Life Science Marketing Radio

I had a fantastic conversation with Abdul Rastagar, founder of Serona Marketing, about his mission to cut the b******t out of marketing. Abdul runs both a podcast and newsletter with that exact title. It’s pretty clear he feels strongly about this. I thought it would be fun to find out what’s been bugging him lately. I was not disappointed.Abdul's beef is that we're stuck using outdated marketing processes from a decade ago that don't match how customers buy today. There’s too much friction. Customers want to see pricing, but we force them through multiple calls with SDRs and demos before revealing whether they're even in the right ballpark. Meanwhile, they're already sharing pricing information in peer communities and researching vendors thoroughly before ever contacting sales. I’ll write more about this soon, but it seems like a missed opportunity to build some trust.While Amazon has systematically removed friction at every step, B2B companies have done the opposite - we've added barriers and complexity. I pushed back a bit about competitive concerns, but he made the case that if you're worried about competitors seeing your pricing, they'll find out anyway through those peer networks. More importantly, if you hide pricing while competitors don't, you're not even getting into the conversation. Better to reduce friction and actually engage with prospects than lose them before they ever reach out.One of his most painful observations is that marketing is the only function where everyone else in the company tells you how to do your job. I laughed at his story about the CEO's spouse not liking the logo colors, but it's not really funny - it's a genuine challenge marketers face daily. Operations, finance, sales, and even board members all have opinions about marketing decisions they'd never dream of weighing in on for other departments. Try telling the CFO about where they should invest all that cash you generated!Here is how he suggests you handle those suggestions: figure out which ones might have merit, prioritize them appropriately, and learn to say no constructively while maintaining collaborative relationships. We briefly discussed LinkedIn’s own flavor of BS: those trade show announcement posts. They're mostly checkbox exercises - the real value comes from personalized outreach using the event as a conversation starter.Given all of this, I asked about being more creative and effective. And I loved his answer. Stop selling your product and start selling your knowledge. Be generous with what you know. Don't focus on what your tool does; focus on sharing your perspective on industry challenges and different approaches.This philosophy of thought leadership before product pitching makes perfect sense, especially in life sciences where people are always eager to learn. Scientists want to understand the "why" behind solutions, not just the "what." When you establish credibility through knowledge sharing, product conversations happen naturally.Abdul shared an example: his client published an industry article, and at a recent conference, the CEO overheard two people discussing that very article. He joined the conversation, revealed he was the author, and one of those people turned out to be an ideal customer prospect. That's how thought leadership creates real business opportunities.On the other side of that, I asked about the common CEO dilemma: wanting to be thought leaders but not wanting to be the face of their companies. Abdul acknowledged the risk - invest in building someone into a thought leader and they might leave. People do move around. But you're better off benefiting from that voice while you have it than getting no benefit at all.Instead of getting caught up in the latest marketing technology or tactic, Abdul's focus on fundamentals understanding your customer's buying process, being transparent, and sharing knowledge generously feels more authentic and is likely more effective.These cold conversations have been a blast and educational for me beyond the content. I have more lined up. If you aren’t subscribed, now might be a good time…Your deepest insights are your best branding. I’d love to help you share them. Chat with me about custom content for your life science brand. Or visit my website. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit cclifescience.substack.com

Recently, I’ve enjoyed interviewing people I have never spoken to before. Harrison Waid, the co-founder of Succession, is one of those. Shout out to Teddy Lin for connecting us. I took this as an opportunity to learn about Harrison and his business as well as a personal challenge to interview someone “cold”. OK, I did some research, so maybe “room temperature”.First of course, I needed him to explain Succession, co-founded with Nick Clare (who I hope to have on another time). They noticed life science companies struggling to translate great technology into successful market entry and sales growth. Succession was founded to address this, offering specialized services exclusively for life science sales teams – everything from lead generation and sales training to recruitment and optimizing internal systems like CRMs with automation and AI. Harrison called it a "vertical service company" for life science sales.The idea for it wasn't a sudden flash of insight but more of a "slow burn." While at Synthego and after moving to the UK, he initially thought about general consulting. He quickly found that clients wanted concrete outcomes, not just advice. The real traction came when they packaged their expertise into specific, deliverable-focused services – that’s when things really took off.I’m always interested in people who come from other backgrounds outside of life science. He made his start was in software sales. A friend brought him into Synthego, a CRISPR company, initially for consulting. At that point, his knowledge of biology was that "the mitochondria is the powerhouse of the cell." But he was excited by the potential of the technology. He immersed himself in learning the science and business of biotech, leveraging online resources and learning from his colleagues. Once again, curiosity = superpower! Asking "dumb questions" is an underrated skill. Those outside perspectives can challenge assumptions and benefit both the business and the individual willing to learn.I'd prepped some questions, but the morning of our interview, I stumbled upon a recent LinkedIn post Harrison made contrasting "old" and "new" ways in biotech sales. I saw some insightful comments from people we both respect, like Owen Swift. I knew this would be worth digging into.Harrison framed the "new way" around leveraging technology to move beyond inefficient models like (old way) simply scaling headcount. I picked a few points from his post for discussion:Small, High-Output Teams + RevOps/Content/Automation: He explained how technology now allows high-performing reps to be supported by robust systems (managed by Revenue Operations) that automate much of the prospecting and research previously done by separate inside sales roles. This frees up skilled sellers to focus on closing.AI for Intent & Sequencing: We discussed how AI can go beyond basic alerts to analyze market signals, identify key opportunities, score leads, and even assist with outreach, providing reps with powerful, timely intelligence.Content & Personal Brand for Demand Gen: I strongly agree with this one. There is a compelling case for reps building their personal brands on platforms like LinkedIn. He argued, quite correctly in my view, that authentic content from individuals resonates far more than corporate posts and that companies restricting this are missing a huge opportunity.Video Outreach: I shared my own recent positive experience with video messaging, having secured a meeting from one just last week. Harrison pointed out how video cuts through the noise, humanizes interactions, and is effective for both prospecting and follow-ups. We agreed authenticity is more important than perfection.The Best Reps Get the Best Opportunities: This one may be controversial, as it goes against the idea of pure "fairness" in lead distribution. He would argue that for maximizing company revenue, it makes sense to give the highest potential leads to the reps most likely to convert them. He acknowledged territory assignments are inherently unfair anyway and suggested lower performers could develop on less critical leads. This leads to discussions about efficiency, long-term strategy, and even healthy team turnover.Compensation plans inevitably drive behavior and can always be gamed, so no system is perfect. It comes down to your goal and again, long-term strategy. As someone who hasn’t formally been in sales, I can see the attraction to developing skills on low risk opportunities.If these ideas got you thinking, you might check out the SalesDNA Podcast, Hosted by Harrison and Nick. These cold conversations have been a blast and educational for me beyond the content. I have more lined up. If you aren’t subscribed, now might be a good time…Your deepest insights are your best branding. I’d love to help you share them. Chat with me about custom content for your life science brand. Or visit my website.BTW, I hope you’ll consider joining me here: This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit cclifescience.substack.com

I’ve never been great at conflict. Like a lot of people, I’ve leaned toward avoiding it—especially in the workplace. But I know that’s not a useful strategy in the long run, which is why I was excited to talk with Deb Nathan, a conflict navigation coach, on Life Science Marketing Radio.Right off the bat, Deb drew a distinction between conflict resolution and conflict navigation. Resolution implies there’s a clear “winner” and “loser” or at least a compromise everyone can agree on—but let’s be honest, that’s not always possible. Navigation, on the other hand, is about figuring out how to work with each other even when we disagree. It’s about forward momentum, not just agreement.Deb reminded me (and all of us, really) that conflict isn’t inherently bad. In fact, it’s often the spark for meaningful change—personally and organizationally. The issue isn’t the conflict itself but how we choose to engage with it.What Is Relational Resilience?Deb introduced a concept I hadn’t considered before: relational resilience. I’m used to hearing resilience in terms of the individual—bounce back, stay strong, push through. But relational resilience is about how teams manage conflict together. It’s rooted in the idea that we’re stronger and more creative when we work through challenges collaboratively rather than individually.She outlined several components that make up relational resilience:* Relational flexibility – being open to hearing and holding multiple perspectives, including conflicting ideas inside your own head.* Relational confidence – allowing yourself to be vulnerable, which is only possible if the team environment supports that.* Mutual empowerment – shifting from "self-empowerment" to a model where team members lift each other up.* Creativity and imagination – thinking beyond current possibilities and co-creating new solutions.* Appreciating complexity – resisting the urge to simplify when a nuanced approach is more useful. (This is probably my favorite.)* Tensionality – the ability to stay engaged with someone else’s perspective while still holding your own.* Comfort with uncertainty – resisting the rush to answers when patience could produce better outcomes.* Reasonable hope – a grounded belief that things can improve with effort, even if it’s not easy.It’s a powerful framework, and it aligns with how I like to think: long-term, with an eye on creating something that lasts.Vulnerability as a Leadership SkillWhen we got into the topic of vulnerability, Deb made a point I’ve seen play out in real life. The best managers I’ve had were the ones who gave me space to try things—even when those things didn’t work out. They made it safe to take risks. And when something failed it was a learning experience, not a career-ending mistake.Deb emphasized that leaders don’t need to have all the answers or even agree with every idea. What they do need is to create an environment where people feel safe to experiment and speak up. That’s where vulnerability comes in—not just for individuals, but systemically. Managers who can admit uncertainty, invite multiple viewpoints, and reflect on outcomes together build healthier, more resilient teams.Curiosity Is a SuperpowerIf you’ve listened to more than a few episodes of this podcast, you know I’m a big fan of curiosity. So is Deb. She described curiosity as the antidote to stagnation, a skill that allows us to continually learn, adapt, and better understand each other. Without it, we default to fixed positions, binary thinking, and conflict escalation.Curiosity means asking open-ended questions, exploring ideas we don’t initially agree with, and staying open to being surprised. For leaders, modeling curiosity invites that mindset across a team. It tells people their ideas matter—even if they’re different or incomplete.And while curiosity might sound like a soft skill, it has very real impacts on innovation, team cohesion, and ultimately, performance.Not subscribed? Let’s fix that, shall we? Subscribe for free to receive new posts by email. (No spam. I promise.)Time Pressure vs. Long-Term ThinkingWe also talked about time pressure. What happens when you're in conflict at work but feel like there's no time to sit down and work it out?Deb’s answer was clear: if you don’t make time for it now, you’ll pay for it later—probably with more time, stress, and friction. Trying to push through without dealing with the real issue often leads to bigger breakdowns down the line. On the flip side, making space for dialogue (even just a little) can result in more durable solutions.One of the ways to manage that time pressure, she said, is to get comfortable with not having immediate clarity. Sometimes the best thing a team can do is agree to keep talking, keep listening, and let the path forward emerge gradually.Culture, Communication, and Cross-Team CollaborationLater in the conversation, we got into cultural differences—across nationalities, disciplines, even departments. Deb’s background includes working with Israeli and Palestinian teens, and the lessons she learned there are surprisingly transferable to corporate teams.The core idea: everyone brings their own lens to every conversation. We all interpret language, data, and goals differently. That’s even true when we’re technically speaking the same language. (I learned this while teaching sailing to someone from the UK—turns out “quite good” doesn’t mean the same thing in both countries.)Within scientific companies, this plays out between technical teams and commercial teams, or between different functional areas. The solution? Again, it comes back to curiosity and creating space for people to explain their views before rushing to fix the “problem.”Deb made a powerful point: even when people don’t agree, they can still work together if they respect where the other is coming from. That opens up new ways forward.From Leads to Loyalty: Marketing with Relationship in MindFinally, I asked Deb to tie this all back to marketing. So many companies still operate with a “get me leads” mentality—but in reality, lasting impact comes from relationships, not transactions.She was clear: if you want lasting value, you need relational resilience. Short-term wins might feel good, but it’s long-term trust that gets you through hard times and keeps customers coming back. That mindset applies to internal culture, too. If you're only focused on extracting value from employees during their two-year tenure, you're missing the chance to build something better—something that retains talent and gets stronger over time.The Bottom LineThis conversation made me think more deeply about how we show up in teams—not just in crisis or disagreement, but every day. Deb’s framework of relational resilience gives us a better way to build cultures that support creativity, growth, and real collaboration.For marketers, for scientists, for managers, for anyone in business: this isn’t about being soft. It’s about being smart. It’s about recognizing that long-term thinking, curiosity, and vulnerability aren’t just nice-to-haves—they’re the foundation of meaningful progress.Your deepest insights are your best branding. I’d love to help you share them. Chat with me about custom content for your life science brand. Or visit my website. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit cclifescience.substack.com

I had the pleasure of speaking with Heather Javier, a genomic sales specialist at Roche, sales coach, and host of the Transition to Sales podcast. Heather shared her journey from working in translational oncology and stem cell research to transitioning into sales, inspired by her desire to connect, problem-solve, and align her career with her values.Heather’s JourneyHeather’s career started with a biology degree and a role in translational oncology at Genentech. Her early work involved managing mice for efficacy studies, followed by years in stem cell research, where her hours were dictated by the cells she was culturing.Despite her scientific success, Heather felt a gap between her work and her passion. What energized Heather was networking, problem-solving, and collaboration. Inspired by her own interactions with sales reps, she realized she could make a bigger impact in sales by addressing customer needs more effectively. After a year of networking and revamping her resume, she made the leap into sales, which she describes as the best decision she made for her family and career.NetworkingHeather believes networking is simply about resourcefulness and taking a “heart-centered approach.” During her days at UCSF, she constantly collaborated with statisticians, vendors, and colleagues to troubleshoot experiments. This mindset carried into her sales career, where she emphasized the importance of building authentic connections.Networking isn’t just a means to an end; it’s about helping others while advancing shared goals. For those who feel intimidated by networking, she suggests shifting your mindset: recognize that people often want to help and are energized by being part of your journey. I couldn’t agree more. I have experienced this many times over many years.Transitioning from Science to SalesHeather knows scientists and technical professionals have the skills needed for sales roles—they often don’t realize it. Sales, at its core, is about problem-solving, asking the right questions, and connecting solutions to customer needs.Scientists are used to analyzing variables and troubleshooting experiments. In sales, this translates to understanding customer pain points, guiding discussions with targeted questions, and tailoring solutions. Heather highlighted the importance of being prepared, leveraging technical knowledge, and staying resourceful. These are things scientists do regularly.Overcoming Fear and Building Confidence One of the biggest hurdles for those transitioning into sales: building confidence. Her advice? Treat the learning process like you would in a lab. Just as scientists train to operate new equipment, aspiring sales professionals can prepare by studying their business, asking questions, and leaning on mentors.Heather shared her own experience of transitioning into sales at QIAGEN, where she won President’s Club in her first year. Her success came from applying her scientific mindset to sales—studying customer personas, analyzing data, and proactively creating business plans. Confidence, she emphasized, comes from preparation and a willingness to learn. In other words: be curious and do your homework. Isn’t that what we’ve been doing our whole life?Not subscribed? Let’s fix that, shall we? Subscribe for free to receive new posts by email. (No Spam. I promise.)Bridging the Gap Between Sales and MarketingHeather isn’t the first to point out that sales and marketing often operate in silos, which can lead to missed opportunities. She urged marketers to view sales teams as their “customers” and collaborate closely to create materials that resonate with what sales reps are hearing in the field.Here is an idea she shared that I can get behind. Cultivate a sense of culture and community at conferences. Instead of relying solely on product demonstrations, create experiences that reflect the company’s values and culture, helping to attract ideal clients and foster stronger connections.Connecting the Dots: Relationship Building in SalesHeather frequently mentions the idea of connecting the dots. She described her role as a connector—both within her company and with her customers. Building trust and relationships is essential, whether it’s with decision-makers at a customer’s organization or with internal teams like R&D and technical specialists.She stressed the importance of identifying “coaches” within customer organizations—people who advocate for your product or service and help you navigate the decision-making process. Heather’s approach to connecting the dots involves bringing people together, asking thoughtful questions, seeking feedback, and leveraging internal and external resources to solve problems collaboratively.Sales Coaching for StartupsIn addition to her sales role, Heather is developing a program to coach startups on building their own sales strategies. Hiring a dedicated sales team can be expensive. Heather’s vision is to help technical teams get comfortable with the fundamentals of sales. Her coaching focuses on skills like prospecting, navigating customer personas, and moving opportunities through the sales funnel, all while staying true to the company’s culture and mission.For startups with a strong sense of purpose, Heather’s coaching aims to channel that passion into effective customer connections.Empowering Women in SalesHeather’s podcast, Transition to Sales, is geared toward women—particularly mothers—looking to move into sales roles from technical backgrounds. She provides actionable advice, free resources like resume guides, and insights into building confidence in sales. Heather’s mission is to create representation in an industry that is still predominantly male, showing women that their skills and perspectives are invaluable in sales.Heather’s story is a testament to the power of aligning your career with your values and passions. Her journey from the lab to sales demonstrates how scientific skills can translate into successful sales strategies, and her heart-centered approach serves as an inspiring model for others considering a similar transition.For anyone interested in learning more, be sure to check out her podcast and connect with her on LinkedIn.Your deepest insights are your best branding. I’d love to help you share them. Chat with me about custom content for your life science brand. Or visit my website. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit cclifescience.substack.com

Shifting our approach to feedbackIn my recent conversation with mindset coach, Margaret Jennings (MJ), our conversation started with the emotional rollercoaster created by feedback—especially when you're early in your career. Feedback, both positive and negative, is useful but can also result in a wild ride. MJ once described herself as a “floundering high achiever” in her 20s. She is a more grounded and self-aware leader today. Her insights are both relatable and instructive.Like many of us I’m sure, she once heavily relied on external validation. She was on top of her game when feedback was positive, but when it turned critical, it felt like failure. This is something that likely resonates with a lot of high achievers. Her sense of self-worth was tied to what others thought about her accomplishments, whether in school or sports. In many ways, this made her successful in the short term, but it came at the cost of long-term fulfillment.She explained that it’s natural to want to please those around us—whether it’s parents, teachers, or coaches. After all, as babies, this is how we secure food, love, and safety. But the problem comes when we carry this strategy too far into adulthood, to the point where our identity is solely built around what others think of us. This approach eventually leads to burnout and can limit our potential for growth and happiness.Consider the mental gymnastics we all do when we receive feedback. It reminded me of the challenge of a good golf swing: You can’t perform well if you are overanalyzing every aspect of it all the time. Margaret agreed and said her turning point came when she started working with a mental performance coach. This coach helped her realize that her value didn’t have to come from others' opinions; instead, she could generate her own sense of worth internally. That shift in thinking transformed the way she performed, both in work and in life.Building a relationship with yourselfMJ brought up the concept of building a relationship with oneself: We’re constantly in a dialogue with ourselves, and it’s crucial to make that relationship a positive one. Through practices like journaling, meditation, and self-reflection, we can learn to identify and understand our own needs and desires, leading to a more balanced and sustainable approach to both work and life. Looking back at my own life, there was a time when I had a few ideas about a career path but was relying a lot on others’ expectations and evaluations of my abilities to show me the way. It took a long time to move past that. I asked Margaret about how she specifically changed the way she talked to herself, and her response was insightful. She noted that awareness is key—you need to recognize the quality of your self-talk. Is it positive and affirming, or is it critical and self-defeating? She likened this to any relationship, explaining that you need to invest time and energy into yourself just as you would with a friend or partner. You’d have a difficult time building a positive relationship with anyone else if you were constantly critical of them.It strikes me that adopting a growth mindset is your ticket off of the emotional rollercoaster. You no longer see constructive feedback as a personal attack but as an opportunity for growth. This mindset shift is vital, especially for high achievers who can often fall into the trap of seeing any criticism as a sign of failure. Not subscribed? Let’s fix that, shall we? Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.Embracing uncertaintyMJ talked about the importance embracing uncertainty, something that has been on my mind lately, and her thoughts on it really hit home. Our constant search for certainty is often counterproductive because so much of life is inherently unpredictable. Instead, we should focus on what we can control and accept that not everything will go perfectly. It’s about shifting from an all-or-nothing mentality—where you're either a success or a failure—to a more nuanced view where growth and learning happen over time. (If you’ve been a listener for a while you know how much I love long-term thinking!)I think we waste a lot of time and energy trying to control things that are not in our power to control or trying to predict things that we do not have the capacity to predict.So, our focus is such a limited resource, that if we have the choice to allow it to be consumed by things we can't control, which is going to fuel anxiety and overwhelm, or we can choose to look at this situation and say, okay, realistically, what can I control here in terms of having impact and creating clarity? Then we're able to make more progress forward. We also touched on expectations and career transitions. This is where the growth mindset can make a huge difference for you. First of all, growth is about trying new things, stepping into new roles. It occurs to me that being ready for a new position and being good or great at it are two points on the curve. Our expectations for our performance at the beginning need to be realistic and not necessarily at the level of someone who did that job for 3-5 years. Being ready means you have the tools and are able to grow (there’s that word again) into the role. Of course you will get better at it over time. For example, MJ is a hockey player. She described the excitement of lacing up her skates and getting on the ice for the first time. She pointed out that if she didn’t expect to fall on her face before learning how to do crossovers and stop and start, it would have been difficult to achieve any success.You may have noticed I’ve been thinking and talking about culture within organizations a lot lately. It occurs to me that we each create a culture within ourselves that affects our ability to perform in any role we take on (leader, parent, contributor etc). MJ’s advice goes a long way toward helping us ensure that is a supportive and growth oriented one that will lead to our success.Your deepest insights are your best branding. I’d love to help you share them. Chat with me about custom content for your life science brand. Or visit my website. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit cclifescience.substack.com

The process of content review, approval, and distribution is often perceived as a "necessary evil" in life science marketing. If you're reading this, you probably know how challenging this process can be. In this episode, I had the pleasure of chatting with Annalise Ludtke, Senior Manager for Marketing Communications and Strategy at Vodori, and host of the Amend and Progress podcast. She offered some great insights on how to streamline and improve this process while still keeping everything compliant, fast, and efficient.Right out of the gate, Annalise laid out the core problem Vodori aims to solve: the complexity of managing content in life science organizations. Companies need to develop a lot of promotional and educational materials, and getting those materials reviewed, approved, and distributed is a complicated process. The challenge is not just about creating great content—it’s about managing the feedback loops, the endless rounds of revisions, and the hurdles of compliance. Without a solid process for reviewing and approving content, life science companies can’t effectively market their products. Of course, you need to make sure everything you put out there meets legal and regulatory standards. Best PracticesAnnalise shared some best practices that Vodori advocates, and these tips stood out to me as practical and actionable regardless of any platform you might deploy or none at all.* Parallel vs. Sequential Review: One of the key strategies Annalise mentioned is the benefit of parallel review processes, where all the necessary stakeholders—whether it's medical, legal, or regulatory teams—are reviewing content simultaneously rather than sequentially. This can save a lot of time because it encourages open dialogue between the different reviewers. If someone has an issue with a piece of content, they can discuss it with the other reviewers in real-time, instead of waiting for feedback to trickle in one department at a time.I appreciated her point that while parallel review might seem more chaotic at first glance, it actually fosters more collaboration. Reviewers can resolve conflicting feedback before it gets back to the content owner, which can speed things up dramatically.* Clear Ownership and Communication: Clearly defined roles and responsibilities make everyone’s job easier. Annalise emphasized that it's critical for each reviewer to stay in their lane and provide feedback based on their specific area of expertise. This helps avoid confusion and unnecessary edits, which can slow down the process. Additionally, it's essential for reviewers to communicate clearly—indicating whether a comment is a required change or just a suggestion, for instance. This small change can remove a lot of friction and keep the process moving forward smoothly. Color-coding comments to signify importance is a simple yet effective way to clarify expectations. * Real-Time Collaboration: I imagine most companies now have the ability for multiple stakeholders to collaborate on documents in real-time, where everyone can log in, see the comments being made by others, and even have discussions within the document itself. This not only saves time but also reduces the likelihood of conflicting feedback, which would require another round of calls or emails to resolve.Is this content helpful?Where is the data for that claim?If someone has a question about a claim, you’d like to know where to find the data that supports it. It seems a simple idea to have a claims library. Vodori’s platform allows companies to store and manage approved claims, making it easier to track where and how certain claims are being used in marketing materials. Likewise when claims are updated with new data, you’d like to know where they have been used in the past to find all the places where the claim was referenced.How does your process compare?Beyond best practices, setting goals and understanding benchmarks is another step toward making the content review process less painful. Let’s invite our industry peers out for drinks after work to compare our review processes! - No one said that.Fortunately, Vodori publishes an annual Benchmarks Report that looks at various metrics like average review time and number of review cycles, giving companies a way to see how they stack up against industry standards.By comparing your metrics to industry standards, your company can decide what might realistically make the most impact and set goals for improving your review process.For instance, some teams might set goals around reducing the number of review cycles content has to go through or improving the speed at which content gets approved. Compliance is another area —perhaps setting a goal to reduce the number of compliance issues flagged during the review process. Reducing time to marketIn my experience, content was always the last thing on the list before a product launch. The impact of improving the content review process is huge. By reducing the time it takes to get content through review, life science companies can get their products to market faster, which ultimately benefits customers/patients. Vodori’s platform not only helps streamline the process but also provides peace of mind by ensuring compliance every step of the way.As Annalise pointed out, the goal is not just to make the process easier for marketing teams but to improve outcomes across the board—for the company, the team, and, most importantly, the patients.Annalise’s Podcast: Amend and ProgressToward the end of our conversation, we touched on Annalise’s podcast, Amend and Progress, which focuses on improving content review processes in the life sciences. She’s been hosting conversations with experts both inside and outside of Vodori, tackling topics like best practices, industry trends, and even the potential role of AI in content review. You should definitely check it out.Her podcast is a great example of how even niche topics can have a dedicated audience, offering valuable insights for those navigating the complexities of content management in regulated industries. I think there’s a lesson here for all of us in the podcasting world—if you’re solving a real problem for people, there’s always an audience, no matter how specialized the topic is.Final ThoughtsI’ve been thinking a lot lately of my second episode way back around 2014 or 2015 about how marketing communications can change an organization. This is one of those opportunities. By taking the lead on setting standards and implementing best practices for the review and approval process, marketing can improve the work lives of their colleagues in other parts of the company as well as their own. The added benefit of developing processes with rigor lets marketing communications be seen as more than a service provider, but rather a leader in unlocking innovation and success in an organization.Your deepest insights are your best branding. I’d love to help you share them. Chat with me about custom content for your life science brand. Or visit my website. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit cclifescience.substack.com

I spoke with Brian Thomson, HR consultant and leadership coach, about leadership, hiring, retention, and culture in early-stage life science companies. Brian’s practical insights offer a roadmap for building and sustaining a thriving company from the ground up.The Importance of Modeling the Right BehaviorsFrom the beginning, Brian emphasized a key concept: intentionality. In his view, leadership is not just about making the right decisions; it's about being intentional in how you model behaviors and build culture within your organization. This is particularly crucial in the fluid environments of startups, where the pace is fast, and the stakes are high.He pointed out that it’s not about whether a particular culture is right or wrong—what matters is that it’s intentional and authentic. This intentionality shapes hiring, retention, and performance management, all of which are crucial for the long-term success of a company. He argued that strategic planning should not just be a buzzword but a disciplined practice that informs every decision, from the type of culture you want to build to the kind of people you need to hire.The Rule of Threes: Core Competencies in StartupsBrain has a rule of threes when it comes to what founders of early-stage life science companies need to focus on: disruptive science, a strong core team, and a high degree of intentionality around culture. While it’s easy for founders to get fixated on the science—because it’s their passion and it’s measurable—the other two elements are just as critical.This resonated with me, especially considering how often we see startups with groundbreaking science but no clear direction on how to build a team or a culture that can sustain the business. The science might make headlines, but it’s the culture and the team that will drive the long-term success of the company.Strategic Planning: More Than Just a ProcessBrian’s sees strategic planning as more than just a process; it’s a foundational practice that lends clarity, focus, and discipline to an organization. He mentioned that in his role as a coach, he often works with early-stage organizations to develop a strategic plan that is as concrete as possible. The goal? To ensure that at any given moment, everyone in the organization knows the top priorities.Be very disciplined. Be very focused. Make your plan. Make it as concrete as possible. At any given time, if I go and ask two of your employees, anywhere in the organization, “What are the number one and what's the number one and what's the number two topmost priority that the company has at that moment?”If they can't answer that, it indicates to me that you haven't done a good enough job of being very clear and being very focused. This approach to strategic planning directly feeds into the hiring process. By being clear on the values and culture you want to create, you can ensure that the people you bring into the organization are aligned with those goals. Hiring isn’t just about finding people with the right skills; it’s about finding people who will thrive in the specific culture and environment of your company.Like what you see?Hiring: An Internal Competency, Not a Task to OutsourceMany startups make a mistake by outsourcing their hiring processes. Hiring is too critical to be left to an external agency, especially in the early stages of a company’s development. The first 10 to 15 hires set the tone for the entire organization, and if those hires don’t align with the company’s culture and values, it will create long-term issues.Brian argued that hiring should be an internal competency, with the leadership team taking an active role in the process. This ensures that everyone who joins the company is fully aware of the environment they’re stepping into, whether it’s a messy startup with lots of ambiguity or a more structured environment.The Value of Transparency in the Hiring ProcessBrian shared a story from his time as Chief People Officer for a small biotech spinout during the Great Resignation. Despite the mass exodus of employees across industries, his organization navigated that period with zero regrettable turnover and zero R&D turnover. The secret? Radical transparency.From the first conversation with potential hires, Brian and his team were upfront about the realities of the company’s environment. This honesty helped attract the right people—those who were excited about rolling up their sleeves and getting their hands dirty—and it also helped filter out those who weren’t a good fit. Brian emphasized that transparency in the hiring process not only attracts the right talent but also helps candidates self-select out if the environment isn’t right for them.Retention: A Balancing ActWhen it comes to retention, 100 percent retention isn’t the goal, nor is it ideal. A little turnover can be a good thing, as it brings in fresh perspectives and prevents complacency. However, the key is to ensure that the turnover is natural and doesn’t result in the loss of essential talent.Brian talked about the importance of building a talent engine within the organization—an environment where employees are developed and prepared for their next roles, whether within the company or elsewhere. This approach not only boosts retention but also enhances the company’s reputation as a place where people can grow and develop their careers.The Power of a Coaching CultureFinally, we talked about the value of creating a coaching culture within an organization. Brian argued that this is one of the most effective ways to develop talent and increase engagement. Instead of relying on traditional training programs, which can be expensive and often ineffective, he advocates for on-the-job learning and continuous development through coaching.In a coaching culture, managers act as mentors, helping their employees navigate their careers and develop the skills they need to succeed. This not only empowers employees but also creates a more dynamic and engaged workforce. This approach doesn’t require a huge budget—it’s more about a shift in mindset and behavior.Final Thoughts: Intentionality Is KeyAs we wrapped up our conversation, the theme that kept coming back was intentionality. Whether it’s in strategic planning, hiring, or building a coaching culture, being intentional about your decisions and actions is crucial for the success of any startup. The best companies are those that are clear about who they are, what they value, and where they’re going.Your deepest insights are your best branding. I’d love to help you share them. Chat with me about custom content for your life science brand. Or visit my website. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit cclifescience.substack.com

In this episode, I spoke to Cassandra Rix, the owner and chief leadership coach at The Resonance Coach. Our conversation centered around understanding individual motivations and expectations within group efforts, especially in the context of company acquisitions. I think you will find the insights applicable to many situations at work and at home.Cass's Background and ExpertiseCass has spent over 20 years working with businesses either in the process of being acquired or on the tail end of an acquisition. She specializes in service agencies selling expertise and time, such as consultancies and communication specialists. Her focus now is on helping founders looking for investment or seeking an exit strategy, and the businesses interested in investing in them. She believes that many acquisitions fail despite thorough due diligence because the underlying human motivations and behaviors of the individuals involved aren't fully understood.Understanding MotivationsWhile people may outwardly agree on a common goal, such as selling a company, their underlying reasons can be very different. These differences will show up during times of significant change (after the investment or acquisition). Everyone’s motivations are influenced by their own personal experiences and beliefs, which drive their decisions and behaviors.Cass's own interest in understanding motivations stems from her background in sales and marketing, where she worked with buyers and wanted to comprehend why people made specific purchasing decisions. Our beliefs drive our behavior, and it's crucial to recognize that we often make assumptions about others' motivations based on our own perspectives. We expect them to act the way we would. I’d like to look deeper into this in future episodes.If you find this helpful, it kind of makes sense to subscribe, doesn’t it?The Challenges of AssumptionsIt’s risky to assume that everyone's motivations are similar. Cass used the analogy of wearing someone else's shoes – just because you're in their shoes doesn't mean you understand their journey. This is especially relevant in business settings, where assuming that all founders or team members share the same motivations can lead to conflicts and dysfunction.Cass illustrated this with an example of how misaligned expectations can derail an acquisition. For instance, if one founder decides they have enough financial security post-acquisition and leaves, the remaining team dynamics can be severely disrupted:So the things that fall apart there is, well, we all think we've agreed to sell this business or invest, have investment in this business so that we can carry on. What does carry on mean? What if that means that one person has generated enough income in the acquisition process, not to need to stay throughout the earn-out. And suddenly you go from a leadership team or founding team of four to three or three to two. What if the other two people in that business were beautifully balanced by that third individual? And so the relationship that they're left with is dysfunctional. They don't really like each other. They don't know how to communicate with each other. They've never had to without that third person as a foil. And probably the most flawed thing is the assumption that the rest of the business, whether you're talking about another twenty people, fifty people or thousands of people, the assumption that those people don't know.This scenario can lead to conflicts and a decline in business performance, which affects everyone's livelihoods.The Role of Vulnerability and Communication As individuals climb the corporate ladder, they often create personas that might not align with their true selves. This can lead to exhaustion and dissatisfaction, as they try to maintain an identity that doesn't reflect their genuine motivations.Cass said that vulnerability is not a weakness but a strength. When leaders and team members are open about their true motivations and feelings, it fosters understanding and empathy. She shared that when people reveal their authentic selves, it often leads to relief and better teamwork. This openness can help teams navigate change more effectively, as everyone understands each other's perspectives and can support one another.Practical Implications and Real-World ExamplesCass pointed out how small habits and cultural norms, such as which hand you use to hold a fork, can shape our perspectives and lead to emotional attachments about how things should be done. If we feel that strongly about cutlery, imagine the intensity of our feelings about approaches to business where the stakes are much higher. Translating this to business settings, she explained how deeply ingrained beliefs about success and behavior can affect decision-making and team dynamics. Differing motivations for making money can lead to misunderstandings. Some people might want to make money to retire early and spend time with family, while others aim to leave a legacy or achieve a prestigious position. These differing goals and expectations can create friction if not openly discussed and understood. Whether you are the acquiring/investing company or the company being invested in, understanding these things can make a huge difference in your long-term happiness (money, legacy…).The Courage to Be DislikedOur conversation concluded with a serious reflection on the importance of self-awareness and the courage to be true to oneself. Cass recommended the book "The Courage to Be Disliked," which explores the concept that what others think of us often reflects their own beliefs and insecurities. She encouraged leaders and individuals to focus on their own motivations and well-being rather than constantly worrying about others' opinions.Her final thought: "The most liberating two words in the English language are 'let them...'" Letting go of the need for external validation and embracing one's true self can lead to greater fulfillment and success, both personally and professionally.Let them.Your deepest insights are your best branding. I’d love to help you share them. Chat with me about custom content for your life science brand. Or visit my website. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit cclifescience.substack.com