Judgement-Based Project Management Builds Partners' Trust

By Jason C. Bork, president and founder, Pintail Solutions

“Do you know what your problem is?”

My butt had not even hit the seat before my predecessor snapped this question off. I sat down, took a breath, and quietly said, “Maybe not.” But I was getting close. I had been in the job for almost two months. It was a big role: global head of project management for a central laboratory supporting 2,000 ongoing clinical trials across hundreds of sponsors. I already knew my organization needed to change: people, process, and technology, in that order, but I was still working through my initial thoughts on exactly how.

My predecessor continued, “You have almost 400 people in your organization, and you need to be sure that each project manager answers the same question from a study sponsor in the exact same way.” As noted, we were a central laboratory, limiting clinical trial data variance by running the same assays with the same types of equipment and reagents, following the same SOPs across the world. The lab itself was a rules-based entity. It had to be. My predecessor grew up professionally in the lab. That is what she knew. But her declaration of my problem was not my problem at all.

Each sponsor we worked with was different. Each study we worked on was different. Sponsor companies have different cultures. Trials have different priorities. Circumstances can vary significantly. My project managers needed to understand their clients, understand their trials, and know how to deliver those trials according to timeline and budget, while also effectively managing the client relationship and ensuring sponsors wanted to work with us again.

These roles were not easy. Budget scrutiny and thresholds for escalation were very different for Phase 3 studies compared to Phase 1 trials. If there were three Phase 3 trials, my project managers needed to know which one was on the critical path, which trial was actually delaying regulatory submission and approval, and what was happening within each sponsor organization that might drive greater sensitivity to budget, timelines, or scope.

My project managers could not be rules-based. They needed to be judgement-based. While there was a common set of project management principles that needed to be applied, PMs also needed to use their own judgment to determine how best to execute the project and partner with the study sponsor. I needed to ensure we had the training, business processes, and tools that best enabled my PMs to apply the right judgment across their portfolio of trials.

Make no mistake: Judgement-based project management is harder. It is more difficult to define. More difficult to measure. But in my experience, it is the only way to manage projects in life sciences development. There are simply too many nuances to consider.

From a management perspective, I will not forget one of the times we got it wrong.

We supported Roche Pharmaceuticals for a long time. We had a great team that developed strong relationships. However, we did not work with Roche Diagnostics until we got our chance (pharmaceuticals and diagnostics are separate business units under the same parent company). Based on feedback from their colleagues, Roche Diagnostics came to us with a study for the first time. We were thrilled to win the opportunity, not only to deliver the trial but also to build a relationship that we hoped would support many more studies in the future.

We selected a rockstar senior project manager to lead the work with Roche Diagnostics. She already had a great relationship with Roche Pharma. They are very different entities, but we assumed that familiarity could only help.

As planned, we effectively delivered the trial. There was little doubt about that given the senior PM we assigned to the team. Her knowledge, skill, and tenacity were unparalleled. However, Roche Diagnostics did not feel good throughout the process.

Why?

We missed the softer cultural nuances.

Our relationship with Roche Pharma was deeply ingrained, with a high level of trust built through years of experience and close partnership. There was a common understanding between our two organizations and study teams. Roche Diagnostics was a new relationship. This was their first project with us. They were apprehensive and wanted assurances throughout the process that we did not provide. They wanted a project manager who could better meet them where they were and spend more time with them during study execution.

While the deliverable was met on time and on budget, the experience left much to be desired.

In life sciences, projects are too important and too nuanced to be led by script alone. Strong execution requires principles, discipline, and structure, but great project leadership ultimately depends on judgment.

The real leadership challenge is not making every project manager sound the same. It is building a team that knows how to think, how to adapt, and how to respond appropriately to the moment in front of them. That is harder to teach, harder to measure, and far more valuable to clients.

Rules create consistency. Judgment creates trust. And trust is what wins the next project.

About The Author:

Jason C. Bork is a life sciences executive with more than 30 years of experience across large pharma, CRO, and startup organizations. He is an entrepreneur known for seeing the essence, distilling the complex into actionable steps, and developing those around him to new levels of fulfillment. From business strategy, organizational change, and operational excellence, Jason enables organizations to solve critical challenges, deliver high-impact projects, and move into the future with clarity and confidence. He has authored multiple scientific papers and book chapters and is a distinguished public speaker. Jason founded Pintail Solutions, a life sciences consulting organization, in 2015.