Preface

“Unprovided with original learning, uninformed in the habits of thinking, unskilled in the
arts of composition, I resolved to write a book”.
-Edward Gibbon

There are many management books lining the shelves of bookstores and librar-
ies encompassing the theories and hypotheses regarding those skills required to
be effective and productive. Excellent texts exist around motivation, commu-
nication, change management etc., which reflect the importance of these areas
in the vast diversity of organizations today. And this is not limited merely to
Fortune 100 firms, small-cap commercial organizations, or private companies;
we see that universities, trade associations, and governments as well as non-
governmental organizations now have programs encompassing management
and leadership. Training programs in these latter types of organizations sug-
gest the realization that lessons from the business (and military) world may
indeed be transferred to the development of strategy and execution of tactics
in non-commercial settings. However, the refinements of management theory,
originating in the different management schools and universities, provide an at
times bewildering array of choices upon which managers and manager-to-be s
(or want-to-be s) may choose in order to begin or continue their specific journey
toward value creation in a group or group setting. The key is to make the choice,
and follow through with the understanding that many concepts may be within a
rubric where a new perspective is required.
Within this context is the idea that technical personnel are the same, but
different. It is my humble observation – having been on both the scientific and
commercial ladder – that the science/engineering ecosystem inherently empha-
sizes different things, putting such professionals at a distinct disadvantage com-
pared to the commercial part of the organization. This is not purposeful, but a
result of the very nature of the R&D process and the way we reward techni-
cal staff; it tends to be, from training onward, an individual or small group
affair, focused on distinct “right” and “wrong” answers. We center on individual
efforts, from graduate school to post-doc days (to get our names in prominent
positions on publications), or from working on prototypes to projects where
reductionist efforts allow components to be created only to be reconstructed
later on. Individual effort, while not exclusive, is emphasized; we need to be
able to show our scientific or engineering competence by getting the data...and
the right answer. This can be contrasted by efforts in the commercial part of
the organization, where a team orientation is almost always required in every
project, and where results have distinct levels of risk and uncertainty. Training

xv
xvi Preface

in business school encompasses by definition team efforts, whether analyzing

cases to collaboration on projects; I cannot recall any assignment in which I was
involved that did not have at least some cooperative aspect within it. Decisions
on cases while requiring analysis and justification can often have diverse out-
comes based on assumptions and interpretations made. The tacit understanding
is that the team is the way to get things done, rather than via the individual per
se; individual effort is expected, but the way to the promised land is through
collective effort; consensus is about grey areas, where black and white areas are
the exception. It is thus no surprise that this results in commercial staff adapt-
ing to organizational structures more easily than the technical, and as a general
observation, start as better managers than those on the technical side.
I certainly know that this was reflected in the way I learned about and rose
through different technically oriented organizations. What I realized was that
management – dealing with people and the challenges inherent in those inter-
actions – was fundamentally missing in our training as scientists, whether as a
student, post-doc, R&D manager, or vice president, wherein this was inculcated
on the commercial side. And leadership, i.e. being able to motivate, articulate a
vision, and requisite goals for the organization, while present, was rarely cen-
tral. Impractical as it might be, it would have been probably better to rise ini-
tially on the commercial side of the organization, rather than the R&D side,
since those people skills were so important to develop and clearly applicable
throughout the firm.
Hence, this book was born, not necessarily to preach about teams or how
technical staff are different, or even “how to be” a better manager (although
certainly, it is hoped this is the result). Instead, this is much more a pragmatic
approach of what I wished I’d known when I was rising through the ranks, espe-
cially on the R&D side of the organization and transitioning to the commercial/
corporate one. As noted, there are great books that describe well how “geeks”
are different, or strategies to approach scientists. However, this book aims to
address the manager and leader within the technical side of the organization,
who might be managing people for the first time, or all of a sudden have been
put in a position to manage many people (some of whom may not even be within
R&D!). By understanding how our scientific training can either help, or hurt,
our performance via our biases, we can know better how to channel our efforts
toward making our organizations the best they can be, by facilitation, encour-
agement, hearing, and motivating (as well as being technically competent). Our
organizations have placed confidence in us with recognition and responsibili-
ties; we owe our firms, as a result, no less than that.
I want to thank my supportive family, without whom either the inspiration
or motivation would have existed to push this project to completion. Moreover,
like any such project, this one represents much generosity of time from very
busy people who were gracious enough to speak with me. Many colleagues and
acquaintances provided their feedback and thoughts, which have been greatly
appreciated and provided more color and clarity than I could have come up
Preface xvii

with alone. For fruitful discussions and reviews, I appreciate the input of Dan
Bradbury (BioBrit), Michael Hough (Advance Medical), Oscar ­
­ Velastegui
(Pfizer), Phil Perera (Dart Neuroscience), Kevin McElgunn (Dow), Xavier
Frapaise (EULexer), Patrick Lucy (Pfenex), Ana Zambelli (TransOcean), Robin
Robinson (BARDA), and Court Chilton (­SloanMIT); for the introduction of the
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, I thank Margi Mainquist (Mainquist Consulting);
and finally, a special thanks to Shinya Yano, who agreed to write the foreword
from many miles and time zones away. A most sincere thanks to my editor,
Dr. Scott B
­ entley, and the staff at Elsevier, for their professionalism and exper-
tise throughout this process. I finally thank those mentors, peers, mentees, and
reports who have taught me both about leadership and management (of people
and myself), often without even knowing they were doing so (including those
represented in this book). You remain an inspiration, and remind me that I can
always do better.