Mind the Gap: Bridging Drug and Device Thinking
A few months ago, I stepped into a new role – shifting from biologics development to device development within the same company. It’s been an exciting change and an opportunity to expand my perspective on pharmaceutical development. While both areas ultimately aim to deliver therapies to patients, the means, mindsets and methodologies can feel worlds apart.
Same Language, Different Meanings
One of the first challenges I encountered was realizing that, even though we all speak English, we don’t always speak the same language. Words and phrases can mean very different things depending on your background. My training is in pharmaceutical sciences, with a strong emphasis on chemical and biological phenomena. Most of my new colleagues come from engineering, where the focus leans more toward physical principles. Naturally, our perspectives – especially when it comes to drug-device combination products – are shaped by this.
For me, the drug is usually the starting point. For them, it’s the device. And this subtle difference can color our priorities, expectations and interpretations of even basic terminology.
Here are a few moments that helped me realize just how deep this goes:
- Variants: When I hear “variants,” I immediately think of different drug product variants – different concentrations, excipients, or manufacturing processes. In the device world, “variants” often refer to changes in mechanical components or assembly configurations. Same word, completely different implications.
- Power Pack Misunderstanding: The first time I heard the term “power pack” in the context of autoinjectors, I pictured a portable phone charger. I soon learned it actually refers to a mechanical component – often a spring-based system – used to deliver the drug. It wasn’t just a funny misunderstanding, it highlighted how our mental models are built by our past experiences.
- Design Verification: On a more inspiring note, I discovered a concept that immediately resonated: design verification. This step in device development ensures that the final design fulfills the technical requirements set early in the process. To me, it felt poetic – reminding me of Bruno Munari’s notion that “design is art.” As someone who finds joy at the intersection of science and creativity, this connection felt like home.
Becoming Bilingual: A Lesson in Empathy
I recently completed a course on Emotional and Social Intelligence that helped me put some of these experiences into perspective. One key takeaway was how gaps in priorities or ways of processing information can reduce empathy and lead to friction – even when intentions are good. It reminded me not only of work dynamics but also of how I sometimes react in personal situations, like with my sister, when I struggle to see value in something that doesn’t immediately resonate with my way of thinking.
Recognizing these blind spots is the first step toward building better collaboration – and that’s especially important in cross-functional environments like drug-device integrated development.
What I’ve come to appreciate is the importance of becoming fluent in both “languages” – drug and device. Effective project leadership in this space benefits not only from subject matter expertise but also from the ability to bridge disciplines, spot misalignments early and help teams navigate them constructively. After all, you can’t collaborate effectively if you don’t realize you’re interpreting the same words differently.
Leave a Reply