Strategic setting
The company develops, manufactures and supplies medicines whose performance may depend on formulation, delivery mechanism, device function, human use, packaging and instructions. The business therefore manages pharmaceutical science and engineered product risk within a single patient experience. A stable formulation is insufficient if the device delivers inconsistently; a conforming device is insufficient if medicine quality, usability or labelling fails.
The Board seeks a General Management-oriented Independent Director who can shape portfolio choices, protect quality authority and improve cross-functional execution. The appointee will help management decide where scientific capability and commercial opportunity genuinely align, rather than pursuing technically impressive programmes without reliable development, manufacturing, filing, launch or lifecycle economics.
Ten operating priorities
-
Define portfolio right-to-win. Evaluate unmet need, scientific complexity, reference understanding, delivery technology, intellectual property, clinical or human-factor requirements, manufacturing capability, competition and lifecycle value.
-
Integrate medicine and device governance. Establish one accountable development and quality plan across formulation, container closure, device, materials, software where applicable, assembly, labelling and user interaction.
-
Strengthen development gates. Require evidence for analytical methods, formulation robustness, extractables or compatibility, device performance, human factors, scale-up, stability and risk before advancing capital and filing.
-
Protect data integrity. Govern source data, laboratory systems, audit trails, access, invalid results, repeat testing, deviations and investigations. Schedule pressure must not influence scientific interpretation.
-
Build reliable technology transfer. Confirm process knowledge, critical parameters, equipment, methods, specifications, sampling, training and comparability before commercial manufacture.
-
Assure supplier and component continuity. Map critical materials, device components, moulds or tooling, alternate qualification, change notification, quality agreements, geopolitical exposure and counterfeit risk.
-
Prepare for inspection and launch as operating outcomes. Review facility readiness, filing commitments, process validation, launch inventory, distribution, complaints, field support and recall capability together.
-
Make programme economics complete. Include development failures, clinical or user studies, filing, tooling, validation, launch stock, price erosion, device complaints, field actions, working capital and post-approval obligations.
-
Govern lifecycle change. Oversee material, supplier, site, process, device and labelling changes through scientific comparability, regulatory assessment, implementation control and market traceability.
-
Build leadership across disciplines. Strengthen succession in science, device engineering, quality, regulatory, operations, supply and commercial roles. Reward quality, evidence and cash-generative execution rather than filing count alone.
Portfolio and capacity decisions
The Director will contribute to programme selection and termination, device partnerships, technology licensing, clinical or human-factor investment, capacity, acquisitions, site transfers, remediation, market entry and significant product-quality actions.
Each programme paper should identify the scientific hypothesis, integrated product risks, development evidence, manufacturing route, filing strategy, supply resilience, launch economics and termination criteria. The Board should receive post-launch reviews comparing assumptions with approval timing, yield, demand, price, complaints and cash return.
Quality governance
The Board pack should include development milestones and failures; data-integrity concerns; method and stability trends; technology-transfer deviations; validation; critical suppliers; release and rejection; inspection observations; complaints by component and failure mode; field actions; launch service; portfolio economics; audit findings; and quality-leadership capacity.
Independent assurance should trace selected products across development, technical transfer, commercial records and patient-facing complaints. Quality and scientific leaders must have direct Board access when commercial or schedule pressure threatens evidence or patient protection.
Candidate profile
Candidates should bring at least 25 years of leadership across pharmaceuticals, drug delivery, medical devices, formulation, product development, manufacturing, quality, regulatory affairs or global product businesses. Former CEOs, business presidents, R&D heads, quality executives, operations leaders and experienced pharmaceutical Board members are encouraged to apply.
The candidate should have led portfolios across scientific, operational and commercial functions. This is a General Management mandate requiring broad enterprise judgment, not a narrow subject-matter advisory role.
Eligibility and independence
Active inclusion in the IICA Independent Directors Databank is mandatory. The candidate must satisfy all listed-company independence and eligibility requirements. Relationships involving promoter entities, pharmaceutical or device companies, research organisations, suppliers, regulators, distributors, auditors or customers must be disclosed.
The role may not be used to generate licences, clinical work, supply, distribution, recruitment or consulting engagements for connected parties.
First-year mandate
In the opening 120 days, the Director will review portfolio logic, difficult development programmes, quality and inspection trends, technology transfers, supplier concentration and leadership succession. Within a year, the Board expects sharper portfolio choices, integrated medicine-device accountability, stronger development gates and global execution that preserves scientific and patient integrity.