Innovation Description of Rtc and the Outcome Essay

In my opinion, I prefer to describe RTC as a ‘Blue Sky Innovator’. The reason is that it is relatively autonomy from the Pfizer and the employees there enjoyed creative and flexible research environment. To some extent, it has worked successfully since it has created several drugs per year, and its managerial style has attracted many scientists to join it. It even provide free innovation network for all the sites of Pfizer. However, it has also put itself into a passive position, which resulted in many challenges. This is because it was fully founded by Pfizer, which make them has less authority to manage its employees, which made it hard to recruit new scientists from top universities like Cambridge. The other challenge is that they could not easily convince headquarters of Pfizer to try their new drugs or listen to their presentations. The final challenge is that the ambiguity of mission makes both leaders and employees confused of their goals, which may lead to unsucc essful future. Evaluation of RTC through an Organizational Criteria, Partnership In terms of its partnership, either with the corporation or the other research sites, RTC did quite well to some extent. On one hand, RTC has successfully provided new drugs to Pfizer, and also been trying hard to make closer relationship with Pfizer, by sending many leaders regularly to Pfizer and build personal relationship between the staff. This has made some progress, for example, Pfizer site will track weekly for the process of the projects in RTC, showing big interests of them. RTC has also built relationship with other sites. For example, the Strategic Alliance group and 11-member Research Informatics team, which provides RTC opportunities to work with other sites. On the other hand, it also suffered from these relationships. RTC has to avoid competing with them, which indicates they may miss many opportunities to enhance revenue. The other reason is mentioned above, which is that the passive part of this partnership between RTC and the corporation made it hard to recruit emp loyees or even stimulate them. Recommendation of the Models I recommend that Frank Drake pursue focus more on opportunities as an innovation and technology ‘pusher’. Since there is already one successful example, the ‘biotrove’ project, which could provide some experience of how to cooperate with the scholars and experts. Besides, it could help RTC to build independence from the corporation, as well as other sites. It could be explained as that if RTC did quite well in innovation and technology and market it well, then it could get contracts from the corporation easily. Moreover, if RTC keep trying to spread its awareness around the world, it could even attract cooperation from outside of the firm. As a result, they do not have to only depend on the cooperation with Pfizer to make profit. It could enhance self-control instead, which is good for recruiting and keeping employees. Maybe when RTC finished its step of becoming independent, it could begin to think of another way to grow its business.