The effects of coronavirus are causing massive disruptions globally—more people are being asked to work from home, academic institutions are closing down, and scientific research is being disrupted. What’s happening to scientific research in laboratories, academic institutions, and within life science and biotech companies? We surveyed over 350 scientists, researchers, directors, and other life science professionals to better understand how the industry is reacting to the impact of the coronavirus pandemic. Our report, Coronavirus and the Impact Across Life Sciences, explores how the life science community is impacted, the estimated long-term effects of coronavirus on scientific research, the perceived length and depth of the disruption, and the overall sentiment felt across the industry in the early phases of a nationwide response.

ABOUT OUR RESPONDENTS

Over half (57%) of our respondents work in academia and another 15% work at pharmaceutical, biotech, or biopharma companies. The remainder of the respondents are comprised of professionals in life science product/solution manufacturers, diagnostics, medical devices, non-profit research institutes, private hospitals, contract organizations, industry consulting, and government clinical testing or research. In the early hours of disruptions caused by this pandemic, those respondents who are actively working on scientific research are largely preoccupied by immediate concerns and disruptions about daily tasks, short-term issues, and lab staffing. Among the 90% of respondents who say they are impacted in some way, nearly one in five are experiencing severe effects. Those who do not directly participate in scientific research (i.e., management or administration) report longer-term impacts from disruptions, stating organizational disruptions leading to lack of progress. Nearly all respondents claim funding to be the least disruptive impact to their work, for now.

CURRENT SENTIMENTS OF THE PANDEMIC

We asked respondents to describe their outlook about the coronavirus pandemic, both personally and as a professional in life science. We found that respondents feel more pessimistic professionally than they do personally. While pessimism certainly prevails, we found those who work in the lab to be more negative than their colleagues in business and management.

PROGRESSION OF PRODUCTIVITY

Using our data set, we developed a prospective model that illustrates the likely progression of productivity in the life sciences community. There are four phases, each with its own characteristics, priorities, and duration. Those phases are: Initial Shock, Golden Interim, Transition, and New Normal.

Initial Shock
Professionals in the US are currently experiencing this phase. We’re focusing on family, social distancing, and worrying about how to stay healthy and getting through the day. We’re in a state of anxiety, disbelief, and worry while trying to figure out our new reality. Productivity is beginning to take its initial nosedive here, and 90% of respondents report that they are affected by disruptions, while those that work in academia feel less productive than their counterparts in industry.

Golden Interim
After the initial shock phase is over, the industry enters the Golden Interim. Respondents estimate this phase will last between 3-6 months, aligned with coronavirus’ peak infection and subsequent decline. Though our respondents claim that they will be productive during this interim period, activities during this time will be different than business-as-usual. Respondents claim that they plan on writing, data analysis, and planning for future work.

Transition
In this phase, we anticipate a sharp increase in surplus activity as the life science community scrambles to re-enter work with their full capabilities. This will be a frenzied time, and we predict winners and losers will emerge as a result. For those that focused on planning, retaining customer relationships, and maintaining or protecting supply chains during the Golden Interim, we expect to see a significant jump in productivity as business ramps back up. Lagging organizations will be focused on relieving or attending to the backlog and stuck in outdated procedures and ways of working. The duration of this phase could range from one month to 18 months depending on the nimbleness and readiness of the organization. 

New Normal
Once the surplus of activities from the transition phase ends, this phase will likely be driven by market psychology caused by the rippling effects the coronavirus will have sent through our society as a whole.

RECOMMENDED ACTIONS DURING EACH PHASE 

Initial Shock: No Draconian Decisions

• The world is currently coming to terms with the reality of the situation. Signals are heightened and not indicative of long-term situation.

• Managers should focus on the key drivers and signals that are important to them, and create inputs to inform their decisions.

• Avoid temptation to react, or act, in the obvious/expected way. There is opportunity in the current situation, and those who watch the signals will win.

Golden Interim: A Period of Pseudo-Normalcy

• Many members of the community will be leveraging this time to write manuscripts, analyze data, share data-sets, and embark on in silico studies. Many are not thinking about the transition back to work. 

• Managers should consider how to generate customer intimacy in this period—to support customers in their above endeavors, and consider the macro effects of these activities, to help in the transition period back.

• Develop dialogue with customers and gain/share data with them that they will find useful. Help them think about a plan for when the transition back to the lab will take place, so that they are ready and confident in their re-entry.

Transition Period: The Backlog No One is Considering

• The science community is not currently thinking about the transition period back. There will be a flood of manuscripts submitted. Informal data-sharing will lead to possible formal collaborations, and expectations need to be managed. Scientists and professionals will have to recreate many of their experiments.

• Though there may be high commercial activity during this period, it is another time of great reactivity. Managers should expect lower levels of overall engagement, especially for strategic decisions or decisions with long-term lead times or impact.

A SILVER LINING: HOPE AND OPTIMISM PERSISTS

Although scientific progress has undoubtedly slowed, life science professionals still find a silver lining in the opportunities to learn about the repercussions of coronavirus. Those include:

• Increased public awareness of the importance of science in everyday lives

• Increased opportunities for funding in biomedical research

• The digitization of science, and adapting to a remote-capable future

• Improved collaboration across populations and organizations

• Increased time to write manuscripts and articles for publication

• Better investments in healthcare infrastructure

 IN SUMMARY

The first phase of our research study found a scientific community reeling from the shock of massive disruption to their lives and work. Although working processes, infrastructure, and systems are being severely disrupted, scientific progress will be met with an overall slowdown and the life science community remains optimistic about the longer-term effects of coronavirus after the virus’ peak ripple effects cease.