IBJNews

Lilly CEO calls for life sciences research institute

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

John Lechleiter, the CEO of drugmaker Eli Lilly and Co., is calling for the creation of a "world-class" research institute in Indianapolis to bring together scientists from universities and corporations to develop new medical therapies and companies.

Lechleiter, in a Tuesday morning speech before a summit sponsored by Indianapolis-based life sciences group BioCrossroads, said Lilly would commit an unspecified amount of money to sponsor research at the new institute, as well as allowing its scientists to participate in collaborations at the institute.

“I sort of see it as the kettle on the stove. It’s boiling, it’s just brimming over with ideas,” Lechleiter said of the research institute he has in mind, which he compared to the Broad Institute in Massachusetts or the Scripps Research Institute in San Diego.

The research institute idea, which Lechleiter hopes gets launched by state, university and corporate leaders within the next year, was part of a broader charge he gave leaders in Indiana to redouble their efforts to grow life sciences businesses here.

“On one hand, we can be content with the progress we’ve made, and continue to follow the same path that got us this far. My prediction is that this will produce diminishing returns over time,” Lechleiter said in a ballroom at the Westin hotel downtown. “Or we can make a course correction based on a sober assessment of our strengths and shortcomings and those of the competition we face.”

To do that, Indiana needs to train and attract talented life sciences workers, Lechlieter said, which will require improvements in Indiana’s K-12 education, greater access to vocational training, investments in mass transit and an inclusive policy environment.

He also called for the state government to “re-engage” with the life sciences, echoing many industry criticisms of the Indiana 21st Century Research & Technology Fund for pulling back from biotech and medical device firms.

“To date,” Lechleiter said, “[state government] has been largely cheering from the sidelines.”

Lechleiter said the state’s research universities need to be more entrepreneurial in order to support the state’s life sciences industry, with more faculty pursuing and being rewarded for pursuing the practical applications of their research.

“This is what we see today in San Francisco, in Boston, in San Diego, but not here—or at least not nearly as much as we should,” Lechleiter said.

Lechleiter also called out Lilly’s shortcomings. While Lilly has greatly increased the amount of research it does via partnerships with other companies, Lechleiter said the company is doing “far too little” with universities in Indiana.

“We’re in a target-rich environment that we’re not making full advantage of,” he said in an interview after his speech.

Indianapolis-based Lilly does spend $1 billion annually with 1,300 vendors in Indiana. But Lechleiter said he’s not aiming for more fee-for-service relationships, but rather creating collaborations with outside scientists.

The institute he has in mind would try to bring together faculty from Indiana University, Purdue University, the University of Notre Dame and even out of state to work with scientists from Lilly and other commercial enterprises.

Their research collaborations would be “outcome-driven,” Lechleiter said, pushing toward new medicines, medical procedures or enterprises.

Lechleiter said the institute would have “liberalized intellectual property policies,” as well as sponsorships for funding. He also suggested that ideas generated by Lilly scientists that Lilly decides not to fund could be taken to the institute to be developed into independent products or companies.

Lilly also will hire in the next year a new employee to seek out alliances with Indiana’s universities, and Lechleiter said the company would create an internal scorecard to measure how many new in-state alliances it is forming each year.

“Within a year, I don’t want anybody within the state to say to Lilly, ‘You guys are hard to work with,’” Lechleiter said.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Life Science Job Opportunities Needed to Attract Graduates to Stay in Indiana
    I agree with Dr. Lechleiter that a Life Science Research Institute might boost Indiana's profile on the biomedical jobs stage. Instead of saddling the State with this funding responsibility, such an Institute should revolve out of the pharmaceutical and biotechnology community in Indianapolis, such as Novartis creating its well respected Novartis Institute for Biomedical Research. I think some in the life science community have high hopes about the new IU Health Neuroscience Center as being the first step toward a world-class research and healthcare center being based in central Indiana. The other issue I see a problem with is the actual job creation and opportunities for graduates finishing with Master's degrees and Ph.D.'s from Indiana's biomedical programs. Job creation in the life sciences needs to be the number one priority in the State. Indiana's economy has come back in large part due to the life sciences and is among the top five states in the US with the larges concentration of life science employees, according to the recent Batelle report. This is great! However, the opportunities are lacking for people such as myself, who have a life science Master's degree and an MBA and desire more of a scientific affairs role away from the laboratory. (By the way, I happen to be unemployed.) Such an Institute as mentioned by Dr. Lechleiter might allow people like me to have greater opportunities. The bottom line is the State needs more than 1.4% job growth per year in the life sciences, according to Batelle. We can do better, anchored by the strength in Indianapolis of Eli Lilly, Roche Diagnostics, Dow Agro Sciences, research-based hospitals; and in Fort Wayne and Warsaw (the Orthopedics capital of the World) with companies such as Zimmer, DePuy, Biomet and others. This strong core will allow Indiana to become the Life Science capital of the Midwest.
  • Cord Blood Bank
    Indiana has a law (P.L. 134-2008, I.C. 12-31) on the books establishing a Cord Blood Bank to be used for transplant and research. This is a vital step in the growth of our Life Sciences. Even though the law has been on the books since 2008, The Advisory Board apparently still has not met. Four years of useable stem cell rich cord blood has been incinerated. Maybe Mr. Lechleiter can encourage the State to move on this Law finally.
  • OUR STATE NEEDS TO ACT!!!
    For our State to be able to attract outsiders and to provide a serious environment for this type of approach, it needs to make fundamental changes in a variety of ways. If one observes those areas of the country of real biotech activity and innovation, one first sees a large number of research medical schools in those areas. It is not the size of the medical school (i.e number of medical students), but the quality of research. Our State will never be able to attract anyone with just one research medical school (i.e IU) which is second tier at best. Unfortunately, in these difficult economic times, I doubt if the State would fund another research medical school even though Purdue has most of the fundamentals already in place. The other obvious need for our State is the training of more physicians to treat our citizens which our State desperately needs, even before health care reform is fully implemented and even with Marian starting its our program in the near future. I have made these opinions before, and expect the same silence again.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. liek the rest of America

  2. These quaint,obsessed musings by the stalkers are certainly entertaining, but I'm trying to figure out what, if anything, all the yelping below has to do with Zak Brown.

  3. It's evident that Moffett was pushing the right buttons and corporate America is now trying to squash him. He just wanted to withdraw the free pilot services provided to the company by the pilots to try and put some pressure on a company that has not been interested in negotiating a contract in over 5 years. The company does not provide a contract because not having one has saved them a bundle of money. Shame on any Republic pilots not standing behind their union leader just because things are getting tough, can you not see such strategic moves by the company as putting the last union president in a corporate position and into THEIR pocket. Do you really believe the last union president is so appalled at the attempts by Moffett, do you not remember his oppositions to the company? We stood behind him. It has been proven over and over again for thousands of years without fail, a man cannot serve two masters. Anyone that believes people vote contrary to their paycheck and livelihood deserve to be taken advantage of, the recent statements by the former union president are laughable as he denounces the current union president from his new corporate position. Have you ever seen a drafted sports player score points for his previous team, it cannot be done, he is not on the pilots side anymore, he gets his money a different way now than you and I do, and he should not be allowed to remain on the seniority list. A drafted player brings strength, credibility, tactical knowledge, and a strategic advantage to his NEW team, he would not be drafted or paid were it otherwise. We are all forced to choose only one side to play for and support, not doing so has many references in life such as insider trading and shaving points, all illegal for good reason. This basic fact is why corporate moguls, scientist, and engineers all sign non-discloser agreements and non-compete clauses, as protection in case they are lured into switching sides as our former union president has done. No NFL coach ever drafted a player so that both teams could benefit and better understand each other, they are recruited to win the game against that former team, period. Likewise the company does not recruit the former union president by accident or mutual understanding, its strategy. Don't confuse playing the game with good sportsman-like conduct in support of common business and prosperity goals, with the requirement to only play for one side. Good men we all love and favor fall subject to this manipulation, often without their knowledge, and it is not a betrayal of their friendship to oppose them when they switch sides. If we did not love and trust them, they would not have been chosen and lured to the other side in the first place. The deception by the drafted player is not made at a conscious level, it's just human nature and it's all about money and power which corrupts our ability to be objective and loyal to two masters. This is why our court system created the defense attorney, and why our military created counter intelligence. Its strategy and its propaganda, and it works, and that's why the "powers to be" manipulate the chess pieces by sometimes changing their colors. Some players know they are being manipulated when their color is changed, but it brings them more money and power so they do not care. The rest have good intentions but do not even realize they are being manipulated. This tactic is also known by another name, Divide and Conquer. In battle sending an imperfect message with an imperfect team is obviously not ideal, but it's still being sent by YOUR team, your union leader, a leader that has common goals and common rewards with you, they are the best, because we have elected them to do a job for us. If you are not backing Moffett but believing the spin by those that have recently switched sides, you are taking food out of your own mouth. Showing unity and backing an imperfect situation still results in taking just as much ground, it's about unity and bargaining power. It's not necessary to wait around for that perfect attack because it will never come, the company will spin and attempt to destroy anyone that gets in their way. Ultimately it's not about any specific attack anyway, ASAP or whatever it makes no difference, it is and always has been only about power. If this company cared about safety it would not build pairings with 8 hour overnights, come on, are you that naive? Besides, do you really think Hoffa cares, no, he got a call from corporate America and was squeezed into denouncing Moffett. If he didn't they would spin the safety card against him and the Teamsters National with implication for truckers, future contracts, insurance rates etc...saying something like the Teamsters use safety as a bargaining chip, blah blah blah... Do you really think any pilot is going to do something unsafe for the contract, absolutely not, the only ones threatening safety here is the company with reduced rest, fatigue, and poverty. Do you not find it odd that Hoffa and the Teamsters are opposing a Teamster president publicly? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and work with one of their own? Why did they not sit down and help him strategize, correct any mistakes, and charge ahead? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and leverage a contract for all those pilots that have been paying Teamster dues, isn't that why we have all been paying Teamster dues in the first place? I sure haven't been paying dues so that the Teamsters National could come along and write this kind of an article undercutting our union leader and our unity. Whose side is the Teamsters National really on, it's obviously not the Republic pilots side.

  4. No matter what Moffatt does the company is going to spin it like he is the terrorist and brainwash people like you into believing it, wake up, back your players that are trying to change things for you and your livelihood. Where has Hoffa been for the last 6 years, except collecting our dues. Seriously, do you really think an FO going for upgrade, signed off by a checkairman ready for the upgrade, who then fails, is not even capable of returning as a First Officer.

  5. whoa!

ADVERTISEMENT