A critical study of transition from scientists role to managerial role of employees in biotechnology companies in India.

OR A critical analysis of management issues faced by biotechnological companies w.r.t. -----

Introduction: .. Biotech5 sections..simple explanation. Overview: Indian biotechnology sector The Indian biotechnology sector is one of the fastest growing knowledge-based sectors in India and is expected to play a key role in shaping India's rapidly developing economy. With numerous comparative advantages in terms of research and development (R&D) facilities, knowledge, skills, and cost effectiveness, the biotechnology industry in India has immense potential to emerge as a global key player. (**Ref: Biopharma Journal ) The Indian Biotechnology market is estimated at USD 3.2 billion (ranked # 12 at a global level), and is growing at +20% over 2008. The key sectors are Bio-pharmaceuticals (64% of total biotechnology market value), Bio-services (17% of total market), Bio-agriculture (14%), Bioindustry (3%), and Bio-informatics. The total biotechnology market is expected to exceed USD 7.0 billion by 2012 with a CAGR of 30% (2009-12) and bio-pharmaceuticals are expected to grow with 22% CAGR from 2009 to 2012. Indian Biotechnology Market comprises of specialized sectors and sub-markets like Biopharmaceuticals, Bio-services, Bio-agriculture, Bio-industry, and Bio-informatics. India contributes around 2% value of the global biotech industry( $ value/ ref.). There are more than 325 biotechnology companies operating and employing more than 20,000 scientists, (reference) with active support from leading academic institutes and Universities (which, ex, ref.) the workforce dedicated to biotechnology is bound to grow. (proof.)

(Ref. )According to Industry estimates, India is ranked among top-12 biotechnology countries worldwide, and is the third biggest in Asia-Pacific in terms of number of biotech companies. The investments in this industry have been strong over the past few years and have reached at USD 637 million. The Indian Biotechnology Market is valued at USD 3,203 million and grew by 28% over 2008. The market is expected to exceed USD 7,000 million by 2012 with a CAGR of 30% (2009-2012). Bio-pharmaceuticals have a market share of 64% of overall market and are expected to grow with 22% CAGR from 2009 to 2012. (R/P/V) The Indian Biotechnology industry was slow to start, but has been gaining momentum for the past couple of years. Although, the current share in the global biotech market is relatively low, but it has necessary potential to become a prominent player in the global arena. The top ten biotech companies of India listed below have broken new grounds and given new products and technologies to the world: Sr. no 1. Organization Biocon Products

(i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) (vii)

Biocon Serum Institute of India Panacea Biotec Nicholas Piramal Wockhadrt Limited GlaxoSmithKline Bharat Serum

(viii) Krebs Biochemicals and Industries Limited (ix) (x) Zydus Cadila Indian Immunologicals

Link: 0. Technology should be in proper hands 1. Playing with nature 2. Environmental impact 3. Relatively new industry 4. Lot of training issues 5. Lot of implementation issues 6. R&D Issues due to lack of skills 7. Technology transfer 8. Funding issues 9. Stress issues faced by scientists 10.High Potential And hence we come to the conclusion human plays an important role
Human Resource Issues faced by Biotech Companies Human resources constitute an increasingly critical function in any biotechnology company, particularly in an industry that's in an increasing state of flux. The efforts to achieve excellence through a focus on learning, quality, teamwork, and re-engineering are driven by the way organisations treat people. It is the job of HR to achieve organisational excellence. The manager of a biotechnology start-up faces the challenge of fostering a transition within the founding team from science-oriented to commerce-oriented thinking and action. An academic scientist's focus is on scientific publications, intellectual brilliance, research involving tightly circumscribed projects, and science for science's sake. A biotechnology company, however, must translate research results into revenue. Biotech managers should be strong and sensitive (morally and ethically abiding to his domain) at the same time.Only managers with excellent interpersonal skills will be able to handle delicate tasks like helping the company founders think commercially, training them in what to say where

and when. Yet, they should be strong enough in aiding decisions, like cancelling a hazardous project, bringing in and integrating new employees better paid than founding staff, and introducing formal management tools such as reporting and budgeting without damaging employee relations. (Handling Redtapism/ EX. Failed biotech startups/ reasons) Transition between science and managing (ex. Dr. Mashalkar: handling plagiarism issue) In biotechnology companies around the world, scientists are often given the responsibility for people and projects without a second thought or additional training. Failures in the transition from scientists to management occur because scientists believe that adding supervision skills is simply a learn-as-you-go experience. Stan Sewitch, Founder of HRG Inc says, Management is an entirely different career from that of the individual contributor in science. Once an employee has 6-8 reporting employees under him, it becomes very difficult to perform lab work along with the mundane management responsibilities. Many supervisors find serious career discontent when their workday fills exclusively with management issues. When they are in the lab they are focused on their practicals, experiments, analyses etc. by remaining in similar isolated group from society they fail to understand the politics, different nature of human beings and handling different HR situations. Hence, they fail to manage HR issues. Jim Lewis (President, Lewis Institute Inc., VA-USA) pens down four required skills for a technical person to be a manager: 1. technical 2. organisational 3. conceptual 4. human relations The supervisor needs to constantly stay updated, because technical obsolescence can set in quickly. After a year or two of management responsibility, a supervisor needs to spend some time getting recharged in the area of expertise. Current situation

In any biotechnology startup, its core technical team consisting of a few people is the primary driver for its value creation. If we analyze the core management team of top 10 biotech companies in India; we come to a conclusion that after almost 20-30 years of R&D experience, people are coming into the management scenario. (ex) . Almost 70% of the entire lot is coming from a purely technical scientific background rather than having a professional experience or education in the field of management. Hence, these people or companies are following a typical learn as go principle. However, I feel success of a project doesnt depend on this core team but also depends on the team who markets it, the team who finances it and the aims of the mentors. The ideal biotech manager (Draw the fig. of ideal biotech model/ ref.) The profile of the ideal biotechnology business model helps to define the newly emerging roles of managers. Modern managers may not make all the major decisions nor hold all controls within their organisation, as managers did in the past, but their role is no less vital. Indeed, the modern manager must play several roles in the new model of a biotechnology corporationleader, facilitator and statesperson. As a leader, a biotechnology manager must provide the vision needed to energize the business and drive it to success. As a facilitator, the manager must co-ordinate the activities of various teams, cultivating an environment that encourages excellence. Finally, as a statesperson, he must skillfully organise the give and take of alliances that engage stakeholders for the benefit of the entire corporate community. Biotechnology straddles the worlds of science and commerce, and so biotechnology executives must reconcile the demands of these two masters by assuring the primacy of research within the context of profitability. Many companies suffer from a serious lack of understanding on these points. Many biotechnology companies fail not because of bad science, but because their management personnel did not have the knowledge or skill to design and guide a complex research organisation effectively. First, strategic HR must partner with senior executives and managers, helping to move planning from the boardroom to the organisation. It must guide serious discussion of how the company should be organised to carry out its strategy

Secondly, strategic HR must be an employee champion, ensuring that employees feel committed to the company and are able to fully contribute, and take responsibility for training line management about the importance of high employee morale and how to achieve it. Strategic HR must also be the employees' voice in management discussions, offer employees, opportunities for personal and professional growth and provide resources that help employees meet the demands put on them. Third, HR must be an expert in the way work is organised and executed, delivering administrative efficiency to ensure that costs are reduced while quality is maintained. Within the HR function there are dozens of processes that can be done better, faster and cheaper. Finding and fixing those processes is part of the work, and measuring the impact of HR programs and initiatives to the bottom line is crucial. Biotechnology companies require managers with unique qualities. The lack of solid managerial training and the associated risk of failure often have long-term consequences for the careers of research professionals. Not a single biotech firm in India has HR link with it which shows less importance given to HR issues and that is why we are conducting this research on this issue. Importance of strategic HR in biotech sector As far as the theory of strategic HR states that in a completely knowledge driven industry, it is its intellectual and social capital which is the key source of competitive advantage plays an equally important role along with financial or physical capital.

Role efficacy - Theory which can be applied to study this problem The performance of a person working in an organization depends on his own potential effectiveness, technical competence, managerial experience as well as the design of the role that he performs in the organization. It is the integration of the two that ensures a persons

effectiveness in the organization. Unless a person has the requisite knowledge, technical competence and the skills required for the role, he cannot be effective. If the role does not allow the person to use his competence, and if he constantly feels frustrated in the role, his effectiveness is likely to be low. The performance of multiple roles is part and parcel of an individuals professional life. As employees perform multiple roles, they have to face multiple demands put on them by others both within and outside the organization. The natural consequence of this is the experience of role stress by employees. Since modern organizations and the tasks that people have to do in their jobs have become more complex, the potential for stress has increased manifold. It is a known fact that stress is an inevitable consequence of socio-economic complexity and role complexity. However, to some extent, stress is a stimulant for individual efficiency as well. People experience role stress when they can no longer have complete control over what happens in their work lives. Work life itself has become a process wherein roles have linkages with other roles. As there is no escape from role stress, there is a dire need to find ways of using stress productively and, thereby, reducing dysfunctional stress. A role is the position one occupies in a social system, and is defined by the functions one performs in response to the expectations of the significant members of a social system and ones own expectations from that position or office. Role has two subsystems: (i) (ii) Role Space the individuals relationship with own / intra roles Role Set the individuals relationship with other /inter roles.

Role, Role Space and Role Set have a potential for conflict and stress. Role Space is the dynamic relationship between the various roles an individual occupies and his self. Role Space Stress has the following main variables: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) Self-Role Distance Intra-Role Conflict Role Stagnation Inter-Role Distance

(v)

Role Irrelevance.

Role Set consists of important persons who have varying expectations from the role that an individual occupies. Role Set Stress has the following main variables: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) (vii) Role Ambiguity Role Expectation Conflict Role Overload Role Erosion Resource Inadequacy Personal Inadequacy Role Isolation

(viii) Result Inadequacy (ix) (x) Role Inadequacy Challenge Stress

Aspects of Role Efficacy Role Efficacy is the potential effectiveness of an individual occupying a particular role in an organization. Role Efficacy can be seen as the psychological factor underlying role effectiveness. Aspects of Role Efficacy are divided into three subsystems: Role Making Role Centering Role Linking.

Role Making is an active attitude towards the role, to define and contribute to it while Role Taking is passive acceptance of responding to others expectations. Role making have the following variables: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) Self-Role Integration (ii) Pro-activity Creativity Confrontation.

Role Centering is an active attitude towards the role to define and make the role central to the organization by increasing its importance as opposed to role entering, which means accepting the role as is and performing it. Role Centering has the following main variables: (i) (ii) (iii) Centrality Influence Personal growth.

Role Linking is an active attitude towards the role to find linkages with other roles through interaction, while Role Shrinking is passive acceptance of narrow boundary of role. Its main variables are: (i) (ii) (iii) Inter-Role Linkage Helping Relationship Super-ordination.

According to a research done by Mr. Aniruddh Pandey and D M Pestonjee (June-1996), Improvement in the quality of performance of employees is not merely a function of the 'hardware' improvement but depends to a large extent on the human-side of organizations. It is believed that role-efficacy improvement interventions will strengthen and reinforce the positive behaviors and minimize and weaken negative behaviors Using this theory as a backbone, we could say that Role efficacy has a direct effect on organizational performance. Measurement of Role Efficacy

In order to determine how much role efficacy a person has, the strengths of the 10 aspects of role efficacy need to be measured. The various materials that can be used to measured role efficacy are:

1. Writing the Essay

The best method of measuring role efficacy is the EMR (Essay on My Role). It gives a high payoff especially in programmes of increasing role efficacy. The role occupant may be asked to write an essay of about 500 words on his role which is then analyzed for role efficacy. When a person writes such an essay, he projects his perceptions about the role and provides enough material from which role efficacy can be measured. 2. Scoring Essays The essays can be scored either by the one who writes the essay or by an expert. Each aspect can be given one of the three scores: +2, +1, or -1. After trying out various ways of scoring, this was the method decided upon: give a score of 2 on each aspect, if that particular aspect is present; score of 1 when that aspect is present to some extent; -1 if the negative side of the aspect is shown. 3. Role Efficacy Scale (RES) (Pareek, 1997) Role Efficacy Scale is a structured instrument consisting of 20 triads of statement in each triad which describes his role most accurately. A respondent marks one statement in each triad which describes his role most accurately. These three alternatives are pre-weighted. There are two statements for each dimension of role efficacy and the same scoring pattern is followed. 4. Interview An unstructured interview with a role occupant to know his perceptions about the role can help collect data for scoring role efficacy. Interview has an advantage, it gets spontaneous responses, and necessary probes can be made to find out more about the various dimensions. 5. Checklist of Adjectives Role efficacy can also be measured by asking a role occupant to list as many adjectives as he can think of to describe the role. In such a lasting the person reflects his significant perceptions of the role. 6. Role Efficacy Differential (RED)

Semantic differential scale can also be used to measure role efficacy. These scales are bipolar, having contrasting adjectives at each of the two ends, with 7-point or 9-point scales in between. 7. Role Efficacy Index (REI) Role Efficacy Index represents the percentage of role effectiveness of a respondent in an organization. It ranges from 0 to 100. A high REI indicates that the respondent perceives that he has a great deal of opportunity to be effective in the role. To find out the REI, scores on all the 9 aspects of role efficacy may be totaled and then the relevant formula can be used. Role Essay & Interview: [(Total Score+ 10)/30] * 100 Role Efficacy Scale: [(Total Score+ 10)/60] * 100 Role Efficacy Differential: [(Total Score+ 10)/80] * 100