Unlocking the True Potential of Medicon Valley An analysis of the biotech cluster, the consequences for business model choice and cluster development Master Thesis • M.Sc Economics and Business Administration • International Business Copenhagen Business School • August 11, 2011 Authors Henrik Gyll Winther Larsen Tillmann Beck Supervisor Can-Seng Ooi, CBS Department of International Economics and Management. Number of pages and characters 118 pages, 269.051 characters. Executive Summary In recent years, the Danish pharmaceutical biotech sector, in the Medicon Valley cluster, has struggled due to global challenges found in the industry. In this master thesis, we analyze the pharmaceutical biotech sector in Medicon Valley and assess its ability to sustain and increase international competitiveness. For our analysis, we apply Porter’s diamond framework to assess the cluster. The concept of business models and transactions costs will then be applied to discuss how companies could adjust to this cluster environment. Empirically, we rely on secondary data, collected from studies, databases and statistics. Further, we have conducted 17 in-depth interviews with key stakeholders that contribute to our understanding of current challenges facing the biotech industry in Medicon Valley. In our cluster analysis we identify four major drivers that determine the competitiveness of the industry. These drivers are qualified human resources, research strongholds, the availability of capital, and the presence of a support infrastructure. As a result of our analysis on these drivers, it is apparent that the region is comprised of research strongholds and large pharmaceuticals, providing biotech companies opportunities for both innovation and collaboration. Further, Medicon Valley has a high number of PhD graduates that can provide biotech companies with a pool of qualified researchers. However, the analysis also reveals that MV lacks capital resources and needs to attract more experienced management and international talent to supply biotech companies with more specialized skills and foster serial entrepreneurship. We then discuss how these identified drivers influence the business model choice of biotech companies. We find that a lean type of business model, which focuses on outsourcing, contracting and licensing instead of keeping most of the value chain integrated within the company, is more suitable in order to reach a competitive advantage. However, we argue that under a lean business model, it is essential to strengthen certain aspects within the cluster. First, the creation and maintenance of an ecosystem, providing the right framework conditions is important. In strengthening this ecosystem we discuss the need for improvements in the Tech Transfer Offices, public funding and R&D tax subsidies. Second, the ability to provide the right platform for network activity and social capital, both locally, as well as internationally can be improved. Overall, this master thesis contributes to a better understanding of specific drivers in MV, how companies should be structured and how the cluster should effectively evolve. Our findings serve as a starting point for a more in-depth analysis on specific drivers, a certain business model choice and a possible role of the cluster. List of figures FIGURE 1: DEVELOPMENT OF R&D COSTS ....................................................................................................................................... 5 FIGURE 2: THE BIOTECH VALUE CHAIN ............................................................................................................................................. 7 FIGURE 3: DRUG DEVELOPMENT PHASES OF DBFS.......................................................................................................................... 8 FIGURE 4: DETERMINANTS OF A COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE......................................................................................................... 32 FIGURE 5: THE TRIPLE HELIX MODEL ............................................................................................................................................. 33 FIGURE 6: INTERVIEWEES (X-AXIS) ADDRESSED FACTOR CONDITIONS ........................................................................................ 36 FIGURE 7: FUNDING SOURCES FOR DBFS IN DENMARK IN MILLION EURO .................................................................................. 40 FIGURE 8: INVESTOR NATIONALITY IN DBFS ................................................................................................................................. 42 FIGURE 9: NO. OF PHD GRADUATES IN DENMARK ......................................................................................................................... 45 FIGURE 10: COMPOSITION OF NATIONALITIES IN DANISH LIFE SCIENCE COMPANIES ................................................................. 48 FIGURE 11: GROSS RATE OF TAX SUBSIDIES PER € OF R&D ......................................................................................................... 51 FIGURE 12: PRODUCT PIPELINE OF DBFS IDENTIFIED IN MV ...................................................................................................... 55 FIGURE 13: CORPORATE COLLABORATIONS WITHIN MV .............................................................................................................. 57 FIGURE 14: IMPORTANT RELATED AND SUPPORTING INDUSTRY FOR DBFS................................................................................ 59 FIGURE 15: REGION COMPARISON OR RELATED INDUSTRIES IN BIOTECH .................................................................................... 62 FIGURE 16: PARTNERSHIPS IN MV ................................................................................................................................................. 64 FIGURE 17: 18 DEV. IN VC AND DBFS ........................................................................................................................................... 71 FIGURE 19: NUMBER OF ANNUAL NEW STARTUPS IN DANISH BIOTECH ...................................................................................... 72 FIGURE 20: COMPANIES OPERATING UNDER THE LEAN BUSINESS MODEL ................................................................................... 89 I List of tables TABLE 1: FINANCING STAGES FOR DBFS IN BIOTECH ...................................................................................................................... 9 TABLE 2: MAJOR CHARACTERISTICS OF THE TWO BUSINESS MODELS FOR DBFS ........................................................................ 13 TABLE 3: OVERVIEW OF INTERVIEWED COMPANIES. ..................................................................................................................... 19 TABLE 4: OVERVIEW OF OTHER INTERVIEWED STAKEHOLDERS. .................................................................................................. 21 TABLE 5: LOCAL STARTUP CAPITAL INVESTED ............................................................................................................................... 38 TABLE 6: EXAMPLES OF LEAD AND CO INVESTORS ........................................................................................................................ 42 TABLE 7: SELECTED ALLIANCES BETWEEN DBFS AND LARGE PHARMA/BIOTECH .................................................................... 54 TABLE 8: IMPORTANT RESEARCH INSTITUTES ............................................................................................................................... 65 TABLE 9: OVERVIEW OF MAIN DRIVERS IN MV .............................................................................................................................. 75 II Abbreviations A/S: Aktie Selskab BRIC: Biotech Research & Innovation Center CAO: Chief Administrative Officer CBS: Copenhagen Business School CEO: Chief Executive Officer CFO: Chief Financial Officer COBIS: Copenhagen Bio Science Park COO: Chief Operating Officer CMO: Contract Manufacturing Organization CNS: Central Nervous System CRO: Contract Research Organization DBF: Dedicated Biotech Firm DNA: Deoxyribonucleic acid DTU: The Technical University of Denmark EU: European Union FDA: Food and Drug Administration GDP: Gross Domestic Product GLP-1: Glucagon-like peptide-1 IPO: Initial Public Offering IPR: Intellectual Property Right LIF: Lægemiddel Industri Foreningen LIFE: Faculty of Life Sciences, Copenhagen University LS: Life Science MV: Medicon Valley MVA: Medicon Valley Alliance NME: New Molecular Entities OECD: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development R&D: Research & Development RNA: Ribonucleic acid SME: Small and Medium sized Enterprises TTO: Tech Transfer Office UK: United Kingdom UNCTAD: United Nations Conference on Trade and Development UPP: Unitary Patent Protection VC: Venture Capital US: United States of America III EXECUTIVE SUMMARY................................................................................................... I LIST OF FIGURES .............................................................................................................. I LIST OF TABLES .............................................................................................................. II ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................................ III 1. INTRODUCTION ..........................................................................................................