Why playing it safe is slowing down drug discovery

In early-stage drug discovery, pressure is nothing new. Long timelines, strict regulation and scientific uncertainty are part of the job. However, when that pressure is compounded by political shifts, market volatility and rising expectations from the global pharmaceutical industry, the old ways of working start to crack.

Nick Petschek is Managing Director – EMEA at Kotter, a change and transformation consultancy grounded in John Kotter’s 50 years of leadership research. He works closely with pharmaceutical teams in Europe and North America to help them move faster, think differently and adapt without compromising on quality or compliance.

His experience with early-stage drug developers makes one thing clear: traditional approaches to timelines, team structure and risk no longer stand up to today’s demands.

Why playing it safe might be slowing you down

Political discussion around the pharmaceutical industry has largely focused on end-stage sales and pricing policy. President Trump’s proposals to reduce drug prices in the US are a key example. However, Nick believes early-stage discovery leaders should be paying close attention too.

“Several estimates put roughly half of the global pharma revenues in the US,” he notes. “This would be a huge disruptor to the industry, especially for global organisations that mostly sell into the US.”

Rather than wait and react, Nick advocates a proactive approach that challenges the sector’s deeply embedded aversion to risk.

He spoke about a recent client engagement – a 90-day sprint project designed to speed up early drug development. “We helped them go from reduced early-stage drug development by half” he says. “And a lot of that [was] by helping introduce more risk – not out-of-compliance risk, but financial or business risk.”

He explains that a risk-based approach can help companies move faster and respond more effectively. Areas such as quality control should remain non-negotiable, but others, such as investment timelines, can be handled with greater flexibility.

“What ends up happening in that industry and others that are heavily regulated is you take the lowest amount of risk and you spread it across the business,” he explains. “Instead of taking a variable risk-based approach.”

A change in this mindset can lead to faster timelines and help build more adaptable, resilient teams – something smaller biotechs need as they try to balance agility with compliance.

Collaborate, talk politics (carefully) and fail fast

For discovery teams that operate across borders and increasingly rely on contract research organisations (CROs), academic partnerships and external collaborators, alignment is everything. However, building alignment in a shifting geopolitical environment requires more than a decent project plan.

In Nick’s view, one of the most overlooked barriers to collaboration is how CROs are treated by discovery companies.

“They are sometimes treated as an arm’s-length supply chain, as opposed to being part of the actual project team,” he says.

That is often a missed opportunity. Treating collaborators as strategic partners, rather than transactional vendors, encourages better communication, faster decision-making and more meaningful contributions to the science itself.

“You will miss the nuggets of, maybe not gold, but molecule, let us say,” he jokes.

This is particularly relevant when dealing with the undercurrent of political uncertainty many teams now face. “Most of my conversations with European clients start with them asking me about American politics – that did not happen six months ago.”

Rather than avoid those discussions, Nick recommends acknowledging them openly and constructively.

“If we cannot talk about it in a way that we are comfortable with, or at least just [slightly] uncomfortable with, it becomes the elephant in the room. We then do not get a chance to understand it or to deal with it.”

This ability to make space for discomfort, build trust across partnerships and work transparently under pressure is what separates effective discovery teams from those that struggle when circumstances change.

In today’s high-pressure environment – where political reforms, shifting markets and evolving industry demands intersect -traditional approaches to early-stage drug discovery are no longer sufficient. To remain competitive, pharmaceutical teams must adopt bold thinking, foster agile collaboration, and take smarter, more calculated risks.

It is not about more people, but smarter thinking

In resource-constrained environments such as early-stage biotech, doing more with less is often treated like gospel. However, as Nick points out, this is sometimes a fallacy.

He notes that adding more people or tools is a common response to adaptability challenges – yet this is not always the most effective solution either.

Instead, he recommends a different approach: looking at how teams are working and thinking and helping them reprioritise or reframe their tasks. One method he champions is embracing failure earlier in the pipeline.

“Especially when it is just computational modelling,” he says. “It is still cheap. It is just a computer and an analyst. So innovate while it is cheap – and fail fast.”

Nick also emphasises the importance of creating psychological safety, starting with small, individual-level changes. One of his favourite examples is a client practice where the first 15 minutes of the workday are spent in reflection, not reaction.

“Five minutes of reflection on what you want to accomplish for the day, before opening any of your devices,” he explains, “then five minutes thinking about what behaviours or mindset you need.”

He encourages teams to write these down. “Literally write them down and post it. There is research that shows you will remember it better and process it more clearly.”

Without practices like these, it is easy for leaders to slip into survival mode – reacting to inboxes, meetings and distractions, rather than building strategy and culture intentionally.

The pattern behind the winners: say no faster

At the broader level, let us consider what separates the discovery companies that thrive from those that stall under pressure.

Nick shares insight from a recent discussion with a business development lead at a global pharmaceutical firm. Increasingly, these companies are looking to partner earlier – not just to acquire drugs, but to help shape their development direction.

That makes early-stage alignment more important than ever. Yet the statistics remain bleak: “For every 150 deals they start, only one of them actually gets to fruition.”

For companies hoping to beat those odds, Nick says it comes down to two things: sharing risk early and being willing to walk away sooner.

“If you can upfront figure out if this could work – and say no faster – that helps everyone.” Whether through informal advisory relationships with larger pharmaceutical companies or more transparent therapeutic strategy discussions, clarity in the early stages avoids wasted months and misaligned expectations.

The companies that survive are not necessarily the ones with the deepest pockets. They are the ones that build systems and cultures to stay fast, honest and flexible – even in the face of global disruption.

Final thought

Innovation in drug discovery has never been more critical or more complex. Leaders must manage shifting policy, limited resources and increasing pressure to deliver. However, as Nick reminds us, success does not come from playing it safe. It comes from leaning into discomfort, rethinking collaboration and being willing to fail – fast and early.