers
Identify and determine best approach for
pharmaco-economic studies
Regulatory Identify critical competitors to pipeline products
Identify filing dates of competitors
Identify hurdles and strategize on how to work around
them
Compare R&D capabilities
Identify and determine most likely labeling of competitors
based on pivotal trial design
International submission strategies
Project and Product Teams Identify critical competitors to pipeline products and help
in tactical decision making for internal product(s)
Create awareness of upcoming hurdles and
repercussions of missed deadlines
Identify competitor developmental hurdles and plan
alternative strategies
Identify patient groups targeted by competitors, and
develop appropriate strategies

cesses, increased use of consultant groups,
and more licensing agreements reflect
these changes (4).
Decision makers should keep in mind
that scientific CI is one of the raw materi-
als for decision making. Many other in-
puts are involved in decision making: gov-
ernmental and political policies, strategic
focus, internal or external policy, corpo-
rate vision, long-term goals, budgets, and
so forth. Decisions can be made without
scientific CI but with high and unneces-
sary risk. In the pharmaceutical industry
this was common practice 10 years ago.
The present environment, however, dic-
tates a need to incorporate scientific C1 for
good decision making. General benefits of
scientific CI are listed in Table 4.
For a scientific CI group to be success-
ful, the unit must organize strategically
within the company and establish good re-
lationships with R&%Dfrom the outset
(18). Development of good relationships
is fraught with multiple hurdles, though.
These include turf battles, perceptions
that the scientific CI unit will kill projects,
“information is power” attitudes, and in-
troversion (19). Good communication, es-

Downloaded from dij.sagepub.com by guest on August 15, 2015

250 Thomas F. Krol, James C. Coleman, and Patrick J. Bryant

TABLE 4
Summary of Beneflts of Sclentlflc Competltlve Intelligence

Improve planning assumptions

Eliminate surprises from the science and technology aspects of the business which could
eventually result in lost revenues
Improve R&D portfolio management and prioritization of projects and products
Provide the basis for better tactical and strategic decisions
Improve decisions regarding the best way to acquire new technology (eg,Should the new
technology be developed internally, an alliance formed, or an acquisition made?)
Improve research project selection and evaluation (eg,Should the project be approved,
continued as is, or terminated?)
Improve resource allocation (eg, Are appropriate resources such as staffing, facilities,
equipment, and budget being invested based on competitor timing?)
Gain better insight on internal strengths and weaknesses
Increase awareness of threats to proprietary technology from unscrupulous competitors

tablishment of rapport, and fostering of
the team approach over time will improve
these relationships.
One of the hurdles that a scientific
CI group must overcome is information
hoarding. The entire premise of CI is to
act as a communication integrator of im-
portant technological advances and com-
petitor activities. It cannot be overstressed
that important competitive information
and CI must find its way to decision mak-
ers and the CI group is responsible for this
task. In any company ask how many good
competitor information sources are locked
up in an executive’s office, desk drawer, or
computer. Ben Gilad, in his book Business
Blind Spots, says: “What matters most is
not the information. It’s how and whether
you use it” (20). This point cannot be
overstressed !
Good communication with technically
trained associates requires excellent listen-
ing skills. Rapport is established with tech-
nically trained associates and scientists by
the scientific CI analysts exhibiting techni-
cal competence. It is built gradually over
time, and is fostered by open communica-
tion and a strong desire to take genuine in-
terest in individuals and their work. Fos-
tering the feeling of being on the same
team is a continuous challenge and is over-
come by working together on projects and
solving problems together. R&D scientists
may develop the wrong opinion about sci-
entific CI if the benefits are not fostered in
appropriate ways and this could be cata-
strophic to the success of the scientific CI
unit.
Another way to improve R&D relation-
ships and enhance the scientific CI process
is to perform needs analyses. A needs
analysis can be combined with an educa-
tional component about scientific CI and
its value to them and the corporation as a
whole. The technique(s) used for needs
analyses should be appropriate for the cul-
ture of the organization. The process will
be effective as long as needs are identified
and monitored, and clients are kept in-
formed of progress in meeting their needs.
Importantly, needs analyses should be
performed on a continuous basis for scien-
tific CI clients.
Research
For the purposes of this discussion, research
represents the biologists, biochemists, mo-
lecular biologists, molecular geneticists,
chemists, toxicologists, and other highly
trained professionals who discover and
perform initial evaluations of potential
new drugs. Research also includes man-
agement of the aforementioned technical
experts. Scientific CI may be of benefit to
pharmaceutical research groups in several
ways:

Downloaded from dij.sagepub.com by guest on August 15, 2015

Scientific Competitive Intelligence in R&D
Scientific CI techniques can be used to
identify similar research projects, thera-
peutic targets, and/or compounds being
investigated at other institutions, whether
it is a company, individual, academic
group, or start-up company. At the re-
search project stage of development
(prior to the time a lead compound is se-
lected), scientists are typically aware of
a few similar technologies, but often are
not aware of others who should be con-
sidered potential competitors. Scientific
CI helps to identify similar technologies
or other research groups that may be
threats, or potential opportunities. For
example, CI practices may identify a
foreign academic institution with a simi-
lar program. It is the viewing of these
potential competitors as opportunities
that often requires a paradigm shift for
scientists and research personnel,
Scientific CI techniques can be benefi-
cial to research scientists and manage-
ment by identifying timing issues and re-
sults of competitor research projects,
products, or targeted areas of interven-
tion. A target area may be a new en-
zyme, receptor, endogenous hormone,
gene, or transcription factor which one
has set out to modify. Timing is impor-
tant because it gives an idea of how far
ahead or behind the competition an in-
ternal project may be. Awareness of re-
sults of competing projects or products
may help in confirmation of a target as
a viable approach or it may allow better
strategic decisions in terms of directions
for the discovery effort,
Scientific CI and awareness of current
and future technologies can lead to po-
tential collaborations. The collabora-
tions may be formed in the way of a re-
search agreement or alliance, or they
may be informal, in the way of estab-
lishing a verbal relationship,
Awareness of the technological arena
can lead to identification of new targets
or proposed new targets for drug devel-
opment. This is especially true for evolv-
Downloaded from dij.sagepub.com by guest on August 15, 2015
251
ing technologies such as gene therapy,
gene transcription factor modification,
and amplification or blockage of genes
related to diseases, and
Better decisions can be made by discov-
ery research management regarding
which lead compounds (or products) to
select or discontinue, or to simply re-
quest a better candidate based on cur-
rently available technologies or those
further advanced in development. Clear
decision points can be identified for
compounds/products under develop-
ment, even at very early stages of devel-
opment. For example, if most compet-
ing technologies for a given disease state
are administered orally and product X
does not have the potential to be dosed
orally it should be discontinued, or an-
other lead compound must be identified
which can be dosed orally.
Development
Development refers to all of the scientists,
support personnel, and management in-
volved in taking a lead compound through
all the hurdles required for regulatory ap-
proval and subsequent studies required to
market a successful product. Scientific CI
can assist developmental scientists and
management in the following ways:
Identification and continuous monitor-
ing of critical competitors is very impor-
tant. Critical competitors are defined as
those competitors that have a high likeli-
hood of taking away significant market
share at or shortly after one’s product
gets to market. Simply knowing who the
critical competitors are flags these prod-
ucts in the minds of development associ-
ates so that when they hear or read
something about one of these competi-
tors, they report it to the scientific CI
group. It then becomes available to
other decision makers throughout the
company. Analysis of the competitive
information which is gathered from
252 Thomas F. Krol, James C. Coleman, and Patrick J. Bryant
competitors, customers, associates, and
so forth by the scientific CI group pro-
vides valuable insight into future trends
and helps in numerous tactical and stra-
tegic decisions made by development
scientists and management,
Scientific CI techniques can be used to
identify unique developmental approach-
es which are targeted to reduce develop-
ment time. Depending on the need, this
may i,nvolve benchmarking studies,
modified benchmarking studies, or eval-
uation of techniques used in other in-
dustries. By combining the competitive
information collected with development-
al approaches used across industries,
unique and innovative strategies and
plans may be developed by development
personnel,
Scientific CI can be used to identify de-
velopmental findings and difficulties en-
countered by competitors. This knowl-
edge can then be used for tactical
decision making and planning as it re-
lates to one’s own product. This is per-
haps most important as it relates to the
clinical program plan. Timeliness is im-
portant for this process to be successful
because a developmental plan is not eas-
ily changed once studies have begun,
It is often not enough simply to identify
critical competitors and their stage of
development. Often key attributes, po-
tential, and actual advantages and dis-
advantages may be identified which
prove very beneficial in differentiating
one’s own product. Designs of pivotal
trials can be modified a priori in order
to attempt to obtain slightly different la-
beling from regulatory agencies, or to
gain a competitive advantage in the mar-
ketplace,
Development scientists often work first
hand with clinician researchers in the
field. Their up-to-date knowledge and
experience of treating and tracking pa-
tients is an incredible asset in determin-
ing needs and identifying other uses or
indications for a drug. It is important
Downloaded from dij.sagepub.com by guest on August 15, 2015
for the scientific CI group to continu-
ously communicate with these folks and
help in the assessment of new potential
indications and whether it will be advan-
tageous to get approval for an indica-
tion as opposed to expect off-label use
which cannot be promoted. An addi-
tional benefit comes with their thoughts
on the hurdles and challenges of the
changing health care arena, and
Scientific CI can also help the pharma-
coeconomics group, whose importance
is rapidly growing in the pharmaceutical
industry. The scientific CI group works
with pharmacoeconomics to identify
which competitors are instituting these
types of studies and when. Although not
currently required for drug approval,
regulatory agencies are paying close at-
tention to the financial aspect and ulti-
mate benefit to society of a new drug.
Scientific CI helps to identify if a com-
petitor is doing pharmacoeconomic
studies, to what extent, the tool used to
validate the study, if it will be accept-
able, and ultimately if it is necessary for
one’s own company to perform these
studies. These analyses are associated
with layers of detail and often a strategy
can be put in place without knowing ev-
ery detail about a competitor.
REGULATORY
Scientific CI can help regulatory groups in
the following ways:
The scientific CI group helps the regula-
tory department by identifying critical
competitors. This helps regulatory asso-
ciates follow more closely what is hap-
pening with these competitors and regu-
latory agencies, such as the Food and
Drug Administration (FDA),
Scientific CI helps in identifying when an
investigational new drug (IND) (or equiv-
alent) or a new drug application (NDA)
(or equivalent) is filed and calculating the
time it has taken for competitor prod-
Scientific Competitive Intelligence in R&D
uct(s) to proceed through regulatory hur-
dles. Perhaps these hurdles can be
avoided by planning appropriate scien-
tific studies or creatively finding ways to
satisfy regulatory agencies,
Scientific CI helps to compare the R&D
capabilities of competing companies
and make an educated guess as to how
long a product will take to be reviewed
by a regulatory agency. Capabilities
may include anything from competitor
history with a given section or subsec-
tion at an agency to their capability of
filing an NDA (or equivalent) in a com-
puterized format which is acceptable to
an agency,
Scientific CI can help regulatory groups
in terms of planning international sub-
missions and how other competitors
have filed or plan to file. This may affect
how and in what order one’s own com-
pany makes its submissions,
Scientific CI can help regulatory iden-
tify and evaluate competitors’ pivotal
trials. Based on these studies one can
make educated assumptions about what
the regulatory agency will allow in the
labeling of the product,
Regulatory groups frequently attend
FDA advisory panel meetings in the
United States. Importantly, many other
independent interactions occur in these
meetings, and may be important for the
CI group to know. This allows for
unique interaction between the scientific
CI group and regulatory. For example,
the scientific CI group may attend an
advisory meeting which does not di-
rectly relate to a company’s products,
but relates to an in-licensing strategy
that will affect regulatory in the future.
Similarly, regulatory associates can
bring back important competitor infor-
mation that may be required for future
decisions by internal associates whom
they never contact. Although advisory
meetings are now available on video-
tape, much more can be learned by
personally attending this meeting and
Downloaded from dij.sagepub.com by guest on August 15, 2015
253
becoming involved in many side conver-
sations.
PROJECT AND PRODUCT TEAMS
Although the accountability, leadership
philosophy, and exact composition of
project and product teams differ among
companies, most new projects and prod-
ucts will have a team composed of cross-
functional groups to reconcile problems
and share plans so that the overall product
plans can be communicated and agreed
upon. Typically, project and product
teams are charged with design and review
of overall development plans, integration
of tasks, and tactical decisions. The scien-
tific CI group can help these teams in their
strategic and tactical decision making:
Scientific CI may affect project teams in
a significant way by identifying critical
competitors and analyzing what they
mean to the company’s product. At the
level of the project team it is often neces-
sary to identify certain key characteristics
about a competitor product which are not
readily available, such as dose, dosage
form, acceptability by patients, and so
forth. The scientific CI group can help
project teams with these specific needs,
Scientific CI presentations often create
awareness of upcoming hurdles and help
team members realize the repercussions
of missed deadlines. The scientific CI
analysts help give the team additional
perspective as it relates to the competi-
tive arena because project team mem-
bers are often too far into the woods to
get a clear view of the forest,
Scientific CI can identify competitor
difficulties and help with designing
alternative strategies. Competitor ad-
vantages and disadvantages can be rec-
ognized and potential differentiating
characteristics for a company’s product
can be identified and evaluated. In this
way it may be possible to differentiate a
seemingly undifferentiated product,
254 Thomas F. Krol, James C. Coleman, and Patrick J. Bryant

Scientific CI techniques can be used to most accurate picture possible even with-
identify patient groups that competitors out the missing pieces. In many instances,
have targeted. Other patient groups or scientific CI analysts can help other inter-
niches can be identified and pursued nal associates in analytical processes and
based on competitor study activity, and by providing the key competitive informa-
If desired, critical competitor strategies tion. Since the majority of an analyst’s
can be approximated and war-gaming or time is spent in analyzing, this can result
modified war-gaming can be performed in significant time savings.
(21). War-gaming is the process of iden-
tifying a company’s most critical com-
PRIORITIZATION OF
petitor, gaining all competitive informa-
SCIENTIFIC CI WORKLOAD
tion available about the competitor, and
then bringing the decision makers in the With the potential to have many clients,
company together to act as if they were the obvious question is how does one pri-
their counterpart at the competing com- oritize the tasks and requests? The prioriti-
pany. Many questions and scenarios can zation and resources allocated to each cli-
be addressed and a better understanding ent group is directly related to the impact
of what the competition may be doing scientific CI has on the future success of
will result. the company. The method of communica-
tion of the competitive information and
intelligence is tailored to the needs of the
CONTRIBUTIONS OF SCIENTIFIC CI
client and balanced with relative impact
In general, the scientific CI group pro- on the corporation. For scientific CI
vides the following two outputs: groups that are already functioning as
such, it is a useful exercise to determine
1. Scientific competitive information, and which clients have the greatest impact on
2. Scientific competitive intelligence. the success of the company and calculate
where current scientific CI resources are
Scientific competitive information is sup- allocated to determine what changes, if
plied in the form of reports from internal any, should be instituted as a result.
databases that are used to track competi- Recently formed scientific CI groups
tor activity. The key component is to col- may not and should not have such a large
lect the relevant data that are important to and diverse client group. Beginning scien-
decision makers at one’s own company, tific CI groups are doomed to failure if the
and organize it into usable information. they try to satisfy everybody’s needs at one
The reports can range from summaries to time. This should not preclude the group
detailed information depending on the us- from finding out what CI is needed by
er’s need. In most cases these reports can whom, though. Starting a scientific CI
be generated in a matter of minutes. Ana- group is much the same as starting a small
lysts should spend no more than 10% of business. The scientific CI group needs a
their time providing competitive informa- strategic plan and should concentrate on a
tion. focused client group which includes at
Scientific competitive intelligence is least one heavy-weight champion and
provided by way of analyses. By defini- those clients who will have the greatest im-
tion, an analysis is used for decision mak- pact on the success of the corporation.
ing and takes hours and often days to piece The initial client group can then be ex-
together. Analyses are much like large jig- panded based on need and potential ben-
saw puzzles in which the analyst is missing efit.
pieces. The important thing is to derive the Three other methods of operation can

Downloaded from dij.sagepub.com by guest on August 15, 2015

ScientificCompetitive Intelligence in R&D 255

TABLE 5
Rationalefor Internal Sclentlflc Competltlve Intelligence
Sensitive issues remain internal
Scientific expertise is guaranteed
Estimated that 75% of raw competitive information needed is already in the walls of one’s
company (A.D. Little survey of 40 companies)
In the long run is more cost-effective
Relationshipsand existing networks are used
Timely requests for high impact needs are completed on time
Awareness of current corporate environment and philosophies are incorporated

help to distribute workload. First, it is in CONCLUSION

the best interest of the scientific CI group
Scientific CI is the process of continuously
not only to educate associates about the
monitoring R&D technology and competi-
competitive intelligence process, but also
tors’ research and product pipelines. It in-
to teach them how to perform analyses
volves evaluation of how these changes
themselves and consult the scientific CI
will affect one’s own company. A good
group if they come across an insurmount-
scientific CI group operates within strict
able hurdle. A key component is to incor-
ethical and legal guidelines. Scientific CI
porate their findings into the scientific CI
differs from traditional business CI by the
group’s filing system, database, and so
data used and the background and exper-
forth so that it is retrievable by the entire
tise of the analysts. Scientific CI will take
corporation for strategic and tactical deci-
on a more important role in the pharma-
sions.
ceutical industry in the future because
The second way to distribute workload
trends in declining rates of growth will
is to maintain and continuously update
force better decision making. Good strate-
competitor profiles on one’s own com-
gic and tactical decisions will be the differ-
pany’s pipeline projects and products.
ence between success and failure in the fu-
This results in significant time savings for
ture. Scientific CI may have impact on any
the scientific CI group because competitor
part and at any level of the corporation. In
reports are available very quickly. The
R&D it can be used to help with tactical
price paid is up-front time in getting all
and strategic decision making from the
competitor analyses automated and instill-
discovery scientists to the head of R&D.
ing a process to evaluate the changing en-
vironment routinely.
The third and final method to distribute REFERENCES
workload is to use external consultant 1. Esposito MA, Gilmont ER. Competitive intelli-
groups. External consultants, however, gence: doing corporate homework. Phurmu
should not replace internal activities for Exec. 1991;December:68-71.
the reasons noted in Table 5 . Use of exter- 2. Weber J , Hamilton JOC, Edmondson G, Dwyer
nal consultants can also result in a valu- P. Drug-merger mania, a rash of new alliances
reshapes the industry. Busin Week. 1994;May
able learning experience, and reduce work- 16~30-31.
load, but they are also associated with cer- 3. Weber J, Carey J, Hamilton JOC, Flynn J.
tain risks. The best way to use external CI Drugmakers are discovering the high cost of cut-
consultants is to know exactly what is ting costs. Busin Week. 1W;October 17904-
needed and evaluate which consultant 208.
4. Lehman Brothers. Pharmapipelines: Implica-
group(s) can best meet these needs. A tions of structural change for returns on pharma-
good way to evaluate CI consultant groups ceutical R&D. April 12, 1994.
is discussed in reference (22). 5 . Asthon BW, Johnson AH, Stacey GS. Monitor-

Downloaded from dij.sagepub.com by guest on August 15, 2015

256 Thomas F. Krol, James C. Coleman, and Patrick J. Bryant
ing science and technology for competitive ad-
vantage. Comp Intell Rev. 1994;5( 1):5-16.
6. Bryant PJ, Krol TF, Coleman JC. Scientific
competitive intelligence: a tool for R&D deci-
sion-making. Comp Intell Rev. 1994-Summer 5
(2):48-50.
7. Brockhoff K. Competitor technology intelli-
gence in German companies. Indus Mark Man.
1991;20:91-98.
8. Wall JL. Probing opinions: a survey of exectives’
attitudes, practices and ethics vis a vis espionage
and other forms of competitive information
gathering. Harvard Bus Rev. 1974;52:22-170.
9. Cleland DI, King WR. Competitive business intel-
ligence systems. Busin Horiz. 1975 (Dec):
19-28.
10. Porter ME. Competitive strategy. New York:
The Free Press; 1980.
11. Porter ME. Competitive strategy. New York:
The Free Press; 1985.
12. Bryant PB, Coleman JC, Krol TF. Trimming the
sails for the best CI Course. In: Navigating the
Sea of Change: CI Experiences and Ekpecla-
tions. New York: Wiley & Sons, Inc; 1995.
13. Data presented at National On-line meeting,
May 4-6, 1993, New York City.
14. Krol TF, Coleman JC, Bryant PB. Sources,
sources, sources: Making the most of them.
Comp Intell Rev. 1995;5(4): 19-22.
15. Fuld LM. Building an intelligence department.
Downloaded from dij.sagepub.com by guest on August 15, 2015
In: Fuld LM. Monitoring the competition. New
York: John Wiley & Sons; 1988:137-160.
16. Fuld LM. Super-monitoring: motivating your
entire organization to monitor your competition.
In: Fuld LM. Monitoring the competition. New
York: John Wiley & Sons; 1988:27-40.
17. Krol TF, Coleman JC, Bryant PB. Range of ser-
vices provided by competitive technical intelli-
gence. In: Keeping Abreast of Science and Tech-
nology: competitive Technical Intelligence for
Business. Columbus, OH: Batelle Press;1996.
18. Bryant PJ, Coleman JC, Krol TF. Organizing a
competitive techinical intelligence group. In:
Keeping Abreast of Science and Technology:
Competitive TechnicalIntelligencefor Business,
Columbus, OH: Batelle Press; 1996.
19. Matteo MA, Dykman EH. Building credibility,
champions and a mandate for competitive assess-
ment. Comp Intell Rev. 1994-Summer 5 (2):26-
30.
20. Glad B. Business Blinrispots. Chicago: Probus
Publishing Company; 1994.
21. Kurtz CJ. Competitive wargaming. Presented at
the 7th Annual Society of Competitive Intelli-
gence Meeting, Washington DC. March 27,
1992.
22. Krol TF, Coleman JC, Bryant PJ. Consultant ev-
luation for scientific CI in the pharmaceutical in-
dustry. Comp Intell Rev. 1993;3:43-46.