The industry over-celebrates financial winners. Equal praise should be given to leaders who, despite poor financial outcomes, successfully pioneer new scientific ground or persevere to get a drug approved for a high unmet need. Their work provides crucial groundwork for future successes.
Related Insights
Effective leadership in an innovation-driven company isn't about being 'tough' but 'demanding' of high standards. The Novonesis CEO couples this with an explicit acceptance of failure as an inherent part of R&D, stressing the need to 'fail fast' and learn from it.
An innovation arm's performance isn't its "batting average." If a team pursues truly ambitious, "exotic" opportunities, a high failure rate is an expected and even positive signal. An overly high success rate suggests the team is only taking safe, incremental bets, defeating its purpose.
Unlike tech investing, where a single power-law outlier can return the entire fund, biotech wins are smaller in magnitude. This dynamic forces biotech VCs to prioritize a higher success rate across their portfolio rather than solely hunting for one massive unicorn.
While capital and talent are necessary, the key differentiator of innovation hubs like Silicon Valley is the cultural mindset. The acceptance of failure as a learning experience, rather than a permanent mark of shame, encourages the high-risk experimentation necessary for breakthroughs.
True innovation requires leaders to adopt a venture capital mindset, accepting that roughly nine out of ten initiatives will fail. This high tolerance for failure, mirroring professional investment odds, is a prerequisite for the psychological safety needed for breakthrough results.
Unlike software startups that can "fail fast" and pivot cheaply, a single biotech clinical program costs tens of millions. This high cost of failure means the industry values experienced founders who have learned from past mistakes, a direct contrast to Silicon Valley's youth-centric culture.
A massive disconnect exists where scientific breakthroughs are accelerating, yet the biotech market is in a downturn, with many companies trading below cash. This paradox highlights structural and economic failures within the industry, rather than a lack of scientific progress. The core question is why the business is collapsing while the technology is exploding.
The path for biotech entrepreneurs is a long slog requiring immense conviction. Success ("liftoff") isn't just a clinical trial result, but achieving self-sustaining profitability and growth. This high bar means founders may need to persevere through years of market indifference and financing challenges.
While success is celebrated publicly, some of the best leadership happens privately when a CEO makes the tough, candid call to shut down a program or company due to unfavorable data. This "truth-seeking" decision, often against their personal interest, is a hallmark of excellence.
To foster psychological safety for innovation, leaders must publicly celebrate the effort and learning from failed projects, not just successful outcomes. Putting a team on a pedestal for a six-month project that didn't ship sends a stronger signal than any monetary award.
