partnership. Good communication should be effective and efficient; it should be honest and create trust in the relationship.
Frequent communication helps, e.g., facilitated by joint project team meetings. In this regard, cultural and time differences should not be underestimated.
In its communication, the sponsor company should be transparent, responsive and respectful. I wish the CDMOs to be reliable, proactive and flexible.
Quality agreements are intended to create clarity and accountability, but disputes around KPIs, standards and responsibilities still occur. What should organisations be doing differently when defining and managing quality expectations with their CDMO partners?
It is important to acknowledge that two companies, and therefore two quality systems, need to interact productively in that regard. Good quality assurance processes based on a high-standard quality assurance agreement are key for this.
The QA processes and agreements should have clear roles and responsibilities.
Alignment of expectations through good, open, and constructive communication is the key success factor for a fruitful collaboration, also in the QA field.
Geopolitical instability, tariffs, and localisation pressures are forcing companies to rethink their manufacturing networks. How should pharma companies and CDMOs work together to build resilience without simply adding cost and complexity?
The changing environment triggers companies to take further, deeper looks into their strategies and approaches, for manufacturing and supply, but also for development. More than ever before, both strategic foresight and keeping the necessary flexibility are essential.
Having a resilient approach in place while being prepared for changes is the best way to do it. This is the same or similar for pharma and biotech companies and their CDMO partners. Good communication and processes, especially for risk management, are of high importance.
