The problem with scientists in pharma—over qualified, under engineered
...and it created SARS-CoV-2 injections
Don’t take it personally
In my experience, whenever anyone says “don’t take this personally, the other person immediately does!”
In spite of that, I’m going to preface this with a “don’t take it personally”—it’s the system that is to blame. To further expand, I’m going to draw on the work of Peter Checkland, a giant in the world of Systems Thinking.
In his excellent book, Systems Thinking, Systems Practice: Includes a 30-Year Retrospective, Checkland makes an important distinction between the mind-set of a scientist versus an engineer.
Checkland observes that science is a vitally important discipline in which, as Checkland puts it, “the highest value attaches to the advancement of knowledge.”
He suggests that scientists are trained to use reductionist thinking—running experiments and drawing conclusions from them.
Checkland compares this way of working with the mind-set of engineers and technologists, who “prize most highly the efficient accomplishment of some defined purpose.”
He provides an example of his work in the science-based Imperial Chemical Industries (ICI). His team was charged with developing synthetic leather to seize a market opportunity. A research scientist gave the project a negative response.
Checkland reports his comment:
“The three dimensional matrix of natural leather is so complex that it cannot at present be accurately described; therefore we cannot hope to simulate it.”
The research scientist assumed that the question was about furthering scientific knowledge. Checkland’s observation was: “Had [the scientist] assumed the question to be a technological one, he would have asked not ‘can we copy leather?’ but ‘can we imagine a material which will perform satisfactorily in end-users’ hands in which natural leather is now used?’”
The search is then totally different. It is about finding an alternative solution to an end-user’s problem [patient and/or healthcare professional]. This is a vitally important distinction when developing products.
How many pharma scientists are studying their molecules and materials rather than developing solutions for patients and HCPs?
If you are one, don’t take this personally, it’s the system wot done it…