Partnerships 2010: Tactical vs Strategic Sourcing: Are the Drivers for Sourcing the Same for Large, Medium and Small Sponsor Companies

Moderator: Andrew Townshend, Senior Director, Contracts & Outsourcing, PFIZER
Panelists: Frances Grote, Senior Director, Strategic Sourcing, MILLENNIUM: THE TAKEDA ONCOLOGY COMPANY
Gary Laine, Director, Clinical Sourcing, Contracts & Payments, ELAN PHARMACEUTICALS
Lauri Sirabella, Vice President, Clinical Strategic Business Development, EXECUPHARM
Mark A. Lanfear, Vice President, Strategic Alliances, KFORCE CLINICAL RESEARCH, INC.

This Q&A session with four panel members covered the debate of whether to use a full service provider versus a functional service provider.

There are a number of factors to consider that will determine which approach a sponsor can or should take. There really was no correct answer as to which provider to retain. A full service provider could offer more flexibility and possibly be more cost effective than a functional provider. However, depending upon whether the approach was tactical versus strategic, one can employ either method or to consider a hybrid approach.

The panel members discussed the processes employed at their respective companies for vendor selection and the reasons for the approach they had taken. Key factors considered when selecting a vendor included business/cultural issues, specific expertise of the CRO, whether the project was a long term program or just a short term assignment, project needs and the relationship that exists between the parties. All panel members agreed that a cohesive and effective relationship was absolutely essential for the success of the project. Adversarial roles can’t be tolerated when selecting a partner. One member stated they focus on the efficiencies and objectives of the job and then to work out the issues contractually.

The question was asked regarding the future of full service versus functional service providers. Again, there is no clear indication of where the industry is headed. The type of provider selected will be dependent upon study specifics, desired locations, expertise needed and the ability of the provider to provide the necessary support to the program. Some companies employed single providers while others used multiple vendors to address the job at hand.

Some companies are outsourcing most everything while others are managing the majority of the project themselves. It was agreed that if the studies were to be conducted in a foreign country, at least the CRA should be a local person while the clinical trial manager may/may not reside in-country.

There did not seem to any correlation regarding the size of the sponsor in relation to the level of support given to them by the CRO. It was stated that the level of attention paid to the sponsor was a function of selecting the right provider in the beginning and had really nothing to do with size.

The success of the partnership is to have and to encourage an open and trusting relationship. The key was to take the time to build this relationship up front as well as over time. Some companies wish to have a stable, dedicated provider by which to move their programs forward. Many use a matrix approach when working with a provider with the expectations clearly defined on the front end. The success of the relationship is related to the people involved and to treat each other as a full partner in the R&D process. Chemistry was also mentioned as a key factor in a successful partnership.